Bono Mack, Who Will Seek Re-Election in November, Blasts Obama on Pipeline

Rep. Mary Bono Mack, R-Palm Springs, hopes to win the newly-formed 36th Congressional District, which includes Whitewater, Cabazon, Banning, Beaumont, Cherry Valley and Calimesa.

The congresswoman who intends to represent the San Gorgonio Pass blasted President Barack Obama's decision on Wednesday to deny an application to build the transcontinental Keystone XL Pipeline that would transport oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.

Rep. Mary Bono Mack, R-Palm Springs, currently represents the 45th Congressional District, which does not include the Pass.

In November, she will seek re-election in the newly-formed 36th Congressional District, which includes Whitewater, Cabazon, Banning, Beaumont, Cherry Valley and Calimesa.

The Keystone XL Pipeline is a proposed $7 billion, nearly 1,700-mile, 36-inch crude oil pipeline that would stretch from Alberta, Canada to the Gulf Coast.

Obama denied the pending application for construction of the pipeline Wednesday, stating in part:

"As the State Department made clear last month, the rushed and arbitrary deadline insisted on by Congressional Republicans prevented a full assessment of the pipeline’s impact, especially the health and safety of the American people, as well as our environment.

"As a result, the Secretary of State has recommended that the application be denied. And after reviewing the State Department’s report, I agree."

Bono Mack joined a chorus of Republican presidential candidates and conservative legislators in criticizing Obama's decision.

"This is a serious blow to our fragile economy and a thumb in the eye to American workers," Bono Mack said in a statement. "This much-needed project would create tens of thousands of new jobs and help to reduce our nation’s dangerous dependence on foreign oil.

"The President needs to rethink this decision before it’s too late, because it will only lead to higher unemployment and higher gasoline prices in the future," Bono Mack said. "This is not the kind of energy plan Americans want or deserve."

Bono Mack also cited national security concerns in her criticism of Obama's decision.

"With the looming threat of Iran blocking the Strait of Hormuz – the transport point of one-thirds of the world's waterborne oil – we should be encouraging an 'all-of-the-above' approach to domestic energy production, including construction of this $7 billion privately-funded pipeline," Bono Mack said.

"Instead, President Obama is saying 'no' to Canada – our largest trading partner and closest ally – and 'yes' to extremist regimes which control huge reserves of oil. In a very dangerous world, this is not the message the President of the United States should be sending to dictators everywhere."

Bono Mack is running for an eighth term in November. The only Democrat to announce plans to run against her so far is Raul Ruiz, an emergency physician at Eisenhower Medical Center in Rancho Mirage.

Due to redistricting, both will run in the newly-formed 36th Congressional District, covering central and eastern Riverside County. A pdf copy of the new 36th District is attached to this report.

Hokudawg January 20, 2012 at 02:26 PM
Tarsand extraction is too new it's messy and it's secretive (what chemicals are they injecting into the earth). Transcontinental pipelines through the bread basket is another bad idea. Couldn't they build refineries in the local areas and ship through the Great Lakes or down the Miss. Seems like a big mess to start up when we are looking to end our dependency on fossil fuels. And every time I hear about doing something to lower our prices at the pump the cost shoots up. And big oil gets richer.
Judi January 20, 2012 at 03:20 PM
The pipeline would provide a few thousand jobs for TEMPORARY employment. Are you sure you want to put our "bread basket" at risk? Should an accident happen and chemicals/oils get deposited in to the nations mid section we would lose our most valuable ability to feed ourselves and others. Is that what the conservatives are about? Undermining our precious farmland by contaminating it? The other thing is follow the money, who would stand to make the most? Texas oil companies...does this not sent red flags up for everyone?
Judi January 20, 2012 at 03:25 PM
I would also like to thank those responsible for highlighting this issue, voting this year will be mandatory for us all. Who/what is backing Mrs. Mack? is it worth a google?
Inside Informer January 20, 2012 at 05:54 PM
Did either of you even read the article? There is NO mention of domestic extraction whatsoever. Also, wouldn't you at least like the option of dealing with Canada if and when things go bad in Iran? You do realize it is a PRIVATELY funded project, right? Crying about "temporary jobs"? Well, I think a lot of people would agree that a longer termed temporary job is better than no job at all. You don't want a pipeline, but you're OK with that oil going up and down our waterways as an alternative?
David Rempel January 20, 2012 at 06:02 PM
I often disagree with Bono-Mack, but she is right on this one. Construction jobs of all kinds are temporary, they always end and then a new job needs to be found. That is no reason for objection. Everything else is a plus. Pipelines are the safest way of transporting oil and oil products. Crazy how those who worry about a spill into an aquifer are willing to risk floating that same oil in tankers. The jobs that AREN'T temporary are al thsoe that flow from having that oil here--refining, plastics, pharmaceuticals, etc. Plus we get to export refined products, which means we take a raw material and make it more valuable--thats what its all about.
David Rempel January 20, 2012 at 06:04 PM
Furthermore, this decision is entirely political. If Obama is re-elected, that pipeline will be approved before Feb 2013. If Obama is not elected, the pipeline will be approved before Feb 2013.
David Rempel January 20, 2012 at 06:05 PM
Finally, perhaps BHO doesn't stand for Barak Hussein Obama, but Barak Hamlet Obama. His years of being able to ponder at leisure , his unwillingness to make decisions outside of a group concensus shows.
Nancy Gall January 20, 2012 at 06:25 PM
It's amazing to me that Mary Mack and her fellow conservative Republicans could vote against the American Jobs Act, which would have created millions of jobs, and then want rushed through this pipeline without adequate studies. In contest, we have Raul Ruiz, child of migrant workers, who graduated from UCLA and Harvard(With three graduate degrees) who wants to bring jobs, education, and healthcare opportunities to our district. Mary needs to go. Let her take care of Florida where she lives.
Judi January 20, 2012 at 07:04 PM
the pipleline runs THROUGH the grain belt of the USA. Do you think it is possible to pipe the "substances" through the grain belt without any accidents? And should there be an accident... who is going to clean it up to its original functionality...and if they don't clean it up the right way...where are we going to grow our crops?
Roger Berg January 20, 2012 at 08:07 PM
Nancy you are wrong and David Rempel comments are right. The construction of this pipeline will bring needed jobs to America that will be high paying and stimulate the economy with Private money, not like the make work administrative government jobs the Democrats keep on wanting to created. Our National Security is at risk when we depend so heavily upon Middle East Oil.
David Rempel January 20, 2012 at 08:29 PM
@ Judi: Ignorance is bliss. Our entire country, including the area in question, is already laced with pipelines. We just don't hear about them because they do what they are intended to do without problems. We also live above numerous pipes containing sewage and we are at peace with that. If the freeways were being built today, would you argue that we were despoiling the prarie or would you see the value in infrastructure? Is it only good infrastructure when the government is paying for it through taxation, and able to steer contracts to their supporters? Is the only good capitalism crony capitalism?
Judi January 21, 2012 at 02:13 AM
Better recheck your crystal ball....the risk for our midwest crops is far to great.
Judi January 21, 2012 at 02:22 AM
Better recheck your crystal ball....the risk for our mid west crops is far to great and having pipelines isn't a good argument for constructing more. The way to insure the safety of our mid west is create non fuel transportation. Greed will be the death of this country. Not anything else. We are well on our way...and have been since Reagan. BTW, before you start slinging aspersions...check your own back yard, sir.
Ben Mason January 21, 2012 at 06:51 AM
Jobs- good. Oil from friendlies- good. keeping the whole oil dependence thing going, instead of finding rational fuel sources that doesn't get us into destroying the planet or going to war with crazies for it, not so good. plus lets get honest guys, answer yes or no, would you run a pipeline full of oil stuff on top of the beaumont basin on route to elsewhere, rolling the dice that just one spill would ruin the water supply just so there will be jobs elsewhere and not here? a waterway can get cleaned up, but an aquifer is just toast- even with all the water pumped out and replaced at great cost can't go down there to scrub the rocks. Its easy to argue about what you would do about something that is hundreds of miles away when there are no down sides for you. I think the only people who should have a real say about this are those whose lives and kids lives could be affected and have something to lose. hate to think my tank of gas or my temp job poisoned some kids water forever.
Inside Informer January 21, 2012 at 01:32 PM
Judi, You need to pull your head out of that crystal ball you keep talking about. Do you know the pipeline is already in place through to Illinois? Do you know that the line WILL be built by 2014? Modern pipeline construction is the safest way to transport oil. The lines are compartmentalized so that in the event of a break/leak the entire line isn't going to empty as you're imagining.
Hokudawg January 27, 2012 at 04:05 AM
I read this rediculous divisive hair brain scheme. Privately funded construction. We (the taxpayers) will be financially resposible for upkeep, maintaining security, forced to clean up the mess after the spills. We wont benefit from that anymore than we do from the Gulf leases. It runs through the middle of the country regardless if it originates in Canada or Montana. And fuel prices wont be lowered. We will always deal with OPEC because that's the way the system is set up. They (Iran, Venezuela..) hate us now so what? $10.00 a gallon won't effect policy. Bad idea.
Claire Fremont January 27, 2012 at 07:16 AM
Everything must be considered about this pipeline. We have been getting oil from the Middle East for far too long, and all our latest wars have been to ensure its delivery. We want oil, we have oil, so its insane that we are putting our national security at risk just so we can pop into our suv to go buy milk. The trade off of national security over the environment at this time is necessary. I'm not against environmental protection, far from it. We know that Keystone 1 had spills, the guarantee was a projection of 1 spill every 7 years and that turned into 12 spill events inside of a year. Those problems should get worked out before we finalize the deal on XL. Not to mention if there is an alternative route past the Ogallala aquifer that is worth the holdup, also. Yet we are hooked on oil no matter what for at least 10-20 years. We can't change our entire energy structure so completely in a less amount of time. I actually see this pipeline, and other American forays into domestic energy production as a positive thing, both national security wise, and strange as it may sound, environmental wise. Think, we drill, frack, pipeline, whatever, right here and there will be the expected mistakes. But those mistakes will be in our faces, impacting our people, and it will finally create enough pressure on our country to finally address clean energy solutions that we've been dragging our feet on for so long. Its simply has to be done.
Hokudawg January 27, 2012 at 03:12 PM
I'm with you. This is all about greed. This slop will be pulled out of the earth and it will not be guaranteed for the domestic market. We all know it will be put on the world market at OPEC prices and all profits will go to the same people it goes to now. NOT the American people. The gulf spill remember??? How long will that mess be around? And have fuel prices subsided since??? And they never will. There will always be some sort of crisis or upgrading process to keep fuel prices profitable. If we really wanted oil independence We wouldn't be buying it from the world market would we? Alaska, Mexico, Canada and the lower US have plenty of reserves. We drill for it and then it goes on the market at OPEC prices. This is too new an industry to start getting so deeply committed.
John Springs February 02, 2012 at 03:40 PM
This is a woman who sold your liberty two months ago. Mrs. Mack is supporting SOPA/PIPA, so why would I vote for her.
Hokudawg February 02, 2012 at 04:01 PM
Because the uber wealthy need her. None of you have addressed the questionable method of "fracking"? Why do they fight so hard to keep these chemicals they're injecting in the ground so secret. Most agree that fossil fuels need to be used less so why pour all this money onto this in it's infant stages. Remember the promise of cheaper electricity when those windmills went in? Did we ever see any cost benefits to the people who look at them everyday? Or the oilwells/refineries throughout So. Cal? But when those refineries blow or catch fire who suffers the most? And yet we pay some of the highest prices in the country. And the oil companies have record profits. Don't believe her any more than BP.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something