In his letter last month, Mr. Jeffers confers blame for support of the ethanol fuel industry upon Republicans, but the Energy Policy Act of 2005, a wide-ranging bill that provided tax incentives and loan guarantees for a wide variety of energy sources, including nuclear and coal, was predated by the Energy Tax Act of 1978, which created the first ethanol tax credits in an effort to decrease the nation’s vulnerability to oil shortages while boosting the price of corn, which had been depressed by federal agricultural subsidies. Apparently axiomatic for career politicians: the antidote for one piece of bad legislation is to dream up another one.
A check of the non-partisan taxpayer.net website, however, confirmed my suspicion that support for the production of corn ethanol (dba “biofuels”) is a solidly Democrat issue.
Of those members of Congress serving on committees with jurisdiction over biofuels subsidies and mandates during the period leading up to this legislation (2009-2012), 10 of the Top 15 recipients of individual federal political contributions from the biofuels industry were Democrats.
In 2013 the intensive and persistent lobbying effort by the biofuels industry paid off in spades, and Democrats were running the show:
“In Sept. 2013, Sen. Harkin (D-IA) introduced the Biofuels Market Expansion Act of 2013 which would boost subsidies for the mature corn ethanol industry. The bill, cosponsored by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Tim Johnson (D-SD), and Al Franken (D-MN), would increase subsidies for ethanol blender pumps and storage tanks and create new federal supports for ethanol pipelines.”
In the end, whether you blame Republicans or Democrats (there is surely lots of blame to spread around), I think we can all agree that corn ethanol – perverting a foodstuff into a motor fuel, then mandating its use through legislation, creating a market that would not otherwise exist – is a very bad idea.
Source: http://www.taxpayer.net/library/article/updated-political-footprint-of-the-corn-ethanol-lobby
I am old enough to remember seeing President Jimmy Carter on TV during this time, sitting by a roaring fireplace with a sweater on, addressing the country. He earnestly reminded us to turn down our thermostats, drive slower, get used to (his) idea of “economic malaise.” He would later have a similar ‘fireside chat’ to ask us to have patience as he and his State department tried their best to negotiate with those pesky Iranians to please the release the 52 US hostages they had taken when the Islamic Revolution stormed our embassy in Tehran.
Alas, the Carter administration was unsuccessful in their negotiating attempts, despite their repeated apologies for our previous support of the Shah. Mere minutes after Reagan was sworn in as President, however, the hostages were unilaterally released. This is a testament to the value the Islamic Revolution placed (then, as now) on a credible threat of overwhelming military force being used against them. Touchy-feely diplomacy does not work with a 13th century mindset.
Roger Clarke-Johnson, Kirkland
