OPINION/COMMENTARY

Keep Ethanol Out of The Energy Bill

Included in the pending energy bill are provisions requiring the use of ethanol in the gasoline supply. This proposed ethanol mandate would raise the cost of gasoline, running against the original purpose of the energy bill—to make energy more affordable. For that reason, the mandate should have no place in the energy bill. Ethanol, a corn-derived motor fuel additive, has long benefited from favorable tax treatment and federal regulations encouraging its use. But its sales have not grown quickly enough to satisfy the ethanol industry or its allies in Congress. A 5 billion gallon mandate was included in an earlier version of the energy bill that was narrowly defeated, on other grounds, in 2003. The House recently reintroduced its energy bill, with the 5 billion gallon mandate, while the Senate has two proposals in the works—for 6 billion and 8 billion gallons. Any of these targets could become part of the final version of the bill. The President has already signaled his support for increased ethanol use, citing both its domestic origin and benefits to the agricultural sector. While an ethanol mandate would benefit Midwestern corn farmers and ethanol producers, it would make gasoline more expensive for everyone. Indeed, the only reason ethanol needs federal help is that it is too expensive to compete on its own....

===