As the Congress debates the Bush “Energy Bill” one issue is Ethanol.

Any big bill, defense or energy, is going to be FULL of special inteest provisions that give benefits to favored constituencies.

Sometimes, the interests of a favored group coincide with the interests of the nation as a whole. In those cases, we all benefit from pork-related favorable provisions, even though they favor a particular group who supports the party in power.

In other words, I think it’s GREAT for the USA that we can burn corn-based ethanol in our gastanks. We can GROW 20% of our gas. Completely renewable. Made in the USA. Wonderful.

The great majority of the Senate favors expanding the use of ethanol in gas. I read that Congress wants to require 20% ethanol content in gasoline over the next decade or two.

But a large handful of Senators do not support the ethanol provisions. The CNN article below talks about a prominent California Democrat opposed to the ethanol provisions as a gift to the Midwest and a tax on the nation.

Geez guys, you’d rather your constituents spend more of their gas money buying Middle East Oil? Better to keep the money in the USA consuming a clean replaceable resource.

CNN.com - Senate approves initial ethanol provisions - Jun 15, 2005
Inside Politics
Senate approves initial ethanol provisions
Energy bill debate expected to last 2 weeks

Wednesday, June 15, 2005 Posted: 1:15 PM EDT (1715 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Senate stuck by a plan to require nationwide use of ethanol in gasoline, although opponents argued that the additive will increase gasoline prices in regions outside the Farm Belt where most ethanol is produced.

An amendment by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-New York, that would have kept the measure out of a broad energy bill was rejected 69-28 Wednesday.