Congressional Roll Call Votes on the Keystone XL Pipeline Page: 4 of 28
This report is part of the collection entitled: Congressional Research Service Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Congressional Roll Call Votes on the Keystone XL Pipeline
Introduction
TransCanada's proposed Keystone XL Pipeline would transport oil sands crude from Canada and
shale oil produced in North Dakota and Montana to a market hub in Nebraska for further delivery
to Gulf Coast refineries. The pipeline would consist of 875 miles of 36-inch pipe with the
capacity to transport 830,000 barrels per day.'
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) receives frequent requests for congressional votes
taken on Keystone XL Pipeline legislation. This report provides roll call vote data on Keystone
XL Pipeline legislation identified by CRS using CQ.com's Roll Call Vote Report database as well
as the Congress.gov legislative database.
Roll call votes listed in the following tables are broken down by chamber, Congress, and type of
legislation-substantive votes (i.e., votes on amendments or passage of bills) versus procedural
votes (e.g., votes to recommit the bill to a committee or to provide for the consideration of a bill).
Votes are also listed in chronological order for each Congress.
House Roll Call Votes: 112th Congress-Present
According to both CQ.com and Congress.gov, the House of Representatives first introduced
Keystone XL Pipeline legislation in the 112th Congress. The first recorded votes in the House also
took place in that Congress.
Table I. House Roll Call Votes on Keystone XL Pipeline- 112th Congress
House Roll Vote Results/Date
CallBo (yeas-nays)
Bill/Amendment No. Vote Summary No.(ya-ysH.Amdt. 720 to H.R.
1938
H.Amdt. 721 to H.R.
1938
H.Amdt. 722 to H.R.
1938Amendment sought to add language describing
an environmental finding, which states that the
Keystone XL Pipeline would run through the
Ogallala Aquifer and which would explain the
risks involved with the proposed route.
Amendment sought to strike paragraph I5 of
the findings section, which says that analysis
using EPA models shows that the Keystone XL
Pipeline will result in no significant change in
total U.S. or global greenhouse gas emissions.
Amendment sought to include a finding stating
that the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) Administrator testified
at a congressional hearing and said that PHMSA
had not done a study analyzing the risks
associated with transporting diluted bitumen.
The amendment also sought to require PHMSA
to complete a review of the risks associated
with transporting diluted bitumen, and whether
current pipeline regulations are sufficient.Roll no. 640
Roll no. 641
Roll no. 642Failed (164-260)
7/26/2011
Failed (164-261)
7/26/201 1
Failed (163-264)
7/26/201 11 For more information about the Keystone XL Pipeline, see CRS Report R43787, Keystone XL Pipeline: Overview and
Recent Developments, by Paul W. Parfomak et al.Congressional Research Service
1
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Cunningham, Lynn J. Congressional Roll Call Votes on the Keystone XL Pipeline, report, April 4, 2017; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc1042355/m1/4/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.