iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Koch Brothers, Grover Norquist Split On Ethanol Subsidies


First Posted: 06/13/11 11:37 PM ET Updated: 08/13/11 06:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- Opponents of ethanol subsidies got a boost Monday from Koch Industries as the company announced its opposition to the giveaways on the eve of a major vote in the Senate.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) is pushing a vote on an amendment Tuesday that would end ethanol subsidies and eliminate tariffs on foreign supplies of the biofuel. That would allow companies to use sugar-based Brazilian ethanol, which is cheaper than the domestic corn-based variety, though presents environmental challenges.

Ethanol is a key national issue for the GOP because of the importance of Iowa's early caucus to the presidential primary. Former Gov. Jon Huntsman (R-Utah) is skipping the state, he has said, because his opposition to the subsidies is toxic in the state. The issue has split the Republican Party, with free market advocates and deficit hawks pushing for elimination of the subsidies and corn-state politicians fighting back.

The conservative power broker Grover Norquist has battled Coburn, arguing that ending the handouts is equivalent to increasing taxes, meaning that candidates who signed a no-new-taxes pledge would be breaking their word. He has charged that Coburn "lied his way into office."

Norquist has been critical of Coburn and other Republicans who have highlighted the yawning federal deficit, arguing that the focus should be on reducing spending rather than trimming the national debt. He worries that if the American people are forced to choose between the two ways of reducing the deficit -- tax hikes or spending cuts -- they'll eventually pick tax increases.

While the Kochs are public about their politics and occasionally engage directly with legislation, it is rare for the Kochs to get in the trenches with a letter on a specific amendment as they've done in Coburn's case. But it might not be enough to get his amendment over the top. In order to get a vote on it, Coburn pulled a procedural move that irked Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who responded by calling on his caucus to oppose the amendment on procedural grounds.

Coburn said that such a move will put Democrats on the wrong side of public opinion. "Go home and explain to your constituency you didn't vote on a bill, an amendment, because you didn't like the way it was brought up, regardless of the substance," he told HuffPost on Tuesday before the vote. "Rule 22 allows any senator to offer an amendment, so I didn't do anything out of the ordinary. The only reason I used that procedure is because they don't allow us to have any votes."

Coburn and Koch Industries have been in discussion about the political issue for several months. But ultimately, the company says, the Koch's commitment to free-market principles overrides the fact that their company benefits from the subsidies.

"Koch Industries has opposed federal mandates and subsidies for decades," the letter to Coburn, written by the Kochs' lobbyist, reads. "Our aim is to create a free market where consumers decide winners and losers based on which products they decide to buy, instead of government picking winners and losers based on which friends or products it chooses to subsidize. One such government intervention is the tax credit that provides about $6 billion each year to blenders of ethanol."

"We hold this position despite the fact that we benefit from these tax credits," the letter points out.

Koch Industries will, however, continue to exploit the credits, if they aren't repealed.

"We oppose ethanol subsidies because they distort economic signals about price and demand and create inefficiencies that divert resources from productive activities to politically favored ones. We have also opposed subsidies for natural gas vehicles and other biofuels for these same reasons," the Koch letter reads. "Still, our company now produces and blends ethanol, because while we would prefer that there be no government mandates or subsidies, once such laws are in place we will comply with them. We will not place our company or our employees at a competitive disadvantage in the mixed-market economy in which we compete."

The Kochs' entrance into the debate is unlikely to swing the vote toward Coburn on Tuesday, but threatens to reshape the long-term debate. The Koch brothers are among the biggest backers of the Republican Party and conservative groups.

The Koch Industries political action committee has been one of the biggest contributors to GOP lawmakers and candidates. From 2009 to 2010 the Koch PAC contributed over $1 million to Republicans.

The Koch PAC has already turned on the campaign money spigot for 2012. According to campaign finance records, it gave $299,000 to GOP lawmakers, candidates and party organizations through the end of April. That total far surpasses the PAC's giving in January through April 2009, the most recent election off-year, and comes close to the more than $300,000 the PAC gave to GOP lawmakers, candidates and party committees over the same time period in 2010.

The Koch brothers' importance has only increased in the wake of the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, which allows the them to use their private company's money to secretly fund attack ads or prop up national organizations. They have given millions to conservative groups including policy think tanks, the Heritage Foundation, Cato Institute, and the Mercatus Center, Tea Party activist groups and Americans for Prosperity.

The Kochs have already promised to raise $88 million for conservative action around the 2012 election.

READ THE FULL KOCH LETTER TO COBURN:

June 13, 2011 Senator Tom Coburn 172 Russell Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Coburn,

Koch Industries has opposed federal mandates and subsidies for decades. Our aim is to create a free market where consumers decide winners and losers based on which products they decide to buy, instead of government picking winners and losers based on which friends or products it chooses to subsidize.

One such government intervention is the tax credit that provides about $6 billion each year to blenders of ethanol. Lawmakers in the Senate could take a sensible step by approving an amendment sponsored by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK.) that would eliminate this credit. We hold this position despite the fact that we benefit from these tax credits.

We oppose ethanol subsidies because they distort economic signals about price and demand and create inefficiencies that divert resources from productive activities to politically favored ones. We have also opposed subsidies for natural gas vehicles and other biofuels for these same reasons.

Still, our company now produces and blends ethanol, because while we would prefer that there be no government mandates or subsidies, once such laws are in place we will comply with them. We will not place our company or our employees at a competitive disadvantage in the mixed-market economy in which we compete.

Our government and public affairs activities are based on principles of economic freedom and property rights that are core values recognized and held by the majority of Americans. Koch will continue to lobby for the repeal of energy subsidies and mandates. We will work to transform the current, mixed-market economy into a true free-market economy.

Sincerely,

Philip Ellender

President and COO Public Affairs

Koch Companies Public Sector, LLC



UPDATE:
Information gathered by Paul Blumenthal on Koch Industry PAC's campaign contributions and the Koch brothers' support for conservative organizations has been added to this report. It has also been updated to include an interview with Coburn and a report on the environmental consequences of ethanol production.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON -- Opponents of ethanol subsidies got a boost Monday from Koch Industries as the company announced its opposition to the giveaways on the eve of a major vote in the Senate. Sen. Tom Cob...
WASHINGTON -- Opponents of ethanol subsidies got a boost Monday from Koch Industries as the company announced its opposition to the giveaways on the eve of a major vote in the Senate. Sen. Tom Cob...
WASHINGTON -- Opponents of ethanol subsidies got a boost Monday from Koch Industries as the company announced its opposition to the giveaways on the eve of a major vote in the Senate. Sen. Tom Cob...
WASHINGTON -- Opponents of ethanol subsidies got a boost Monday from Koch Industries as the company announced its opposition to the giveaways on the eve of a major vote in the Senate. Sen. Tom Cob...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 4,325
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (95 total)
photo
OMEGA MAN
A wise man learns from the mistakes of others.
08:02 PM on 07/05/2011
The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it comes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power.

Franklin D. Roosevelt
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ZeraLee
A Citizen's View from Main Street
04:52 PM on 06/16/2011
'd like to throttle back the ethanol subsidies, though not eliminate them completely. But not for the reasons the Koch brothers give.

The campaign to promote corn ethanol drove up the price of corn, which benefited the corn farmers. It also encouraged new businesses and job creation.

But at a price...

As demand for corn skyrocketed, the price also rose. Because the price rose, more fields went to corn. More corn, less fields of other grains, which meant low supply and high prices for other grains. That raised the price of foods derived from grains and food animals fed on grains.

In short, it drove up the price of food. Worldwide.

What would I do?

1) Cap corn ethanol at 10% mixture.
2) Keep subsidies for small "blenders", but greatly reduce or eliminate subsidies for the rest. Betraying small startups would hurt the government's ability to lead the economy into the future instead of letting it decline in the past.
3) Bring oil speculation back into regulated markets, where they belong. Tax windfall profits of oil speculators by at least 50% - their pursuit of profits severely hurts the economy.
3a) If (3) is not feasible, then bypass the market entirely by having the federal government buy directly from the producer on contract and sell at a slight profit to the domestic market. This is probably the best option for the country (and the world).

And the Koch brothers?
http://thinkprogress.org/report/koch-oil-speculation/
03:24 PM on 06/16/2011
At last and not a moment too early, Grovequist is done. Perhaps now Republicans can return to sanity.
01:12 PM on 06/16/2011
wha-wha-what!!! what's this the koch boys are finally making sense on a subject? corn based ethanol has been a complete failure. we could argue and quite well ethanol in general has been a failure.
11:43 AM on 06/15/2011
GreenGas.cc costs 50 cents a liter and is zero emissions.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wayne the pain
11:21 AM on 06/15/2011
Trouble in paradise?
bcunnin679
Political Correctness, the enemy of free speech
09:43 AM on 06/15/2011
All ethanol subsidies should be done away with. We using approximately 45% of our corn crop to make a fuel that gets us fewer miles.

We are becoming a nation that uses it food for fuel.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:45 PM on 06/15/2011
Why don't they use Sugar Cane instead. Good use for that stuff.
bcunnin679
Political Correctness, the enemy of free speech
11:01 PM on 06/15/2011
It really does not make any difference whether ethanol is made from corn or sugar cane. It will still have a low level of power
01:14 PM on 06/16/2011
and is highly corrosive and destructive to internal combustion engines, not designed for it like most pre 2006 range vehicles, lawnmowers, weed eaters, generators, boat motors, and on and on, and on....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:31 AM on 06/15/2011
Вы превысили максимально допустимое количество попыток входа. Теперь, кроме имени пользователя и пароля, вы должны пройти проверку средством против спам-ботов.
05:28 AM on 06/15/2011
I find it odd that subsidies are for corporations, while entitlements are for the individual tax payers. I think we should call subsidies what they are: subsidies are for the ENTITLEMENTS for the corporations. As such, I am surprised that the Republicans haven't put them on the table right next to Medicare and Social Security. All tax expendetures/subsidies should be examined for reform and deficit reduction. There are some hard decisions that have to be made if we are going to tackle the debt problem and it is clear that we really can't afford all the entitlements that corporations have.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wayne the pain
11:20 AM on 06/15/2011
You make way to much sense and are far to logical for Democrats to do anything that would help their cause. They are to busy cutting taxes on the rich and looking for ways to agree with Republicans on how to cut spending on the poor and middle class.
12:54 PM on 06/15/2011
sad but true.
12:54 PM on 06/15/2011
that is EXACTLY what it is and it should be referred to by all Dems!!!
05:09 AM on 06/15/2011
Ethanol is one of those dodges to give farmers a higher price for corn----ethanol is so environmentally absurd that it actually costs far more to make a gallon of ethanol than it costs for a BTU equivalent in any fossil fuel----gas, oil, you name it. When Bob Dole was Sen Majority Ldr, the joke in DC was that Bob was the "Senator from Archer Daniels Midland."

I actually admire the Koch brothers, much maligned by the usual suspects on the left, for opposing these subsidies, as a matter of principle, because they would make more money from the subsidized ethanol than without it. Since Soros has zero principles whatsoever [except his long-term goal of destroying the dollar as he did the pound in the early '90s], the Koch family comes out on top in this tug of war.

Norquist is starting to make more enemies than is wise or necessary. His Palestinian wife has caused him to rag on Israel to the extent that he's starting to sound a bit shrill. Calling a sitting GOP senator a liar is an impolitic way to conduct yourself up on Capitol Hill. Even if he were a Dem, that language would have been considered over the top.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mary Eyer
11:31 AM on 06/15/2011
I'll admire the Koch Brother's principle when they also oppose oil subsidies.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
teeniechino
01:30 PM on 06/15/2011
Exactly. They are only motivated by greed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Harpe
Was young, now old.
02:24 AM on 06/15/2011
When do we get to end oil subsidies, including free military power to fight over oil that they want to take from other countries? This is probably the biggest subsidy program ever, and we can't afford it.
12:56 PM on 06/15/2011
call it what it really is: ENTITLEMEN­TS to Oil companies! calling it subsidies makes it appear to be something else and so it should 'not be on the table with other entitlements such as Medicare"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dave Harpe
Was young, now old.
05:26 PM on 06/22/2011
Good point! Since the conservative media has turned "entitlement" into a bad word, this could actually work.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:49 PM on 06/15/2011
Want to "take from" ??
Pay a lot of blood, sweat and tears for that oil.
Plus a lot of money they don't give that stuff
away .
luckybear
Coffee Drinker
12:33 AM on 06/15/2011
"Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) is pushing a vote on an amendment Tuesday that would end ethanol subsidies and eliminate tariffs on foreign supplies of the biofuel."

Sorry but I agree with the Kochs on this. End them ASAP.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
SkiingGator
Searching for the Castle Anthrax
01:59 AM on 06/15/2011
along with all fossil fuel subsidies
photo
GoldEnergy
No "Tea" For Me, Please.
11:53 PM on 06/14/2011
One of the Republithugs' task masters (Big Oil) is calling an end to the support for the only viable liquid fuel that competes directly with the monopoly they hold over the liquid fuels market. They are obeying in order to keep campaign contributions like these rolling in.
http://www.ethanolrfa.org/exchange/entry/the-politic-of-sen.-coburns-anti-ethanol-efforts/
photo
ImmanuelGoldstein
Founder of the "Brotherhood"
03:24 PM on 06/15/2011
Crop based ethanol is in NO sense a viable option to petroleum.
Not only does it take a LOT of petrochemicals in it's own right but even if every single square inch of cropland in American was devoted to crop based ethanol it would only supply a tiny fraction of our liquid fuel budget.
photo
GoldEnergy
No "Tea" For Me, Please.
06:06 PM on 06/15/2011
Ethanol from corn is much better than dirty gasoline on energy balance, pollution, greenhouse gases, etc. Just look at the data. https://docs.google.com/a/chicagocleancities.org/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=Y2hpY2Fnb2NsZWFuY2l0aWVzLm9yZ3xjaGljYWdvY2xlYW5jaXRpZXMtb3JnfGd4OjRkMjdlMTk5NGIxMWM1NWI

From other sources it would be even better (hemp, cellulose, sugar beets, etc).

On another note, you are completely wrong about ethanol production. If all of the corn crop was used for ethanol (I am not advocating this but goes to show that you are way off on your claim) then 13 billion bushels would yield 39 billion gallons of ethanol which is approximately 39% of the 100 billion gallons of fuel consumed by American motorists per year.
We should be able to get at least 15-20% of our fuel needs from cornstarch ethanol and another 20-30% from other sources of ethanol (sugar beets, hemp, switchgrass, cellulose, etc).
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
out west
centrist turned progressive
07:32 PM on 06/14/2011
What, the fascist Kochs and the little dictator wanna be Norquist having a spat. Say it isn't so....
photo
Peter Combs
Amused by the illogical..no, NOT a Republican
07:20 PM on 06/14/2011
Ethinol is a cost effective looser....dump the subsidy.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
teeniechino
07:41 PM on 06/14/2011
Ethanol, loser.