adn.com | Alaska Politics Blog : House passes TransCanada license

Alaska Politics Blog

This is the place to talk about Alaska politics -- state, local, national. Public life in the Last Frontier has probably never been more interesting than right now -- the governor as candidate for vice president, the broad and still-evolving corruption investigation, a big election, powerful members of Congress under scrutiny, and the usual hardball Alaska politics. Come here for news, tidbits and information, and join the discussion. Keep your comments civil and on point. Avoid personal attacks. Do not use profanity. Posts that violate the Terms of Use will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned.

Contributors

Erika Bolstad

Erika Bolstad covers Alaska issues, including the congressional delegation, from Washington, D.C., for McClatchy Newspapers. Before joining the bureau in 2007, she spent seven years as a reporter at the Miami Herald, where she covered politics, government and the state legislature. E-mail Erika at ebolstad@adn.com.

Sean Cockerham

Sean Cockerham writes about Alaska state politics. He spent three years based in Juneau for the ADN before joining the Tacoma News-Tribune to write about Washington state politics. He went to Iraq twice for the News Tribune, and previously wrote about Alaska government and politics for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. E-mail Sean at scockerham@adn.com

Kyle Hopkins

Kyle Hopkins covers politics and other stories for the ADN. He covered the 2006 campaign for governor, has blogged extensively about Alaska politics, covered Anchorage city government and was a reporter based in the Mat-Su. He grew up in Southeast Alaska and previously was a reporter at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner and Anchorage Press. E-mail Kyle at khopkins@adn.com

Features

2008 Election

At one point the races with Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young promised to be the highest-profile campaigns in Alaska history.

SECTION

Palin coverage

The nation was captivated by Sarah Palin's run to the White House, and now Alaska awaits the return of their governor.

Photo galleries

Reader-submitted Palin photos

SECTION

Alaska political corruption

The FBI raided state legislatures offices in Aug. 2006, and the fallout since has been epic in Alaska's political world.

House passes TransCanada license – again

Posted by Wesley Loy

Posted: July 23, 2008 - 1:03 pm

From Wesley Loy in Juneau –

The House of Representatives just voted again to pass House Bill 3001, which gives state officials authority to grant a natural gas pipeline license to TransCanada Corp.

The final tally was 23-16.

Last night's vote on the bill was 24-16. One member who voted yes yesterday was absent today, Bethel Democrat Mary Nelson.

House members also adopted a "letter of intent" saying they expect the administration of Gov. Sarah Palin to continue to "aid" other gas projects such as an "all-Alaska" pipeline to Valdez. It passed 39-0.

login or register to post comments

16 July 24, 2008 - 8:07am | Stags_Leap

Parnell and the 2004 TransCanada Proposal

Something mighty fishy about the 2004 TransCanada proposal.

Fact: Parnell helped negotiate the 2004 proposal when he was an attorney in the oil & gas division.

Fact: Marty Rutherford worked for Transcanada at the time.

It has been kept sealed ever since. TransCanada still insists that it remain confidential.

I'd like to see full disclosure on Parnell and Rutherford's work on that proposal, directly and indirectly. Can we get a FOIA request on all emails from Parnell -from 2003-2004, that deal with the 2004 TC Proposal?

Something is starting to stink. And it's a rotting stench that keeps growing.

July 24, 2008 - 9:30pm | gcp

I do not understand why they think it's a good idea

to authorize any project involving anything less than full disclosure. This whole process is a bad idea but passing this without knowing all of the details is entirely unacceptable. If the car salesman said, "Sign the papers and THEN we'll tell you what you're buying and what it will cost you", everyone here would run the other way. This is sheer lunacy.

July 24, 2008 - 10:01am | yujump

Stags! We thought you committed Hari Kari...

...after the votes the last two days. But it good to see you are back offering up your version of Alaskan seafood - Classic Stags (oil company) Red Herring. What would we ever do without your baseless diatribes, unoriginal thinking, unsubstantiated claims and oh so predictable (n0n) producer rhetoric.

July 24, 2008 - 10:35am | Stags_Leap

nice try

to smokescreen the merits of the issue: which is -if everything is on the up-and-up -why is TC refusing to release its complete 2004 proposal for public review?

July 24, 2008 - 3:52pm | yujump

Dear Stagcrow

Debate the merits of a Red Herring? You only serve to resemble my remarks:

Stagcrow - "If I only had a brain I could think for myself!!"

July 25, 2008 - 9:51am | Stags_Leap

Demand full public disclosure of the 2004 TC proposal

before allowing this to go to the floor for a vote. Parnell had his hands all over it in 2004. Same with Rutherford -when she worked for TC.

I suspect there is some interesting details in that 2004 proposal that could be damaging to TC and Parnell -and Palin, if it were made available to the public.

If not -then why not disclose now -up front, in the spirit of truth and transparency???

July 25, 2008 - 10:51am | rfn

Don't invest too much time

in fulminating about the outcome of a floor vote.

Lyda's still in charge.

There will be no floor vote.

It's too tough. Might make some look like the slaves to the oilies that they are. Might make others look like they're pandering to the vast majority of voters. Definitely not a good thing, right?

15 July 23, 2008 - 10:55pm | brdzwrd

Drink your own milkshake, Canada.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBCfLJkZ_d8

14 July 23, 2008 - 8:50pm | silverspoon_not

House AGIA vote

Jump for joy only 16 of 39 still in the dark or (light of big oil, big money).
Lets take note alaskans VECO did not get them all.
Nice touch not giving it an effective date. Harris sure knows who butter's his bread, one would think after the raw deal EXXON gave the people of the sound. He could get his head/hand out of thier *** and support the people of alaska. Hope we as voters take note of the NAY voters when reelections come around.

NOW WE WAIT ON THE SENATE! Let the game begin anew!!

OH! by the way anyone catch the latest Big Oil slick ad on DENALI
(buy/hire/build) with alaskan and alaskans another try for the end around to beat the bid process. Anybody out there accepts this line, I got some arizona ocean front property for sale.

July 23, 2008 - 11:31pm | Beethoven

Ahh Silverspoon?

Are you new to Alaska? If you just got off the banana boat you might not know that the people Speaker Harris represents have overwhelmingly said "no deal" to TransCanada. Harris' folks want the Alaska Gasline to Valdez. TransCanada has made it clear that that is not a priority for them. They want Alaska's gas to cook the tar sands to make a big mess, but also, a lot of oil. So the fine folks in Valdez- and all the way up the Richardson Highway to Fairbanks are quite pleased with Speaker Harris.

13 July 23, 2008 - 6:28pm | LeadingEdge

The House

has no choice but to kiss Farrahs ass. Hopefully someone with some nuts in the Senate puts a stop to this although it's looking like a done deal. What a shame this administration has become.

12 July 23, 2008 - 6:26pm | doctoradoalfredo

House Passes

I guess we can not please everyone. However, the propose plan is better than giving it to Exxon that betrayed our state. So, please stop complaining for the benefit of our future children. The gas line is a good deal and the Canadians are honest people that will do only good to their neighbors. I hope that you find good endeavors in other places that you move since some of the people that do not agree want to move out of the state. If you feel cold, I guessed Alaska is not for you. It is quite warm here in Juneau. Even thou, we did not have any summer. I am not complaining because hurricanes are worst than the nice cold chill that we are getting. I rather have the nice 50's degrees than a bad storm or hurricane. Love Alaska because we have the best government in the world.

11 July 23, 2008 - 4:49pm | publicfacts

LETTER OF INTENT MEANS NOTHING----------------NOTHING

I AM ASHAMED THE HOUSE VOTED TO GIVE OUR RESOURCES TO ANYONE BUT ALASKA FIRST. IT IS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION.

GOVERNOR, SENIORS AND CHILDREN ARE FREEZING NOW AND WILL DURING THIS WINTER. AND YOU just gave the license to a foreign company, who employs foreign workers, and who will probably sell the license to Exxon. I am going to write to every senior center in the State this winter.

And if your dream of 1,200.00 will buy loyalty, wrong. We are moving my grandmother in to our house so she can stay warm. Her fuel bill is over $700.00 per month. Your 1,200.00 will last her less than 2 months especially with her federal tax liability.

The people of Fairbanks and Bush Alaska thank you. We are guessing that since the VP slot was not offered, you are running for the prime minister of the Yukon?

July 23, 2008 - 6:54pm | Beethoven

Publicfacts

You are 100% correct. This letter of intent has no legal meaning and is designed to give legislators who voted for this scheme cover in the fall election.

It will not work.

Legislators will have to defend the indefensible.

So, legislators, with ten billion in the bank and throughput on TAPS in decline, you give an exclusive license to a foreign corporation that has stated that they will not touch this gasline until three other major projects are completed- maybe in a dozen years.

Meanwhile Alaskans get no certainty, killer energy bills, and politicians who have betrayed the public's trust.

The icing on the cake is this law, HB3001, directly conflicts with the voters 2002 ANGDA initiative.

Shameful.

10 July 23, 2008 - 4:34pm | Cartman3_15

The oilies are

out in force today.

9 July 23, 2008 - 4:27pm | Beethoven

Alaska is screwed

While throughput on the Trans-Alaska Oil Pipeline is declining...

While Northern Alaska is in a critical energy crisis...

We have the Palin administration breaking the promises Sarah Palin made when she was a candidate and trying to turn this gas line project over to Canadians who will not build our gas line for 15 years.

Here is what the CEO, Hal Kvisle, of TransCanada said recently:

”But the Alaska project is a long way off. Just to put everything in time sequence, we would build the $5 billion Phase I of the Keystone (pipeline) over the next couple of years. Then we move into the Keystone Expansion we announced today. Then our plans would see us construct the Mackenzie Valley pipeline, and
only in the later part of the next decade would the Alaska pipeline be built.”

8 July 23, 2008 - 4:23pm | the_truth

Are you sure? Better vote again....

How about the best 3 out of 4, or best of seven, or...

The Keystone Cops would be proud...

July 23, 2008 - 8:12pm | WhiteBeard

SOP

The legislature has a rule that after a 1st vote (that happened yesterday), a member can ask for a reconsideration. I'm thinking that the member seeking reconsideration has to be on the loosing side, but that's just off the top of my head. Every time I can recollect, the move for reconsideration comes from the side loosing. This article reports the results of the 2nd (reconsidered) vote today. The procedure happens all the time. With today's vote, the measure has passed the House Chamber.

But you knew that, I suspect. Get bored with saying "you suck" over on YouTube?

July 23, 2008 - 8:35pm | rfn

Quick reconsideration

is almost universally used in these kind of proceedings. As I recall the rules, someone moving for a reconsideration must have voted on the winning side. For that reason it's standard for one person to be delegated to vote opposite to the way they want things to go. Then, if the losing side members hang around after everybody else has drifted away the one "winning" person can suddenly change their mind and propose reconsideration when only his/her cronies are left in the room. By the actual winners doing it quickly it's over and done with - no room left for manipulation - because reconsideration can only be moved once. It's a card that must not be left on the table.

7 July 23, 2008 - 3:52pm | Blackthorn

Liscence awarded????

I thought that Ferc issued the licence., and that yesterdays vote in the House only was the first step in giving away close to a billion dollars?

July 23, 2008 - 5:45pm | chasm

The license

from Alaska means nothing except giving away $500,000,000. The FERC will issue the real license and whoever gets the FERC license will have a shot at building a line.

July 23, 2008 - 4:41pm | bhessert

True

And they did it twice to make sure to give away the money.........WHY????????

6 July 23, 2008 - 3:49pm | rattlepop

House passes TransCanada license

Why are we giving a half a BILLION dollars to a foriegn company to build a pipeline. If they are so good at building pipelines, why don't they finance it themselves.

Don't we have any companies in the United States of America that know how to build a pipeline? I think we do.

I am afraid that we have 24 people in the House of Representatives that need to be replaced before they bankrupt our beautiful state and cause irreparable damage to the State of Alaska and to the United States of America.

These 24 people are supposed to be representing the best interest of Alaskans not Canadians. What the hell are they thinking. Well, it looks like they AREN'T thinking at all.

July 23, 2008 - 6:39pm | trapper

Without

gas no matter who you are you have no pipeline. Not even Sarah! OOPS!!!!!!!!!

July 23, 2008 - 4:21pm | jmacinak

why?..

because it guarantees we get a pipeline for one, second, it`s better than paying Exxon ten billion to do the same thing in the same direction. (only whenever they feel like it)

July 23, 2008 - 5:41pm | chasm

And just how

does it guarantee a pipeline? TC has no gas and no money and cannot build a line without the producers signing long-term agreements with TC that will be used to finance the line. Which, since they have started their own project, they will not do.

The Palin clan has started down a path that cannot succeed and will mean years of litigation as the administration tries to stop Denali by withholding permits, etc. It is stupid.

July 23, 2008 - 6:49pm | Cartman3_15

Why do you

continue to spout this crap that only you oilies appear to believe? What a deluded bunch.

Face it. You all blew it. It's over for your gang.

July 23, 2008 - 11:31pm | Emperor

Cartman

Tell me which of one these statements is true.

1. AGIA Guarantees a gas pipeline will be built.

2 TransCANADA has all the funding it needs to complete the project under the terms of AGIA.

3, TransCANADA is not asking for any additional government assistance from either Federal or State agencies.

4. TransCANADA will begin immediately to start the field work required.

5. FERC has no problem giving licenses for Pipelines without commitments of gas to ship or funding for construction.

6. Palin is a lousy Governor.

July 23, 2008 - 11:40pm | Cartman3_15

None is true.

Now tell me how it's different for your (non)producer line.

Tell me, too, while your at it, why Drue Pearce would say we're closer to a gas pipeline today than we've ever been?

July 24, 2008 - 11:35am | Emperor

6 is true.

As for how the other five apply to BP/CP

1) AGIA doesn't apply to them, but they have already invested more in their project than TransCANADA has in theirs. So while not a guarantee, at least they have some skin in the game.

2) BP/CP has the gas and the capital to fund all phases from preparation to completion without a dime from the government.

3) As far as I know they have not asked for nor do they expect to ask for funding assistance from the government.

4) BP/CP has already began their field work.

5) FERC has stated that they have never approved a project without gas commitments. BP/CP has filed for and received FERC Pre-filing approval.

As for Drue Pierce, you would have to ask her. I agree with her simply because the market dynamics makes the gas line economically viable and the leaseholders are FINALLY moving forward with their plan in spite of the Palin administration.

July 26, 2008 - 9:38am | Cartman3_15

Actually

Pearce made it clear that the real progress being made toward a gas pipeline is because of AGIA. But I would never you expect you to acknowledge that, let alone agree with it.

July 26, 2008 - 10:03am | AK_Lady

Are you paid to post here, Cartman?

Is that what your trip to Anchorage was for?

July 27, 2008 - 2:48pm | TheSdog

If cartman is being paid

to post here then someone out there does not value their money.

July 23, 2008 - 11:38pm | Beethoven

Emperor

"NO" to all but question #6. Palin still has some time to redeem herself from this TransCanada fiasco. She must be smart enough to have figured out by now that TC has been saying embarrassing things BEFORE they even have approval from the legis. How bad will the Palin- TransCanada marriage be? Holy smokes. It'll be like a long episode of Jerry Springer.

This is a lot like how we got into the stupid Iraq war- lots of BS from the administration- and the legislature not doing its job with tragic consequences.

I think the adults in this fight will be the Alaska Senate. They will kill it- Galvin and Irwin looked frightened today.

July 24, 2008 - 3:59pm | Emperor

Our best hope...

...is if it never gets to the Senate floor for a vote. Don't they have a deadline of Aug 2 to approve the license and bribe?

July 23, 2008 - 6:52pm | chasm

So Cartman

why don't you answer the question, instead of pulling a Palin and attacking everyone who doesn't agree with you.

Just how is giving TC a license going to get a pipeline?

July 23, 2008 - 8:06pm | Cartman3_15

Hmmm

A quick perusal of this blog thread shows it is you who is "attacking everyone who doesn't agree with you".

Nice deflection, though.

Now run along. You've got some industry misinformation/wishful thinking to spread.

July 24, 2008 - 12:17am | AK_Lady

sad

July 24, 2008 - 10:48am | rfn

Just

think of me as a dedicated preservationist.

Let's preserve Alaska's resources by building only a little-bitty pipeline adequate to Alaska's needs and to start up an in-state
value-added industry. Then all you Texahomans can go home or maybe drill for oil in places where there isn't any as Congress prefers.

5 July 23, 2008 - 3:37pm | HD

Thanks, reps

Although the summer is chilly and gray, our future as Alaskans looks warm and bright, indeed. No plan is perfect, but AGIA and the contract with TransCanada offer the best hope for a gas pipeline on good terms for Alaska. Let's keep moving forward, and not be distracted by the defeated naysayers (Halcro and the Murkowski/Alaska Alliance crowd). It's good to have that hope and some confidence in the judgment of our elected officials.

July 23, 2008 - 3:53pm | worknews

Explain to me

how the he77 the agia plan is going to work again. Let's see they TC are seeking a permit to build a gas pipeline But they don't have any gas--- NONE--ZERO. The (producers) people that do have the gas are also seeking permission from FERC to build a pipeline. They also happen to have the money to build it which TC does not and never will without GAS. Hmmmm looks like a $500 million dollar give away to me. Think about it, even if they do build it without buy in from the producers to build a gas processing plant and supply the gas it will sit idle. This all stems from the tax rate and structure and the history of the PPT rate and structure changes by the state. Palin will not negotiate at all and the producers are not going to get caught in the moving target tax rate game again. No matter who builds a pipeline until the producers are happy with it NO GAS.

July 24, 2008 - 12:11am | counterpoint

the most important ?

Over 90 percent of the pipelines built in North America are built by independent pipeline companies who do not own the gas that ultimately flows through the pipeline. Apparently that is the norm, not the exception. What exactly makes our situation different?

July 23, 2008 - 5:48pm | chasm

Exactly so

except that without the producers on board there will never be a gas line built.

July 23, 2008 - 6:28pm | rfn

Exactly so.

Which means there'll be no way for Alaska's gas to be shipped to a strange and foreign land to fuel their petro-chemical industry and keep their workers employed. To cook mud into make-believe-oil to be shipped to China. Well, most of it. The rest being refined into jet fuel to be pipelined to the vast mega-airport being built at Prince George expressly to suck the air cargo business out of Alaska.

If there's no giant pipeline; just a proper sized, All-Alaska line, there'll be feedstock for an Alaskan chemical industry. Jobs for Alaskans, Fuel for Alaskan homes. LNG and propane for coastal and river villages. CNG to fuel vehicles.

Please share with us why you feel those things are so bad!

July 23, 2008 - 6:50pm | chasm

Sounds good to me

So why are we giving TC $500,000,000? As usual you have no clue.

July 23, 2008 - 8:38pm | rfn

We really shouldn't be giving anybody

$500,000,000 and we really should not, as Frank Murkowski attempted to ordain, give $10,000,000,000 in "concessions" to anybody. In fact, we should not be building a pipeline that hijacks Alaska's resources to a foreign land.

Why are you so in favor of the more expensive of the two plans that deny Alaskans work and ensure there'll never be a chemical industry in Alaska?

I certainly wish both will simply go away. $500,000,000 should not be spent on this foolishness but that's a small fraction of the $10,000,000,000 your favourite multi-nations would extort.

July 23, 2008 - 6:44pm | LeadingEdge

Who are you?

rfn, you seem to have a lot of inside knowledge that only someone with ties to the oil companies would have. Why don't you disclose who you work for and what your ultimate agenda is? You seem a bit more informed then the average Joe and it's easy to read between your lines. Clue us in without the riff raff.

July 23, 2008 - 8:46pm | rfn

It does seem that way, doesn't it!

Thank you for having noticed!

I'll happily disclose who I work for the very hour you do the same. Please include your full name, street address, e-mail address, phone and fax numbers. I'll happily reciprocate after verifying each.

My agenda:

I guess you really want me to expound it again! Thank you for the invitation.

My agenda is to see a large wooden stake driven through the evil hearts of both the Trans Canada and (non)producers schemes. To see Alaska's natural resources used for the exclusive benefit of Alaskans. Fuel for our homes and businesses. Fuel for electric power plants. A petro-chemical industry so we produce value-added goods instead of being milked as a colony. So we can reopen the fertilizer plant. So we can produce LNG and propane exclusively for shipment to Alaska's river and coastal villages. So we can produce Compressed Natural Gas to power Alaskan vehicles. To keep the air cargo business in Alaska instead of surrendering it to a cheap-fuel mega airport in Canada. That's part of the overall scheme that needs to die. Selling our gas cheap to cook tar sands to produce make-believe petroleum for China and to refine some to make that airport at Price George the new hub for Asian air traffic.

Now, what's your agenda? Who do you work for? In oil-chemical engineering? Physical labor on the slope? Big Oil management? Creative Oil Company accounting? What are your ties to the oil companies?

Oh, I have none and never did. But I have done a lot of research and reporting over several decades.

July 23, 2008 - 6:59pm | chasm

Don't encourage her/him

She has a problem with reality and can tie disparate things together. She never writes anything but riff raff.

July 23, 2008 - 8:48pm | rfn

It's so hard

connecting the dots. I can understand why some folks have so much trouble with it as you so often demonstrate. I'll have to try a little harder.

Search Jobs | Place an employment ad

Alaska Politics Blog

Contributors

Features

Archive

House passes TransCanada license – again