Margaret Breen: Defunding Big Oil

If America’s reliance on fossil fuels was a story, then it would have been written a long time ago. It might begin by saying that we rely on gas and oil, and that gas and oil are good. It might say that although the construction of oil and gas pipelines sometimes hurts the land and those that live on it, these pipelines must be built, because fuel is good and so is money. Such a story might end by saying that we will continue to drill, because there is still oil in the ground and money to be made.

This story has, in fact, been written. It is a classic story, and  it is very well known, because it is read to us every night by the people who wrote it. The story has become so ingrained in our minds that its plot line has become our reality.

Last week I sat down with Margaret Breen, Macalester student, Youth Climate Intervenor, and environmental justice advocate, to speak about a new narrative that she’s helping write. Margaret shared her experience about what it’s like to compete against the fossil fuel industry, both as an individual actor and also within a larger collective of activists. In speaking about her experiences on the front lines, Margaret shared insight on the current challenges and successes of the pipeline resistance movement. She also spoke about her hope for the future.

The story of Margaret, and of the work that she does to rip old narratives off of the shelves, is invaluable. By sharing her voice, Margaret shows us how a group of activists can make history, and chip away at the oppressive and unjust tales that have been read to us for decades. It is important to listen to Margaret’s story, and the stories of others like Margaret. She is a very important author– she’s writing us a new future.

Margaret is, like many students at Macalester, particularly busy. She may be a full time student, but she’s also a full time activist. In her three years at Macalester, Margaret has taken classes across a variety of disciplines in order to complete her studies in sociology and environmental studies. She has taken an active role in the Lives of Commitment program on campus, interned for Bernie Sanders, and has even served as a delegate to the 2016 Democratic National Convention. Margaret has since committed herself as a policy and justice issue area coordinator within the Civic Engagement Center at Macalester.  In doing so, she’s able to pursue her intersectional passions for seeking justice; in the summer of 2018, Margaret received a competitive Chuck Green fellowship in which she partnered with the Restorative Justice Community Action (RJCA), a community based non-profit that provides opportunities for people cited with misdemeanors or minor felonies.

Margaret’s activist work both on and off Macalester’s campus has launched her into the public sphere. Now, she is one of 13 Youth Climate Intervenors (YCI), a group of young people who have been granted full legal status as an intervening party in the case against Line 3. Along with the legal and procedural work she does as a YCI, she’s also an active member of the MN350 Pipeline Resistance team, which works to unite Minnesotans against the fossil fuel industry across the state.

Margaret hasn’t necessarily been always at the front lines, however. It was in her first semester at Macalester that she became involved in the fight against the fossil fuel industry on a national level.  “When I was a first year at Macalester, the Standing Rock occupation was really at its peak,” she said. So she traveled to Standing Rock Indian Reservation in North Dakota to stand in solidarity with those fighting the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, a 1,172 mile long underground pipe that, if built, would cut through Sioux land (Levin 2016). But it was in an Environmental Justice class at Macalester where Margaret first learned about Line 3, an active Minnesota pipeline that has been operational for more than five decades. For Minneapolis born Margaret, that news hit closer to home. “I was seeing a lot of parallels between [Line 3 and] the Dakota Access Pipeline and was horrified to think that this was something that was occurring all over again,” she said. “I was not aware that we had so many pipelines running under our feet.”

Much like DAPL, the Line 3 pipeline is an issue of national concern. The pipeline is a 1,097 mile crude oil network that has carried hundreds of thousands of gallons of crude oil from Canada throughout Minnesota and into Wisconsin since its build date in 1962 (Nelson 2018).  The pipeline crosses the headwaters of the Mississippi, cuts through tribal lands, and threatens wild rice beds that are sacred to the Anishinaabe tribes who live in reservations located across northern Minnesota. Despite the importance of the natural resources and the health of the native communities through which the pipeline runs, Line 3 is the only fully approved, fully funded tar sands infrastructure in North America (Honor the Earth).

But the pipeline is old, corroding, and only carries a fraction of the oil that it used to. And in order to export more oil, Enbridge has to replace the line. In 2014, the oil transport company announced a proposal to replace the old line and expand the capacity of the existing one (Enbridge), which would allow the pipeline transportation network a pipe along 337 miles of northern Minnesota that would increase tar sands oil traveling out of Minnesota by 370,000 gallons a day (Sanders-Reed 2017). Margaret was one of many climate activists that knew that the new Line 3 was not a replacement of an old pipeline, but rather a major move to sustain the fossil fuel industry in her home state. It was at this pivotal moment in which Margaret knew she had to fight against the replacement of Line 3 and the environmental injustices that it would perpetuate.  “I wanted to be more engaged on the front end of the fight, and become more involved throughout the duration of the process,” she said.

And involved she became. Following her introduction to Line 3, Margaret reached out to Akilah Sanders-Reed, a  2016 Macalester alum and a member of the Powershift Network, an environmental justice based organization based on empowering youth to get involved working in environmental justice policies. Sanders-Reed encouraged her to explore the MN350 Pipeline Resistance Team by attending their meetings, which Margaret now does on a bi-weekly basis. Sanders-Reed also asked Margaret what she thought about potentially participating in another, newer project: “It was hypothetical at this point,” laughed Margaret, “but [Akilah said that] she was kind of thinking about getting this group of youth together.”

This group of youth, who would become nationally recognized as the Youth Climate Intervenors, would be instrumental in the fight against Enbridge and the placement of Line 3 in northern Minnesota. In the group’s earlier months, they “were a group of 13, who did not have a lawyer, who were arguing for legal standing,” Margaret said. When the group testified for the legal ability to intervene in the pipeline permitting process in July 2017, Margaret wasn’t sure how their case would be viewed. “While of course we saw our case as very valid and legitimate, we very much expected the judge to say, ‘Nah, I don’t think so.”

But the judge didn’t dismiss them. In fact, in a historical move that inspired generations of youth activists across the nation, the YCI were granted legal standing in the case against Enbridge’s proposed pipeline, not only enabling them to work as stakeholders the legal process, but allowing them to represent millions of young citizens who would be ultimately affected by the effects of pipeline building, like Enbridge’s Line 3. “It was really shocking,” Margaret said. “But in the best way possible.”

Since then, the work Margaret has done with the YCI has largely been procedural and legal. She pours over evidence, files legal briefs, and continues to represent the YCI as battles over Line 3 continue. It was by suggestion of Sanders-Reed that Margaret began to put her organizational efforts towards the MN350 Pipeline Resistance team as well, which focuses their efforts on grassroots organizing.

In our conversation it was clear to see that Margaret’s passion for justice is what enables her to continue doing tiring legal work. But isn’t always easy, she says, to work inside the system. “It’s kind of a catch-22. The issues that are causing projects like Line 3 in the first place are also what’s stopping us from being able to use the legal process, from fully protecting us from those [issues] as well, because they’re so intertwined,”“It’s kind of a catch-22. The issues that are causing projects like Line 3 in the first place are also what’s stopping us from being able to use the legal process, from fully protecting us from those [issues] as well, because they’re so intertwined.” she said. Margaret pointed out that the construction of the pipeline would not only endanger Minnesota’s natural resources, but also the health of its citizens. The current Line 3 already runs through northern Minnesota, traveling 300 miles under federally protected reservations (McKenna 2018). While Enbridge wants to build its new Line 3 off reservation land, the proposed route would cut through areas where local tribes grow wild rice. Wild rice is not only economically valuable to the state, but sacred to the tribes that grow it. And while the US Constitution defines reservation treaties as the supreme law of the land–– something that federal representatives are sworn to uphold–– the voices of native tribes aren’t being taken to consideration by elected officials. Instead, they’re listening to Enbridge. The oil transport company has poured over 16 million dollars into lobbying state officials for Line 3–  that’s a record amount as reported by the MN Public Utilities Commission (Sanders). And it’s working.

“When seeing the numbers of the millions and millions of dollars that Enbridge has spent exclusively lobbying the state of Minnesota, it feels impossible to compete with that because YCI did not have any funds,” Margaret said. But YCI, along with other intervening parties, didn’t let lack of funding stop them from fighting Line 3 construction. “We followed every rule, got every expert witness that we needed, we did everything,” Margaret said. And their work paid off– in April 2018, the Administrative Law Judge appointed to the case recommended that the Public Utilities Commission (PUC), a group of five board members appointed by the Minnesota governor, deny the certificate of need for Enbridge’s preferred route. Margaret said she would have been blindsided if the PUC didn’t side with the judge; the YCI had administrative law, the Department of Commerce, and the Department of Human Rights on their side, as well as five indigenous tribes, the Sierra Club, and various other intervening parties. In Margaret’s eyes, it was a slam dunk. That’s why, when the PUC pulled a 180 and unanimously granted Enbridge the certificate of need two months later, Margaret was shocked. “I think a lot of people were surprised,” she said. “I was surprised to an extent where I knew I shouldn’t have been.” It wasn’t until later in the year that she found out that Enbridge had spent 11 million dollars lobbying in the state of Minnesota.  Then, “it all started to make sense. [I began to understand] that these legal systems, while it’s necessary to interact with them, can also fail us in many ways.”

Margaret is not unfamiliar with working within a state that fails her. In the courtroom, for example, she and other pipeline resistance activists are often disregarded because of their age. “I think that people not fully taking us seriously unless you’re wearing a suit and have a law degree is really disappointing,” Margaret said. “It’s really indicative of the value system that is placed on our legislative bodies– not only in the state, but also in the country.” Margaret is hopeful that the work of the YCI and the work of other groups will continue to challenge that narrative and show that a diverse collective of voices such as the YCI can indeed be valuable, well informed, and educated. “We maybe don’t have a law degree, but we’re still equally valuable in those cases,” she says. “Hopefully that will be shifting.”

But it’s not just a matter of age that limits pipeline resistance activists from being taken seriously. The amount of racist discrimination that surfaces in the pipeline resistance movement is striking, Margaret said. In her mind, it is embedded racism that deepens injustices in cases such as these. “The Stop Line 3 Movement is indigenous led and that is a very defining feature of the work we have been doing,” she stated.  “But some voices are seen as more credible than others. Throughout the entire process it was very clear that there is a great deal of systematic racism that was delegitimizing the work that indigenous people were doing.” Margaret noticed that she would be treated differently than indigenous activists. She would see consistent targeting of indigenous people in the courtroom for rule enforcement, for example, and noticed a difference in how police interacted with indigenous people within the legal processes at the PUC.“That goes to show that in every aspect of this fight, racism is hugely significant and controls a lot of why the projects exist in the first place,” she said. “But it also controls how the fight against it has been defined.”

Because of this, Margaret said that in this line of work, it is necessary to not only work within the legal system but also outside of it. “I think that working outside of the system is not only beneficial, but necessary in projects like this,” she said. “A lot of these problems are so deeply embedded and ingrained into the legal system and that in many ways makes it challenging– if not impossible– to overcome these types of injustices by using those tools.” While Margaret is trained to attack the development of Line 3 from a legal standpoint, she emphasized that it is necessary to approach the issue from many different angles until these legal processes are fixed in order to prioritize justice in a larger realm. “Especially environmental justice,” she added.

This doesn’t mean that YCI and MN350 have to change their attack plan. In fact, they’re making significant progress just playing by the rules: “The fact that [water protectors], with no money, have been able to hold off someone who is throwing millions of dollars at the state…is an important reminder,” she said. While she may feel frustrated that pipeline resistance activist groups haven’t fully been able to overcome Enbridge, she acknowledges that they are making a significant impact in the process. “The work that we’re doing is worth 11 million dollars in the last year, and 5 million dollars the year before,” Margaret said, in reference to the ways in which pipeline resistance legal efforts have been able to combat Enbridge’s lobbying. “While of course we are lacking that huge resource, I think we make up for it in a lot of other ways.”

It’s exactly through those “other ways” that keeps Margaret going, especially when experiencing setbacks, such as PUC’s decision to grant Enbridge the certificate of need. “I felt so exhausted in that moment,” Margaret said. “I felt like that all of this work building up to it was nothing, because so much of it was ignored by these five rich, white commissioners  who were sitting up on a board.”“While we might not have the elected officials on our side, and while we might not have the money on our side, we have the power of the people on our side.” Sometimes, she says, it’s easy to feel discouraged. But Margaret doesn’t give up–– she knows she has to keep fighting. “If there is one thing, when I am feeling helpless, hopeless, and sad about the state of affairs, the only way that I can lift myself out of that is by talking to people who are doing something about it,” she said. “ While we might not have the elected officials on our side, and while we might not have the money on our side, we have the power of the people on our side.” Margaret said that there are few things more inspiring than knowing that there are masses of people that support her in this fight, who also see Line 3 as a horrible injustice for the state of Minnesota. “[We try] to remind ourselves that [our power] in many ways is more powerful than the systems that we’re fighting against.”

On December 13, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission rejected petitions filed by environmental and tribal groups asking the commission to reconsider its approval of Enbridge’s proposed Line 3 pipeline route. Although recent green light given by the Public Utilities Commission okayed a new route in October 2018, the line isn’t necessarily a done deal. Margaret and other pipeline resistance activists are now making their case in the court of appeals, along with the Department of Commerce, which claims that Enbridge failed to prove the need for actually replacing the line (Wagness).

In more good news, the resistance is growing. Margaret urges people to do what they can to continue to delay Enbridge and other oil companies from building not only the Line 3 pipeline, but also by preventing injustices on a larger scale. “In a sentiment from a book that I read by Angela Davis, there is this idea that everybody has a responsibility to be involved in the fight for justice, but not everybody needs to be involved in the same way.” Sometimes people are immobilized by a fear of thinking they don’t belong in the fight, Margaret said. But she challenges this. “I would push people to just show up and see what options are for them. I think there is a place for everybody in this movement. The only way to find out what your place is, is by showing up and introducing yourself to people and becoming a part of that community.”

What Margaret says is true. Five years ago, she chose to show up and introduce herself in the fight against Line 3. Now she is, at 21, changing the course of history. This is not metaphorically said, but meant in the most literal way.  The world has a lot to learn from Margaret and the people with whom she stands. The fossil fuel industry doesn’t have a place in the future of this country, but Margaret does. And I do, too. There is no use in listening to stories written by those invested in the past. There is great promise, however, in spreading the voice of the future. Thanks to Margaret, this story, I believe, is different.

References

Enbridge Line 3 fact sheet, Honor the Earth. http://www.honorearth.org/line_3_factsheet. Accessed 26 Apr. 2019.

Levin, Sam. Dakota Access pipeline: the who, what and why of the Standing Rock protests, The Guardian, 3 Nov. 2016, www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/03/north-dakota-access-oil-pipeline-protests-explainer. Accessed 26 Apr. 2019.

Line 3 replacement project, Enbridge. https://www.enbridge.com/projects-and-infrastructure/public-awareness/minnesota-projects/line-3-replacement-project. Accessed 27 Apr. 2019.

McKenna, Phil. Controversial Enbridge line 3 oil pipeline approved in Minnesota wild rice region, Climate News, 28 June 2018, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/28062018/enbridge-tar-sands-oil-pipeline-minnesota-tribes-wetlands-watershed-route-approval. Accessed 26 Apr. 2019.

Nelson, Cody. Line 3 timeline: From construction to present day battles, Minnesota Public Radio, 23 Apr. 2018, www.mprnews.org/story/2018/04/23/timeline-line-3-enbridge-oil-pipeline. Accessed 28 Apr. 2019.

Sanders-Reed, Akilah. How 13 young Minnesotans are using this obscure regulatory process to fight tar sands, Power Shift Network, 19 May 2017, http://powershift.org/blogs/how-13-young-minnesotans-are-using-obscure-regulatory-process-fight-tar-sands. Accessed 27 Apr. 2019.

Stop the Line 3 pipeline, Bernie Sanders U.S. Senator for Vermont, https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/video-audio/stop-the-line-3-pipeline. Accessed 27 Apr. 2019

Wagness, Billy. Minnesota Department of Commerce appeals PUC’s certificate of need for Enbridge Line 3, Live Local Duluth, 21 Dec 2018. https://cbs3duluth.com/news/twin-ports/2018/12/21/mn-dept-of-commerce-appeals-pucs-certificate-of-need-for-enbridge-line-3.