More

Ethanol Subsidies: Tom Coburn Forces Senate Vote To End Tax Credits

Tom Coburn Ethanol Subsidies Senate Vote

DAVID ESPO   06/14/11 09:07 PM ET   AP

WASHINGTON — The Senate refused to kill a $5 billion annual subsidy for ethanol on Tuesday, backing continued government aid for a Farm Belt-based industry over deficit reduction in an era of record red ink.

The 40-59 vote, far short of the 60 needed to advance the measure, reflected regional as well as partisan differences, a split among Republicans – and anything but the final word on the issue.

"We continue to spend money that we don't have on things that we don't need," said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., a prominent deficit hawk who led the effort to eliminate the subsidy immediately.

Supporters of continued federal spending for ethanol argued it is a leading source of alternative fuel and is needed to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil.

"With conflicts in the Middle East and crude oil priced at more than $100 a barrel, we should be on the same side. Why would anyone prefer less domestic energy production," Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said on Monday, when the measure was debated at length.

Grassley's state leads the nation both in harvesting corn and blending it into alternative fuel. Other leading ethanol-producing states are Nebraska, Illinois, Minnesota, South Dakota and Indiana, and all senators from them opposed an end to the subsidy, regardless of political party.

Ethanol is blended with gasoline, and subsidized at 45 cents a gallon, with an additional 10 cents for small producers. These tax breaks long have been supported as a way to reduce oil imports by politicians in both parties, emphatically so for many who campaign across Iowa every four years in the state's kickoff presidential caucuses.

But a new emphasis on deficit reduction, particularly among Republicans aligned with tea party activists, has contributed to a shift in the political landscape.

As a result, with the current subsidy scheduled to expire at the end of the year, Grassley and other farm state lawmakers support alternative legislation to reduce the tax break without eliminating it for several more years.

Unlike Coburn's measure, the alternatives put only a fraction of the savings to deficit reduction. Instead, the rest would go for renewal of different tax breaks, including one for firms that purchase pumps to blend ethanol with gasoline. Given the pressure to cut spending, it was evident even before the vote that the roll call would not be the final word this year in Congress on ethanol.

House deficit hawks are likely to seek to cut or eliminate the subsidy, and the issue also may come up in deficit reduction talks led by Vice President Joe Biden.

Additionally, shortly after Coburn's legislation was blocked, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., announced he would schedule additional votes on the fate of the subsidy at the end of next week.

Coburn's pre-emptive move forced a quick choice.

White House spokesman Clark Stevens said President Barack Obama opposed the elimination of the subsidy, but was "open to new approaches that meet today's challenges and save taxpayers money."

For Republicans, the choice was complicated by opposition from Grover Norquist, the head of Americans for Tax Reform and an inflexible opponent of tax increases.

Because the subsidy isn't scheduled to expire until the end of 2011, he said Coburn's legislation to end it immediately amounted to a tax increase.

The Oklahoman disagreed, as did other deficit hawks who said the vote marked a chance to go on record for spending cuts.

"It seems to me to be a pretty easy one" to cut, said Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., who said he had supported the subsidy in the past but had switched his position because of the growing national debt.

Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., elected to his first term last fall, said the current program was "extremely inefficient. It is a waste of taxpayer money."

But Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., said ethanol takes the place of 445 million barrels of oil annually. "That is the equivalent of $34 billion that we don't send overseas," he said.

Other critics noted that Coburn's state of Oklahoma is part of the nation's oil patch, and said the oil industry has benefited from government largesse for roughly a century.

"Already, the ethanol community is ahead of every other energy sector in stepping up with an alternative plan," Grassley said in a statement issued after the vote.

Thune and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., like Grassley, are sponsors of an alternative measure.

In all, 33 Republicans sided with Coburn, several of them first-termers elected with the support of tea party voters eager to cut federal spending.

Another 12 GOP senators opposed the legislation, all from farm states.

Among Democrats, five voted to kill the subsidy. Another 46 voted one independent voted to retain it, but some said their votes reflected an unhappiness that Coburn had decided to force a vote rather than a long-term commitment to the program itself.

___

Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
WASHINGTON — The Senate refused to kill a $5 billion annual subsidy for ethanol on Tuesday, backing continued government aid for a Farm Belt-based industry over deficit reduction in an era of re...
WASHINGTON — The Senate refused to kill a $5 billion annual subsidy for ethanol on Tuesday, backing continued government aid for a Farm Belt-based industry over deficit reduction in an era of re...
Filed by Alexander Belenky  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 29
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rda1911a1
God Bless John Browning
07:13 PM on 06/15/2011
Thanks Dr. Tom once again you cut through the rethoric and get down to the bottom line. Maybe that's why I let you deliver and treat my three kids. Oh and that first baby you handed me on that stormy Oklahoma night just graduated high school headed off to college.
06:13 PM on 06/15/2011
The Republicans tell us they are for the "free market", and against continuing Medicare for people under age 55,

Why would any thinking American think that Republican Members of Congress takes their responsibility to the electorate regarding the federal debt seriously when they vote to retain subsidies for ethanol industry and vote to take Medicare away from all Americans under age 55 and replace it with an inefficient and much more costly health insurance industry program?
12:32 PM on 06/15/2011
What Stinks Worse? Ethanol or Sean Penn?

It’s difficult to say whether ethanol or Sean Penn smells worse. It’s all dependent on your olfactory, political, and occupational sensibilities.

If you’re an American consumer of crude oil, which category would incorporate everyone who drives, consumes produce and manufactured products delivered via road and rail, wards off frigid cold with #2 heating oil in your homes, or labors in a factory/office kept functioning thanks to semi-liquid gold, you may say that ethanol takes the stink prize.

If you cook with corn oil, use masa harina, or just love tortillas, ethanol should beat Sean Penn in the stink run by at least a mile since the brainstorm of conservationists and numbnuts at the EPA which inspired the idea of converting a valuable food staple, corn, into ethyl alcohol biofuel and blending up to 10% of the stuff into gasoline has sent the price of corn into the stratosphere.

And, notice what it’s done for gas prices!

Ostensibly re-introduced, (after Henry Ford gave up on the idea almost a century ago), to curb America’s dependence on foreign oil imports, another government failure, ethanol has evolved into a typical, wasteful boondoggle. It serves to enrich farm states and has made major political capital for pols in those states while helping to impoverish those needing gasoline . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=4803)
photo
Arashi
comfort the afflicted; afflict the comfortable
11:29 AM on 06/15/2011
Let's see... Coburn is from.... Oklahoma. And Oklahoma is known for producing... oil.
Now, Grassley is from... Iowa. And Iowa is known for its... ethen.., er, corn.
It's a Republican spending cut frenzy, I tell ya! Save the country!

I wonder if we can get them to duel.
03:13 AM on 06/15/2011
Leave it to a republican to want to block the development of alternative sources of energy, while bending over backward to make sure the oil companies get even richer at America's expense.
photo
Arashi
comfort the afflicted; afflict the comfortable
11:35 AM on 06/15/2011
Just doin' their job, mate.
Americans all suffer under the same delusion: That the Republican Party exists to govern the country.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dtallwalk
11:26 PM on 06/14/2011
Just when we may be able to reduce our dependents on oil the oil guys in Washington
Want to put a stop to the growth of a newer kind of fuel for cars
If the amount of ethanol goes from a additive of ten percent to eighty percent
And ten percent gas we will be using a lot less gas in the US. How is this a bad idea.
If in the near future the scientists find out how to use the whole plant
And begun to make fuel a plant that is re groin in two weeks (SWITCH GRASS)
It is know that when this happens we will have a surplus of fuel in the US
Produced solely in the US that as long as we can harvest all left over plant matter this will happen a fuel source that will last forever. But if funding is stopped because
The powers that be crush it before it can happen . how is this a good thing?
Got to about money got to be
07:09 PM on 06/14/2011
coming from a republican who always stand by big oil companies no matter what. even though ethanol is one of the alternatives, look at brazil, they have lots of ethanol stations, but electric energy,solar electirc and hydrogen are the cleanist way to power our cars and other vehicles. even though i've got a hybrid vehicle that runs both ethanol and electricity.
02:55 PM on 06/14/2011
The ethanol in the gas is crap. Motors or small engines are not working properly even when you use the high test only. I have never seen any advantage at all of using ethanol ever. Even back in 73. I am spending a small fortune on dry gas for each tank of gas that goes into my lawn mower. Maybe I should find the old push one.
It is just a subsidie that we do not need to pay for. Lets keep the corn for comsumption and dump the ethanol project totally. It was a wasted project from the beginning.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beckjr2000
been there done that & tired of it
02:40 PM on 06/14/2011
Ethanol is not a good an alternative to gasoline. One gallon puts out 81,090 BTUs of energy compared to Gasoline that produces 125,000 BTUs. It actually takes more energy to produce Ethanol from corn than it produces. Because of the energy output differences you must use more Ethanol to travel the same distance. It costs more to produce than Gasoline, therefore the subsidies. Look what it has done to pork prices since Jan 2010. 2010 alone was a price increase of over 30% and for 2011 they estimate at least another 15%. Sen. Coburn is right!
02:24 PM on 06/14/2011
I rarely agree with Tom Coburn, but own a farm in Oklahoma which produces corn, but am SOMEWHAT in agreement. Corn based ethanol drives food prices up. Brazil makes ethanol from waste wood pulp, and their economy avoided the "great recession" because they converted 12 years ago to an ethanol based transportation system. They haven't imported a drop of OPEC oil in years, so while America was crippled by $5.50 gasoline prices, Brazil was prospering. I beleive we should support natural gas, not corn ethanol. Republican senate leader Mitch McConnell is blocking the energy bill which passed the House 2 years ago. The energy bill would create 1 million new high paying jobs, would convert the nation's long haul trucking fleet to Compressed Natural Gas, and also provides start up help for other alternative and renewable energy sources. In 5 years, we could cut foreign oil imports by 40 percent, saving Americans $1 BILLION per DAY that now goes straight to net profits to OPEC. Big oil opposes the bill, because it will create competition and lower profits. Clean burning CNG sells locally for $1.39 per gallon, versus $3.75 for 4 times dirtier burining diesel fuel., which would save truckers an average of $1,000 per week. We have a 100 year supply IN THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES of Natural Gas. The oil companies will be FORCED TO LOWER PRICES on gasoline for the rest of us-or would risk us converting passenger cars to CNG.
photo
PERPLEXED IN TEX
What we have here, is a failure to communicate
02:30 PM on 06/15/2011
I agree with you but have some minor corrections to suggest. CNG is not liquid but a compressed gas that can be stored at normal temperatures. It cannot be sold by the gallon. LPG (liquefied petrolium gas), can be propane or butane is liquefied and can be stored at normal temperatures. LNG (liquefied natural gas) must be stored at around -260F and is not practical for long haul trucking. CNG is practical but the driving range of the trucks may be limited because even in the compressed state, an equal volume of the compressed gas contains less pounds than the equivalent space occupied by a liquid.
01:41 PM on 06/14/2011
OIl prices are too high and Republicans want to end the only competition to oil for transportation purposes. When oil keeps going up in price it would be nice to have some alternatives like ethanol, biofuels, electric vehicles, CNG vehicles and anything else that would add some competition into the market and foster price competition. Big oil billionaires do not want the competition and are funding opponents. Having a monopoly is a good way to rake in the cash.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Recovering CPA
01:27 PM on 06/14/2011
With corn prices ant record highs, it makes no sense to grant subsidies to grow the stuff for fuel - especially when imported ethanol made from sugar is cheaper.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:34 AM on 06/14/2011
This is perhaps the first thing Coburn has ever said that I agree with.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
nutty4tahoe
Stop repeat offenders. Don't re-elect them.
09:49 AM on 06/14/2011
We all know now without a doubt that Sen. Coburn is deeply indebted to and in the pockets of the Koch brothers, not that the Oklahoma voters seem to care. Thanks, Oklahoma voters, for helping to keep us all under the thumb of middle eastern oil and thereby helping keep us all as potential victims of terrorism being funded in part by the Koch brothers, Tom Coburn, et al. They are money grubbing greedmeisters who call themselves real Americans.

By the way, Stainmaster Carpet is also owned by the Kochs and sold by Lowes and others. Keep this in mind the next time you need new carpet. There are other companies owned by them as well.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:17 AM on 06/14/2011
Tom Coburn doing the Koch Bros. bidding.

Ethanol competes with fossil fuels.

Simple as that.
09:30 AM on 06/14/2011
Stop drinking the Kool Aid.... if "Ethanol competes with fossil fuels" than it does not need a subsidy.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
09:58 AM on 06/14/2011
Your comment - better understand a talking point before you regurgitate it.

Reads like you have been drinking ethanol.

lol
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wsmith3023
Dems and Reps are two sides of the same coin
11:18 AM on 06/14/2011
Ethanol releases more CO2 per volume than gasoline.
Ethanol damages engine parts.
Ethanol can only be trucked to distributors, increasing transportaions costs and CO2 release.
E85 increased in price faster than regular gasoline with 10% ethanol.
Without subsidy, E85 would cost more than regular gasoline and produce lower mpg and horsepower and torque.