Actually, the pipeline will kill more jobs than it creates:

http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/globallaborinstitute/research/keystonexl.html

Obama said that apparently there is no connection from the pipeline to USA dependency on foriegn oil and it will not lower gas prices here.Gas prices
have been droping lately and adding this pipeline might boost America's oil reserves and lower gas prices.

Seems dubious to me. The calculus that there will be more jobs killed than created includes supposed jobs lost because of climate change. This oil is gonna get burnt regardless of whether the pipeline is built. Canada will just build one out to BC. It's disingenuous to include future hypothetical job losses based off of models of climate change in here. Not to mention supposed job losses because of hypothetical future leaks in the pipeline.

The pipeline won't decrease gas prices, Zach0805. Oil is a commodity, so just because we have a lot more oil here that doesn't necessarily mean the price will go down. For example, a bumper year in the United States and Canada for oil can still coincide with a huge spike in oil prices if, say, Saudi Arabia were to stop producing altogether because of a civil war. All energy independence means is that there won't be 1970s style lines at stations in the event of a crisis. The economy can still be effected by high prices, but the underlying resource will still be available to those who can pay.

Well its a plan that most US pipeline infrastructure has been built according to the plan.

It will definetly help if something like that happens in the Middle East.

Screw Mary Landrieu.

Let's be nice to her. She's just weeks away from a deep humiliation at the polls.

She seems both pretty naff and also better than a large proportion of US politicians.

I used to waiver back and forth on my support for the pipeline but lately I've become of the opinion that I'm against anything that makes the oil sands more profitable and harder to shut down. I believe that Canada needs to make very drastic changes in the way it approaches the environment. Unfortunately, the oil sands are both a major part of our economy and a very serious obstacle to having an environmentally sustainable energy mix.

Any small tick against the inertia of the oil industry is a good one, imho. Any small move to making it less profitable is a move towards alternative sources getting more consideration. So, on that basis, I do not support Keystone.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/transcanada-files-application-for-c-12-billion-energy-east-pipeline-1414671162

We're already close to losing the opportunity. Canada seems like it may build an new pipeline all the way out to New Brunswick, and then ship the crude out from there. So the oil, again, is getting burnt regardless. Only now, instead of American jobs being created building the pipeline and American refineries turning the tar sands gunk into petroleum products, Canadians will get the construction jobs and refineries all over the world will get the crude. We lose the economic boost of the construction AND the underlying benefits of increased North American refinement.

If Congress acts quickly, as they will, and the president cooperates, as he may, this can still be stopped. It's obviously a much more expensive project and will take mlonger to build than just integrating the XL Pipeline into the existing pipeline system we already have to ship Canadian oil to Gulf Coast refineries. Let's hope our government gets its act together.

Read Obama's Comments, hes not going to sign it.

If Harper does start the pipeline east (and, famously, he's not going to let a minority opposition stop him if he wants to do it -- though why he would choose NB over BC is beyond me) and then loses the election next year, does the new PM, either Mulcair or Trudeau, kill it?

And if he uses closure to get a pipeline bill passed (which MAY have occurred previously in Canadian history), as he's relatively fond of doing for other legislation, will that completely seal his fate (which MAY have occurred previously in Canadian history)?

I support the pipeline extension, but then again, I'm not one of the 2/3 who didn't vote in the election (and I voted Republican or abstained anyway), so even if I had some political stature, my opinion would be entirely irrelevant in the matter.

Just to clarify, in case you guys are mining Canadian news articles, there are two major pipelines that are being debated domestically. There's the Northern Gateway which heads to the pacific and Keystone which is the one you're talking about.

Well if Northern Gateway is completed before Keystone gets a foothold on construction the oil we get just goes to Asia.