backtop


Print 108 comment(s) - last by sweetca.. on Dec 1 at 7:51 PM

Big corporate corn farmers celebrate major win, share prices in corn corps. inch higher

Battered by a drought, and hit a second time by the U.S. government's artificial inflation of corn prices, many small livestock farmers were desperately hoping that the Obama administration’s and its appointed leadership at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would agree to a temporary waiver on blending requirements of ethanol in vehicles.

I. Big Corn Gets a Helping Hand from the Obama Admin.

The EPA on Friday echoed the sentiments of big corn special interests saying it found no evidence that "significant harm" would be caused by not granting a waiver.

The decision came as somewhat of a surprise.  Many sources had expected the Obama administration to instead punt on the issue; the decision to side with the well-heeled special interests to push a program that is unpopular and likely will now cost American jobs was unexpected.

The auto industry has also vigorously opposed the EPA's decision to bump ethanol blending requirements to 15 percent.  They argue that the higher blend will ruin the engines of older vehicles, increasing emissions and forcing consumers to pay for expensive repairs or abandon their vehicles.

Obama bribery wide
Obama and Bush both backed big corn special interests. [Image Source: Politically Incorrect]

The EPA has alleged that it knows the science behind fuel blending better than the engineers who make cars, essentially calling the automakers liars.

The decision will also impact consumers, as ethanol provides less gas mileage in traditional engines that gasoline.  In other words, unless gas stations start charging less at the pump (which seems rather unlikely) consumers will be paying the same amount per gallon, for less equivalent fuel.

Even environmentalists are outraged at the Obama administration, given that ethanol has been shown to not only waste energy, but also increase carbon emissions.  Comments, Michal Rosenoer, biofuels policy campaigner at Friends of the Earth, to The Detroit News:

If the worst U.S. drought in more than 50 years and skyrocketing food prices are not enough to make EPA act, it falls to Congress to provide relief from our senseless federal support for corn ethanol.  The RFS is a broken policy — rather than giving us clean energy, it's incentivizing biofuels like corn ethanol that are exacerbating our economic and environmental problems.

Congress needs to cut corn ethanol from the RFS entirely to protect the economy and the environment from this destructive and dirty fuel.

But despite the united opposition, the Obama administration appears resolute in following its predecessor, the Republican Bush administration, in choosing to side with the big corn special interest groups.

II. EPA to Small Farmers: "Deal With It"

Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Air and Radiation fires back at the critics, commenting, "We recognize that this year's drought has created hardship in some sectors of the economy, particularly for livestock producers.  But our extensive analysis makes clear that congressional requirements for a waiver have not been met and that waiving the RFS will have little, if any, impact."

In other words, the EPA admits it recognizes that farmers are struggling, resorting to desperate measures like feeding their livestock candy waste; but when it comes to bucking a key special interest's agenda the EPA's answer to farmers is basically "tough luck".

Farm drought
EPA claimed to be sympathetic to farmers, but refused to help them with a waiver.
[Image Source: US News]

Over 200 members of Congress, eight state governors, and numerous college professors sign a letter arguing that the blending targets would indeed have a dire impact on farmers.

So who wins?  The biggest winners are the corn and ethanol industry, particularly the growers, who benefit the most from the artificial inflation of corn prices.  Many of these growers are not even family owned, but rather are large corporate farms run by deep-pocketed entities like Archer Daniels Midland Comp. (ADM) and ConAgra Foods, Inc. (CAG).  Indeed, both companies saw a rise in share prices following the EPA's decision.

corn profits
Big corn donates deeply to federal politiicans, who in turn reward it with billions in subsidies.
[Image Source: Agriculture.com]

So the word is official -- the U.S. will continue to manipulate prices in the fuel department, despite the cost to consumers, the environment, automakers, livestock farmers, and U.S. jobs.  That's bad news for most -- unless you happen to be an Archer Daniels Midland shareholder.

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Whats new?
By EnzoFX on 11/19/2012 2:21:53 PM , Rating: 0
Ew. 3rd party will never help anyone, and can only hurt considering one of the parties is counting on you NOT to vote for the other. The stupidest cop out. If you don't like the system, change it, but that involves joining it, being a part of it. Not shouting Ron Paul at every election. Taking it to one level further and complaining about your 3rd party vote... wow.


RE: Whats new?
By HrilL on 11/19/2012 2:41:50 PM , Rating: 5
You're completely wrong. I voted 3rd party. I didn't vote for evil. Both of the "two" parties are exactly the same when it comes to the FED, taking away my freedom, and out of control spending. Maybe if people actually knew what was going on and supported a party they believed in then we'd have a working system but that won't happen until sheeple like yourself stop voting for something they don't want. Gary Johnson happens to have a proven track record of successes seeing how he was a 2 term governor, lowered taxes, created jobs, and left the state with over a billion dollar surplus. But Yeah voting for one of the two clowns is a much better idea. Got it.


RE: Whats new?
By JasonMick (blog) on 11/19/2012 2:44:34 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.

-John Quincy Adams

I'm not advising anyone to vote third party if they don't do their homework and have a compelling reason why they feel that is their best option. I'm all for everyone voting for who they think is best.

You think Romney would have been great for the country? Great, I hope you voted for him.

You think Obama, is "hope" for the future and moving the nation "forward"? Well, I hope you voted for him, if you really think that.

Ultimately, though, I wish people would spend more time on sites like OpenSecrets, MapLight, ACLU, and EFF, studying how the current political system is bilaterally reducing civil liberties, while increasingly bowing to special interests.

All I want is for people to inform themselves. Is that disgusting or wrong?

As for third parties, I fail to see why you find them so distasteful.

George Washington, who won the freedom for our country, addressed this issue directly in which he called the two-party system a monster of "alternate domination". He spoke:
quote:
The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.

I'll let that statement speak for itself.


RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 4:51:09 PM , Rating: 2
You're spot on Jason. Great post.


RE: Whats new?
By YashBudini on 11/19/12, Rating: -1
RE: Whats new?
By PontiusP on 11/19/2012 4:54:03 PM , Rating: 2
Enzo, that was perhaps the dumbest and most contradictory comment I've ever read on this site.

"If you don't like the system, change it, but that involves joining it, being a part of it."

We are trying to change it, by joining and voting for 3rd parties. Remember, voting for the lesser of two evils, is still evil, so stop supporting evil.

I voted for Gary Johnson, am proud of it, and would do it again if I had to, despite the whining of apathetic, cynical nihilists like yourself.


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki