Headshot of Toronto Globe and Mail reporter Paul Koring. Photo (C) Dennis Drenner 2012Dennis Drenner/The Globe and Mail
It seems impressive.
Eleven U.S. senators – all of them Democrats – write a no-nonsense letter to their president telling him that they want Keystone XL approved and they want it done now.
"Bring this entire process to an end no later than May 31, 2014, … and (find) the Keystone XL pipeline is in the national interest," the 11 said in their letter to President Barack Obama released Thursday.
Not quite as blunt as Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying the decision is a "no brainer" but still unmistakable in message and urgency.
Unsurprisingly, the missive drew delight from TransCanada's chief executive officer Russ Girling whose analysis was that the "letter from Democratic members of the U.S. Senate again highlights the strong bipartisan support that exists for the Keystone XL pipeline project and the importance of reaching a timely decision."
But look closely at which senators signed the letter warning "this decision must not drag on" and it's evident that the urgency may be personal and political.
Five of the 11 signatories are fighting for their political lives in red states won by Mitt Romney in 2012. Those five; Mark Begich in Alaska, Kay Hagan In North Carolina, Mary Landrieu in Louisiana, Mark Pryor in Arkansas and John Walsh in Montana are mostly running away from the President as much as they can. They may all want Keystone XL but they are keen to distance themselves from Obamacare and a president mired in miserable approval ratings. The five are the same five sitting Democrats targeted as the most vulnerable in the Republican effort to seize control of the Senate. Republican only need a gain of six seats to get a Senate majority in November.
Along with toss-up open seats in West Virginia and South Dakota, the battle for control of the Senate will play out in Republican-leaning states where those five pro-Keystone XL Democrats are in deep trouble.
What of the other six signatories? Five aren't running. Only one, Mark Warner in Virginia, is both a Democrat and not in danger of losing, so he doesn't need crossover Republican votes.
Another 10 Democrat senators are facing the voters this fall but none of them wanted to sign the pro-Keystone XL letter.
The crass political calculus shapes up this way.
Mr. Obama's party seems certain to lose some seats in the Senate in November.
Losing a couple or even four won't ruin his last two years in the Oval Office because Democrats will still hold a majority – albeit reduced – in the Senate.
Losing six, and thus control of both Houses of Congress, would turn a lame-duck president into a crippled one and improve Republican chances of winning the White House in 2016.
The notion that approving Keystone XL would please enough swing voters in places like Louisiana and Alaska and North Carolina to save senators Landrieu, Begich and Hagan is far-fetched. It might help and with their imploring signatures those Democrats show they are hoping so even as they distance themselves from the President on most other issues.
But the bigger game isn't any single Senate seat. For Democrats, getting out the vote, especially among minorities and young people – key constituencies in the rainbow coalition that has twice put Mr. Obama in the White House – for mid-term elections is the key to victory.
Keystone XL might – or might not – be in the U.S. national interest. Only Mr. Obama can decide that. He says he will, not just in terms of crude from the neighbourhood or secure supplies but also in terms of impact on climate and future generations.
The narrower 'political' interest may hinge less on whether Keystone XL is rejected or approved. Rather it's about timing.
The five Democrat senators in dire political trouble, all facing defeat in November desperately want a Keystone XL decision now because a "Yes" might help them.
But a 'Yes' might dismay greener Democrats – many of them young and politically active – making it less likely that they will serve as the shock troops in a grassroots campaign to get out the vote in November.
Mr. Obama's first decision won't be about Keystone XL but about timing. It may be that delaying a decision again – after all it has been more than five years already – until after November offers a greater short-term political benefit.
Paul Koring is a reporter in the Washington bureau.