“Before Russian bombs began to rain on Ukraine. Before hundreds of innocent Ukrainians lost their lives. A horrific decision had already been made. Joe Biden caved to the radical environmentalists and stopped America’s Keystone pipeline and dramatically increased Americans’ dependence on Russian oil, endangering America’s security and helping Russia fund their invasion.”
— Voice-over of a new ad, “Horrific Decision,” via former vice president Mike Pence’s political organization, Advancing American Freedom, March 7, 2022
Well, this ad certainly is not subtle. It starts with vivid, frightening images of the Russian invasion of Ukraine — and then connects President Biden’s “horrific decision” to halt the Keystone XL pipeline to increased U.S. purchases of Russian oil.
Text appears at one point: “U.S. reliance on Russian oil hits record high.” And then another text appears: “U.S. ‘paying Putin to invade’ Ukraine.” That is attributed, oddly, to “Oil analyst, Fox News.” (It turns out to be Stephen Schork, a onetime commodity trader and research analyst who writes a newsletter.)
The Pence organization claims it will spend $10 million targeting 16 congressional Democrats with this message. The ad ends by urging viewers to contact the lawmaker to “support America’s security instead of Russia’s terror.” Images of explosions and the sound of a woman’s cry close the ad.
Given that Biden on Tuesday announced a halt to imports of Russian oil and gas, the ad already feels rather stale. Moreover, the ad displays little understanding of the energy markets and makes an unwarranted suggestion that Biden is responsible for increased purchases of Russian oil. Energy analysts say other factors — which predate the Biden administration — are responsible.
The Facts
Within hours of taking office, Biden canceled the planned construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. The move was designed to be a signal that the Biden administration was taking a tougher stand on fossil fuels and shifting the country toward cleaner energy.
We’ve written many fact checks on this project over the years, about inflated claims about the number of jobs that would be created and about false assertions that the oil moving through it would bypass the United States. If the pipeline were built, the crude oil would travel to the Gulf Coast, where it would be refined into products such as motor gasoline and diesel fuel, with one estimate that 70 percent of the refined product would be consumed in the United States.
But here’s the rub — despite President Donald Trump’s enthusiastic backing, the pipeline still had not been built, because of court fights and other challenges. So even if Biden had not canceled it, there is little chance it would have been built by now. Biden’s move was more symbolic than anything else. (Moreover, in the past 10 years, the production of oil from tar sands has doubled, by more than what the Keystone XL would have carried, and it is ferried by other pipelines and by railroad.)
The ad only mentions Biden’s cancellation of the pipeline, not his other energy policies. In a news release accompanying the ad, Pence issued a statement that also referred to “restoring oil and natural gas leases.”
Biden did announce a halt to any new federal oil and gas leases shortly after taking office. But The Washington Post reported that in his first year, Biden outpaced Trump in issuing drilling permits on public lands — in part because a federal judge last June struck down Biden’s executive order. So the administration resumed leasing, to the dismay of environmentalists.
One could possibly make a case, as some analysts do, that the Biden administration’s actions — such as canceling the Keystone pipeline and oil and gas leases — shaped market perceptions that have led to higher prices for oil. But the ad does not make that argument. It only mentions the pipeline as a “horrific decision” made because of “radical environmentalists.”
Then the ad shifts to the claim that Biden “dramatically increased Americans’ dependence on Russian oil.” We take a reasonable-person test when assessing such ads and think most viewers would link the Keystone cancellation to the higher purchases of Russian oil. After all, both statements are made in the same sentence.
First, some context: In 2020, oil from Russia represented 1.3 percent of total U.S. crude oil imports, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Canada is the biggest supplier, accounting for 61 percent. The preliminary numbers for 2021 indicate that the Russian share increased to 3.3 percent of crude oil imports; Canada remained at 61 percent. That’s hardly what one would call “dependence” on Russian oil, as the ad claims.
Even if one decided that the claims were linked, analysts say the increase in Russian oil purchases stems from factors that predate the Biden administration. In particular, analysts point to Trump’s decision in 2019 to impose sanctions on Venezuelan oil, and analysts point also to international emissions rules for shipping that took effect in 2020.
“The overdependence on Russian oil grew after sanctions on Venezuela,” said Robert McNally, the founder and president of the Rapidan Energy Group, who was responsible for international energy policy while on the National Security Council staff of President George W. Bush. McNally said U.S. refiners, which had been Venezuela’s top customer, had been optimized for heavy Venezuelan crude and shifted to Russian oil products, such as low-quality fuel oil known as mazut, because the Venezuelan crude could be easily replaced without overhauling for a cleaner type of crude.
“The increase in Russian oil exports to the United States over the past few years is primarily due to the sanctions on Venezuela,” agreed Kenneth Gillingham, an economics professor at Yale University who served on the White House Council of Economic Advisers during the Obama administration. “Venezuela generally produces higher sulfur content ‘sour’ crude oil, and a fair number of refineries on the Gulf Coast were optimized for this crude. Russia produces similar grades of crude that can readily substitute in for Venezuela crude.”
Jason Bordoff, a professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs who served on President Barack Obama’s National Security Council staff, pointed to another factor: “Russian imports rose partly because new rules on emissions from the shipping sector at the start of 2020 reduced the demand for Russian heavy oil, and U.S. refiners took advantage of the discounted prices Russian firms offered.” The new emissions rules were imposed by the International Maritime Organization, because maritime shipping had traditionally relied on cheaper, lower-quality high-sulfur fuel oil.
We had a long back-and-forth via email with a Pence spokesman but in the end did not receive an on-the-record statement.
The Pinocchio Test
This is a powerful ad with an emotional punch, and regular readers know we hold such ads to a high standard for factual accuracy. The ad sneakily tries to make two distinct statements — Biden canceled the Keystone pipeline and Russian imports of oil reached a high under Biden — but it does so in a way that virtually all viewers are going to think the two are connected. After all, it decries the pipeline cancellation as a “horrific decision” as images of bomb explosions and frightened Ukrainians fill the screen, along with text claiming Biden is “paying” Russian President Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.
But the Keystone pipeline still would not have been completed by now even if Biden had permitted it to go forward. And imports of Russian oil — still a relatively small part of U.S. energy purchases — have jumped because of factors unrelated to Biden administration actions. So the juxtaposition is so highly misleading that we deem this ad to be a whopper.
Four Pinocchios
Send us facts to check by filling out this form
Sign up for The Fact Checker weekly newsletter
The Fact Checker is a verified signatory to the International Fact-Checking Network code of principles
