Jonah Goldberg
Recommend this article

Welcome to the "year of action." In last week's State of the Union address, the president vowed to do whatever he must to help the economy, even if that means working around Congress: "What I offer tonight is a set of concrete, practical proposals to speed up growth, strengthen the middle class and build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class. Some require congressional action, and I'm eager to work with all of you. But America does not stand still, and neither will I. So wherever and whenever I can take steps without legislation to expand opportunity for more American families, that's what I'm going to do."

The White House has touted the fact the president has a "phone and a pen" and he's not afraid to use them.

The president also vowed to cut red tape, and not for the first time. In 2013's State of the Union, he insisted that "my administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits." And in 2012: "In the next few weeks, I will sign an executive order clearing away the red tape that slows down too many construction projects."

All of this was in the wake of Obama's 2011 executive order requiring the elimination of "redundant, inconsistent or overlapping" regulations. The administration had hailed the order as an "unprecedented" move to boost growth. In an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal touting the order, the president wrote: "We're also getting rid of absurd and unnecessary paperwork requirements that waste time and money."

Laymen might have the impression the president wants to cut red tape and take action on job-creating infrastructure, particularly oil and gas projects.

The fools.

On Friday, the State Department issued a much-awaited study on the Keystone XL pipeline. It found that there would be negligible effect on climate change -- the president's only expressed reservation about the project, which would create thousands of construction jobs and generate billions in tax revenue.

In fact, the study concluded that if the pipeline from Canada is not built, it could result in a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions. That's because the alternative means (trucks, rail, etc.) of transporting the fuel -- which Canada says will be pumped no matter what -- are more carbon intensive than a pipeline.

Recommend this article

Jonah Goldberg

Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online,and the author of the forthcoming book The Tyranny of Clichés. You can reach him via Twitter @JonahNRO.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Jonah Goldberg's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.