THE BEGINNING: For the past year, the American people have been told by the media that our nation is currently in a state of division like no other. Although this rhetoric may be convincing now more than ever after the inauguration of Donald J. Trump, one must not forget that our nation has never been fully united to begin with. Since the creation of this country, the citizens have never unanimously agreed upon something. Even our own Founding Fathers had differing views and stances with how the country should be maintained. It is natural to have inconsistency with opinions, especially when it comes to issues, since many people interpret situations differently.

One of the biggest issues that is currently happening within our country is the debate on the Dakota Access Pipeline. This controversial pipeline has been circling the news outlets since April of 2016 when the Standing Rock Sioux tribe in Dakota began protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline. On January 24, 2017 President Donald Trump issued a Presidential Memorandum regarding the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline sending the debate and the public surrounding the issue into an outburst. In the President’s Memorandum, he detailed the future procedures that should be adopted to expedite the approval of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This order comes in just after Former President Barack Obama decided to stop the completion of the Dakota Access Pipeline back in December.

The feedback regarding the decision has been split. Some American citizens have shown their support for the continuation of the pipeline and the economic impact it will have on the current oil industry, while others are more adamant on the effect the leakage could have on the Sioux tribe that reside in the area of construction. This Civic Issue post will examine both sides of the argument, focusing on the benefits and disadvantages of the decision to continue construction on the Dakota Access Pipeline.

THE GOOD: As President Trump boasted about when signing the Presidential Memorandum, the continuation of this project will create a significant amount of jobs for the American people. Although the job estimates for the Dakota Access Pipeline vary, since most of the project is already constructed, there will still be an influx in the workforce. Not only that, but the economic impact the Dakota Access Pipeline will have is undeniable. When built, the pipeline will stretch more than 1,100 miles from oil fields in North Dakota to a river port in Illinois and all the small towns that line the pipeline’s path are likely to see local booms in business, as workers spend money on lodging, food and entertainment.

One of the major concerns of the protestors is the environmental effect the pipeline could have on the land. However, Kelcy Warren, the CEO of Energy Transfer Partners, has reassured the Sioux tribe and the public that the only error that could possibly occur with the pipeline is human error, and not in the sense that the pipeline is faulty, but in that other people could possibly ignore the warnings and accidently dig into the pipeline. Despite this concern, a pipeline is the best option when transporting oil. Compared to the alternatives, trucks and rails, a pipeline is much less likely to leak oil.

THE BAD: Although the crusade to stop the Dakota Access Pipeline has gained thousands of supporters from all across the United States, the original protestors for the construction were the Standing Rock Sioux tribe. The Native Americans of this tribe began to block the completion of the interstate oil pipeline after they became aware that the energy company planned to route the pipeline under their ancestral land. To the members of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe this land is sacred to them and has immense historical meaning. In addition, the Sioux tribe is also deeply concerned about the impact the pipeline will have on the Missouri River, which happens to be their main source of water. The tribe and environmentalists alike, are worried about possible oil leaks into the water that could cause serious damage to the surrounding area.

Many protestors have also brought the question of race into the debate. While many supporters of the pipeline find this claim to be ridiculous, there does seem to be some questionable evidence of race-related decisions by the company. The pipeline’s original path crossed the Missouri River, just north of Bismarck, a city that happens to be 90% white. However, when concerns were raised in the town about a potential oil spill, the pipeline was rerouted south to go under the river right next to the Standing Rock Reservation. The energy company has denied this and inferred that the decision was solely based on numbers, which could be true. More people live near Bismarck, so if the pipeline were to be routed there then it would have passed closer to more homes and it would have needed to cross water sources more times than where it is currently routed now.

THE OILY: Although the debate never ended between whether the Dakota Access Pipeline is a good or bad decision, it certainly did intensify as a result of Donald Trump’s recent Presidential Memorandum. However just because the newly elected President ordered a Presidential Memorandum on the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, doesn’t mean that the approvals needed to put a finish to the construction were granted. So far, all that the Presidential Memorandum does is authorize an expedited pathway for approval that will cut through the confusion that surrounds and blocks the issuance of permits and easements to Dakota Access. To the many protestors and environmentalists that object to the construction of the pipeline this is good news. Unfortunately, to these same people the Dakota Access Pipeline will be difficult, if not impossible to stop in the future. But like many issues in the United States, a resolution will never occur unless the debate doesn’t continue.

Resources

Epstein, Richard. “Trump’s Big Move On Dakota Access Pipeline.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 26 Jan. 2017. Web.

Krauss, CLifford. “Keystone XL Pipeline: A New Opening, but What Lies Ahead?” The New York Times. The  New York Times, 26 Jan. 2017. Web.

Meyer, Robinson. “The Legal Case for Blocking the Dakota Access Pipeline.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 9 Sept. 2016. Web.

The Daily Show with Trevor Noah. “The Dakota Access Pipeline’s Reservation Reroute: The Daily Show” YouTube, 2 December 2016, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uugjk2J9tXs