Senate Republicans cheered a political victory Saturday that forces President Obama to make a speedy decision about an oil pipeline splitting his party on jobs and the environment in the midst of a difficult re-election campaign.

But some pipeline opponents predicted the congressional deal on TransCanada's Keystone XL -- if it becomes law -- could also work to their advantage, setting up a fierce lobbying battle in coming months over energy security and the carbon dioxide emissions from Canada's oil fields.

The battle was set into motion Saturday when the Senate voted overwhelmingly to extend the payroll tax cut and include a provision that forces Obama to deny or grant a presidential permit for Keystone XL within 60 days. The decision comes on the heels of a House vote with similar text requiring the president to approve the 1,700-mile pipeline in the same time frame unless he determines it's not in the national interest.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), however, cast uncertainty into the process on Sunday by indicating that the House prefers a year-long extension of the tax cut. The payroll tax holiday is scheduled to end Dec. 31 if the House rebuffs the Senate's legislation.

"If House Republicans refuse to pass this bipartisan bill to extend the payroll tax cut, there will be a significant tax increase on 160 million hardworking Americans in 13 days that would damage the economy and job growth," White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer said yesterday in a statement.

The political maneuvering, in all likelihood, steers the pipeline project back into the public's attention five weeks after Obama seemed to have pushed it out of his political hair. In November, his administration quelled weeks of environmental protests by punting a decision on the project until 2013, saying more time was needed to study environmental impacts and a reroute of the pipeline in Nebraska's environmentally-sensitive Sandhills region.

Now, Republicans can tout a legislative victory while saddling Obama with an immediate choice between economic and environmental benefits.

"We want jobs," Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), who introduced the provision, said in a brief interview after the vote. "And we want more energy independence."

Lugar declined to predict Obama's decision on the pipeline, but noted that large Canadian investments in the U.S. are at stake when unemployment is high and economic growth is weak.

"These are all important aspects that lead me to hope the president will come to the right decision," Lugar said. The pipeline would run from Canada's oil-sands region to Texas if built, and roughly double the amount of Canadian crude coming into the United States.

Rejection anticipated

There is speculation that the provision might offer more short-term political benefit for Republicans than an actual pathway to pipeline construction. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) indicated as much by suggesting that Obama will reject the provision's demands for fast action.

"The president's going to veto it," Reid told ClimateWire on Saturday. "That's what he said."

Reid seemed to be saying that Obama will turn down the permitting request within the provision, and not veto the legislation containing it.

Reid's comments echo those of both White House officials and the State Department in recent days.

Pfeiffer, for example, said via Twitter that the House bill -- which parallels the Senate deal -- "shortens the review process in a way that virtually guarantees that the pipeline will NOT be approved."

That rhetoric prompted some environmentalists to say they weren't worried about the latest political plan.

The Senate deal is a victory because "it's going to force a rejection of the pipeline sooner rather than later," said Jane Kleeb of Bold Nebraska. Similarly, Jeremy Symons of the National Wildlife Federation blogged that the "the rider forces the Obama administration to deny the pipeline permit and the project will be stopped. Good riddance."

If Obama denies the permit, TransCanada would have to start from scratch in a process that could take years.

The environmental hope stems from the fact the State Department delayed a permitting decision on the grounds it needed at least an additional year to fully study a reroute of the pipeline around Nebraska's Sandhills and the Ogallala aquifer, a major drinking water source.

The Nebraska factor

The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality -- which is awaiting a proposed reroute plan from TransCanada in the wake of State's delay -- has yet to begin its own review process of an alternate route, which could take six months or longer.

"There's no way Obama can make a decision in 60 days under these circumstances," said Kleeb.

"If Obama were to surprise everyone and grant a permit," it would open the door to lawsuits, she said. The text from Lugar essentially would allow construction of the pipeline in every state but Nebraska while the rerouting process is being resolved there.

That is an impossible prospect, according to Kleeb and other pipeline opponents, since a reroute within Nebraska could force alterations of the pipeline path in other states. That raises serious legal questions under National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which requires a full environmental review of the pipeline's final pathway, she said.

But pipeline supporters also expressed optimism.

TransCanada said in a statement that the bill provides a "practical middle ground" that avoids unnecessary construction delays in other states outside Nebraska.

The vote indicates that "the majority of Congress supports the benefits Keystone XL will bring to the United States," said TransCanada president and CEOr Russ Girling.

Marty Durbin, executive vice president of the American Petroleum Institute, said he was "confident" about the outcome. The president will consider economic challenges and support for the pipeline among organized labor, he said.

The comments from the administration about not having enough time for an environmental review under the Senate bill is "political posturing," he said. "We've seen the winds move back and forth," he added.

What is certain is that Obama will face political pressure regardless of his decision.

A 'hold your nose' vote?

At a debate last week, GOP presidential hopefuls Newt Gingrich and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R- Minn.) slammed Obama about the delays over Keystone XL.

Meanwhile, environmentalists have also said they will engage in further civil disobedience if the project moves forward, and possibly stay home on election day if Obama approves the project. Others expressed frustration with the deal.

"If President Obama allows a deal cut in oily, money-filled congressional back rooms to lead to a pipeline that harms the public ... he will have failed one of the biggest tests of his presidency," Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, warned in a statement after the vote.

Environmentalists say Keystone XL is a climate-change disaster, although the degree the project would increase greenhouse gas emissions is a matter of intense debate (ClimateWire, July 25). Oil sands crude is more carbon intensive to produce than other forms of oil, because its production involves blasting or heating gooey bitumen from the ground.

The weekend vote might have put some lawmakers in a difficult position on the climate issue. Some who are supportive of the tax cut extension might have had to hold their nose to swallow the pipeline provision.

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) was asked about the project's impact on climate change after he voted to approve the legislation Saturday. "We're looking at that," he said several times of its effect on emissions. "I haven't made a judgment on that yet."

Even Lugar, one of the few Republicans to express concern about climate change, said he's sympathetic to environmentalists' views on the pipeline.

"Of course I am," said Lugar, who's facing primary challenge next year. "But at the same time I'm more sympathetic with the fact that we're beholden to Venezuela, to Russia, to other countries for oil that we need. We have the ability to refine it in the United States. We have the ability to take steps that I think will be helpful in terms of climate change."