Native voices not heard on pipeline
Two Native American tribes are taking the Trump administration to court over the recent approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.
The Keystone XL pipeline is a proposed oil pipe that will carry crude oil from Canada and link to an existing pipe in Steele City. The battle over the pipeline has been fought for over a decade, and yet, the Rosebud Sioux and the Belknap tribes believe their voices were overlooked. The pipeline’s proposed route cuts right through the sacred land of both tribes in South Dakota and Montana.
The Native American Rights Fund issued a statement claiming that there was: “... no analysis of the potential impact on hunting and fishing rights, no analysis of potential impacts on the Rosebud Sioux Tribe’s unique water system, no analysis of the potential impact of spills on tribal citizens.”
They also state that there was no analysis of the impact the pipeline would have on the tribe’s cultural sites, which is in violation of the National Historic Preservation Act. The trial date is set for April 10.
The members of the Rosebud Sioux and Belknap tribes feel like they were left out of the debate over the pipeline, and this is the result. Little consideration has been given to the unique issues that these small groups of individuals may face.
Fortunately, the battle over the pipeline is far from over, so make your voice heard and say no to the Keystone XL pipeline.
Seth Greenfield, Lincoln
Liberal editorials miss the mark
The Lincoln Journal Star needs to get out of the left-wing echo-chambers when making editorials.
The editorial board bought in to the whole man-made climate change theory (“Climate plan makes sense for Nebraska,” Feb. 16) without appreciation as to how flawed the theory is or how concerns have been exaggerated.
The Copenhagen Consensus was founded by Bjorn Lomborg, an environmentalist, who believes the climate change theory but says it does not warrant the attention as there is a vast number of more important problems to address.
The Consensus has been around for more than 10 years making suggestions to policy makers.
The very next day, an editorial on sales tax was published (“Sales tax increase for road justified,” Feb. 17). Is the paper aware the state has already increased the gasoline tax to improve roads?
In addition, since the sales tax has so many exemptions, how about considering removing some of the exemptions before increasing the rate?
Andrew L. Sullivan, Omaha