The Dakota Access pipeline is a 1,172 mile oil pipeline that stretches through North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa and southern Illinois. The pipeline would allow oil companies to transport crude oil from North Dakota to oil refineries along the Eastern Seaboard. The pipeline’s construction was permitted by the participating state governments under eminent domain. Opponents of the pipeline (including several Native American tribes, including the Meskwaki and Sioux tribal nations) argue that the pipeline has the potential to pollute their water supply and destroy Native American burial sites. Proponents argue that the pipeline is necessary for the U.S. to achieve energy independence.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
@B4FKB49Libertarian1mo1MO
It's American job you take that away that hurts the economy plus it helps the consumer and the working class
@B44HYS72mos2MO
Yes, and it could pollute the land further degrading the environment on top of destroying Native Americans homes.
No, As long as the construction is heavily regulated so that there is a much smaller chance of incident.
@9Y8VYQF6mos6MO
No, but the government should work seriously with Native Americans to reach compromise, or else reroute the pipeline away from Native American land.
@9T4J8NM8mos8MO
Reroute the pipeline away from the Native American land and find a way to use it for something else that will equally benefit the citizens of the United States without causing environmental problems nor taking away the "true" American's (Native American's) land.
@9S9T3XX9mos9MO
This debate is a contentious and multifaceted issue some believe pipelines are essential for transporting oil efficiently. Some people believe it would open up more jobs for people.
@9RZ4FZ49mos9MO
I don't think that the pipeline is bad but, they have to be able to be in agreement with the Native tribes that live in the areas.
@9G3R9ZD2yrs2Y
Both reroute the pipeline and drastically increase the amount of fines companies must pay in the event of an accident.
If it is harmful to the Native Americans then it needs to be stoped because that would destroy historical evidence and religious sites. If it was harming the christan religon in any way then it would be take out or not allowed.
@B2RPZB23mos3MO
Yes, it is harming the environment, as well as damaging other sites and interfering with native Americans.
@93K7TKKIndependent3yrs3Y
Let the people in the area vote, yes or no.
@93JQF8BIndependent3yrs3Y
Vote on it. Let the people decide. Maybe there can be an alternative route.
@924XW8C3yrs3Y
i do not have adequate information to form a solid opinion.
@8ZRPCFH3yrs3Y
YES, leave the tribes alone they have been through enough.
@8YQZ9RJ3yrs3Y
Yes, and work to move away from petroleum products in this country.
@8Y8248K3yrs3Y
No, but reroute it away from Native American land unless they give authorization(probably through compensation to be honest), and drastically increase the fines in the event of an accident.
@8XRKSQN3yrs3Y
I think they should leave all the options they have now and look for a completely new option that brings together the best aspects of the previous ones, affecting as little as possible what is now affected.
@8XDNNFG4yrs4Y
Yes, allow construction and operation. Tax every barrel of oil, Every MMBTU of other products at $100 per barrel or MMBTU.
@8X7VX68Libertarian4yrs4Y
Auction the pipeline to the private sector.
@8X5P6V84yrs4Y
No, government should have no role in private business.
@8X226BC4yrs4Y
No. The country needs its own source of petroleum to make fuels while we find new sources of fuel.
@8W3XX344yrs4Y
yes but avoid native american land
@8SX57L34yrs4Y
No, but replace the company in charge if more leaks happen.
@8SWWQ674yrs4Y
Yes, because in order for the US to leave fossil fuels behind, all new sources for fossil fuels need to be abandoned until the US’s domestic and foreign oil supply is completely dry
@8R25G26Libertarian4yrs4Y
The pipeline should be turned over to private businesses.
@8QYMJVX4yrs4Y
No, native american reserves operate on a level similar to a state, they agreed to allow it to run through their lands as it was good for the local economy
@8Q9GLTXRepublican4yrs4Y
@8KQYJSW5yrs5Y
Government should pay the fines
@8KNPLLY5yrs5Y
Do t know enough to side
@8D5KYYS5yrs5Y
If its going to help then yes but if it don't then stop the pipeline. Do a studies on each one.
@8CTNJJ45yrs5Y
Yes, however there are better ways to access american oil.
@8CFN2RT5yrs5Y
Yes, and move to use renewable energy for independent sustainability.
@98H46SQ2yrs2Y
Regardless, the arbitration of this matter should be determined by judges at the state level.
@9755TCP3yrs3Y
No, because we need oil to be produced more locally because we need to stop relying on other countries for oil. there should be hefty fines for illegal dumping or pollution.
@954ND243yrs3Y
No because we need oil, but make sure that there are no leaks in the pipeline.
@8Y92WFSIndependent3yrs3Y
No, but they should reroute the pipelines and make sure to take extra precautions to make sure that the water isn't effected. If the water gets effected ALL involved should be penalized.
@8X92J68Republican4yrs4Y
No, but include costs of paying for any land necessary for the pipeline.
@8L7JHFN5yrs5Y
If it is this controversial, divert the resources into clean and sustainable energy and leave peoples land with them.
@8F54KZK5yrs5Y
No, but they should do there best to not affect others
Is it absolutely necessary.
@B4K72Q41mo1MO
I honestly have no idea Thats a ton of oil just for us to stop construction but at the same time i mean we are ruining the earth by drilling it for oil over and over again
@8XHWJPH3yrs3Y
The government should not be able to do anything.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
