Fighting for Ethanol

I’ve been a leading advocate for ethanol for three decades, and I’ve gotten to play a big role in securing federal policy in support of ethanol many times, in a number of ways.  Remember, federal policy has long supported much older energy sources, such as oil and gas.  This week, reporters asked about the possibility of the Senate considering individual budget amendments like those considered in the House of Representatives last week to block E-15 regulations and prohibit funds for blender pumps.  If the debate unfolds that way in the Senate, it’s a no-brainer that I will be leading the fight in opposition.

In the Q and A with reporters this week, I said that if the Senate considers only an up-or-down vote on a significant deficit reduction package that targets a variety of programs and policies, including anti-ethanol provisions, I would have to vote for it in adherence with the general principle of deficit reduction.   I also said I’d prefer an approach that weighs each program on its merits or across-the-board cuts rather than one vote on a comprehensive package that leaves little room for deliberation, but the current effort to reduce the deficit is likely to present up-or-down votes on comprehensive packages.  I recognize, just like most Americans do, that we need to reduce the federal debt, or the United States will end up bankrupt like Ireland, Greece, Spain and Portugal.

In the end, rural America should not bear more of a share in deficit reduction efforts than urban America.  I will fight hard and work for victories for rural America, accordingly, just like always.  What’s more, ethanol is good for national security.  It’s the only domestically produced renewable energy source that’s substantially reducing America’s reliance on foreign oil.