04-06-2021, 05:45 PM
For Republicans, Pipes Are Infrastructure Only If They Carry Oil
Unhappy with President Joe Biden’s sweeping American Jobs Plan, members of the GOP have latched on to an extremely narrow definition of infrastructure.
Source: Huffington Post
In an interview last week with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem ® expressed outrage over the fact that President Joe Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure package calls for significant investments in housing and water pipes — literal infrastructure.
“I was shocked by how much doesn’t go into infrastructure,” she said. “It goes into research and development, it goes into housing and pipes and different initiatives, green energy, and it’s not really an honest conversation that we’re having about what this proposal is.”
“I’m frustrated,” she added.
Apparently, Noem’s definition of energy infrastructure starts and stops with fossil fuels.
In 2017, Noem signed on to a letter in which she and more than 80 other Republican members of Congress called on then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to safeguard oil and gas pipelines from protesters. “Maintaining safe and reliable energy infrastructure is a matter of national security,” they wrote.
The letter exposes the real issue Noem and other Republicans have with Biden’s infrastructure plan: It prioritizes pipes that carry water rather than fossil fuels, and energy sources other than oil and gas.
A lengthy White House fact sheet on the administration’s plan makes no mention of fossil fuel pipelines. It does, however, include detailed sections on replacing lead pipes across the nation to ensure access to safe drinking water, as well as plugging abandoned oil and gas wells. Compare that to former President Donald Trump’s failed infrastructure plan, which had a whole section on speeding up oil and gas pipeline projects.
Reached for comment, a spokesman for Noem referred HuffPost to the governor’s post to Twitter.
................
Personal comment: the fossil-fuel business is profitable enough to fund its own capital projects. Noem's position is clearly on the fringe.
Unhappy with President Joe Biden’s sweeping American Jobs Plan, members of the GOP have latched on to an extremely narrow definition of infrastructure.
Source: Huffington Post
In an interview last week with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem ® expressed outrage over the fact that President Joe Biden’s $2 trillion infrastructure package calls for significant investments in housing and water pipes — literal infrastructure.
“I was shocked by how much doesn’t go into infrastructure,” she said. “It goes into research and development, it goes into housing and pipes and different initiatives, green energy, and it’s not really an honest conversation that we’re having about what this proposal is.”
“I’m frustrated,” she added.
Apparently, Noem’s definition of energy infrastructure starts and stops with fossil fuels.
In 2017, Noem signed on to a letter in which she and more than 80 other Republican members of Congress called on then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to safeguard oil and gas pipelines from protesters. “Maintaining safe and reliable energy infrastructure is a matter of national security,” they wrote.
The letter exposes the real issue Noem and other Republicans have with Biden’s infrastructure plan: It prioritizes pipes that carry water rather than fossil fuels, and energy sources other than oil and gas.
A lengthy White House fact sheet on the administration’s plan makes no mention of fossil fuel pipelines. It does, however, include detailed sections on replacing lead pipes across the nation to ensure access to safe drinking water, as well as plugging abandoned oil and gas wells. Compare that to former President Donald Trump’s failed infrastructure plan, which had a whole section on speeding up oil and gas pipeline projects.
Reached for comment, a spokesman for Noem referred HuffPost to the governor’s post to Twitter.
................
Personal comment: the fossil-fuel business is profitable enough to fund its own capital projects. Noem's position is clearly on the fringe.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.