|
A chance at last to undo the ethanol boondoggle
THE NEWS TRIBUNE
Last updated: May 7th, 2008 01:24 AM (PDT)
It took one of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse to do it, but Big Corn’s tight grip on Congress seems to have been loosened by a finger or two.
Two governors and 24 U.S. senators are pushing to suspend or roll back the enormous indirect subsidies they’ve bestowed upon corn-brewed ethanol, the “renewable fuel” that has been enriching U.S. agribusiness at the expense of the world’s hungry.
Outright hunger – even the specter of famine – is forcing Congress to rethink these subsidies.
Demand for corn alcohol would hardly exist in this country except for the prohibitive 54-cent-gallon tariff on imports of cane-derived Brazilian ethanol, tax credits for its production and congressional mandates that effectively force Americans to buy billions of gallons of corn ethanol a year. The supports have proven a bonanza for Midwestern corn farmers by artificially driving up the value of their crops.
These are not hungry hard-timers in dirty overalls. Many are well-off businessmen and businesswomen. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that farm income is expected to rise 6.3 percent between 2007 and 2008, with average household earnings reading $89,000. That compares to the national average of $67,000 per household.
America needs its farmers. It doesn’t need to transfer the wealth of less affluent Americans to them.
The ethanol supports are especially inexcusable. Although the ethanol mandate is rationalized as a carbon-neutral boon to the environment, it’s actually an environmental fraud. Large scale production of corn alcohol may consume as much fossil fuel as the alcohol itself supposedly saves. Growing the corn requires immense quantities of water and fertilizer – much of which runs off to pollute rivers and lakes.
Corn destined for fuel also diverts acreage that would otherwise be put under crops people eat. Though corn ethanol is far from the biggest reason food has become more scarce and expensive in recent months, it is one factor. There’s no justifying any government intervention that enriches American agribusiness at the expense of the hungry poor.
Corn-lobby opponents, most notably Sen. John McCain, have long sought to eliminate the 54-cent tariff and get rid of the consumption mandate. With luck, they may finally be able to pry these boondoggles from the hands of corn farmers. Given corn alcohol’s lack of environmental redeeming value, there’s no reason it should be permitted to contribute even one pang to a Mexican child’s hunger.
Originally published: May 7th, 2008 01:24 AM (PDT)
|
