Well, you could research the last couple of Congresses to know one reason why that's the case - the GOP has shattered all time records for filibusters, and so hardly anything has passed....
Furthermore, I'd think most democrats in the Senate don't see it as taking a 'political bullet' any more than a GOPer voting against gun control is a political bullet. Not voting for crap like Keystone is why they were elected.
I might have been OK with that if we didn't give a private, for profit, foreign company the eminent domain powers of government to build their pipeline to export refined product to China.
Again, if the company is getting massive taxpayer subsidies, then plenty should come back to the treasury in exchange for those subsidies.
That's partly true, but the major problems are two - one way Keystone was sold was as a way to reduce domestic prices for refined product. That's not going to be true unless that oil found no way to the market at all. Second, the vast majority of the benefits are going to flow to the Canadian oil companies shipping dirty sludge to Texas for refining, and the refineries in Texas. I just see no reason for the U.S. to subsidize that. Build a pipeline to a Canadian port and we're all happy.
The way you phrase your argument has two much straw to contest:
"one reason why that's the case" could be applied to a snowstorm or hurricane Sandy for why Congress acts the way it has. Counting the number of bills is as useless as counting the number of executive orders. The count is irrelevant, it is the content which is key.
"if we didn't give a private, for profit, foreign company". Did we? I can't find anything to indicate that is the case, but perhaps I just didn't look in the right place. Companies are not given eminent domain powers and the creation and use of right-of-ways has a long history. Is it eminent domain, probably is, but it is for limited purpose and scope.
"massive taxpayer subsidies". Again, couldn't find this, could you point me to where I can find that?
"one way Keystone was sold". Again, the "one way" argument. Sold by whom and to whom? "shipping dirty sludge" sounds like propaganda to me, all oil is dirty to some degree.
As for the vast majority of benefits going to the Keystone company, well, they are putting up most of the money.
I have no stake in the Keystone argument one way or the other. If it dies, it dies. If it goes through, it isn't near me. I'm real close to the national Natural gas grid which goes along the edge of a national park. It is government land in there wasn't any debate of it going through. In fact, there are pipelines all over this country not even counting water and sewage. Somehow they manage to stay out of the news.