• Business & Economy
  • Politics & Government
    • Campaign Countdown
      • 2012 Reports
  • Sports
  • High School Sports
    • Football Friday Night
    • Radio Iowa Poll
  • All Topics

Radio Iowa

Iowa's Radio News Network

  • Home
  • Audio Archives
  • Contact Us
  • Reporters
  • Affiliates
  • Affiliate Support
  • PostsComments
You are here: Home / Agriculture / Vilsack says reducing ethanol mandate “ill-advised” and “ill-timed”

Vilsack says reducing ethanol mandate “ill-advised” and “ill-timed”

October 6, 2011 By O. Kay Henderson

U.S. Ag Secretary Tom Vilsack says he does not support legislation which would cut the federal ethanol “mandate” which requires a specific level of ethanol production.  

“I think it’s ill-advised,” Vilsack says. A bill introduced in the U.S. House Wednesday would cut the ethanol mandate by up to 25 percent if corn supplies dip. Under current requirements, the ethanol industry must produce 12.6 gallons of ethanol this year. The ethanol target for next year is 13.2 billion gallons.

“This is an opportunity for the country to wean itself off of foreign oil and to build a domestic industry with new job opportunities in rural America as well as increasing income levels for farmers and producers,” Vilsack says.

Livestock producers are pushing for the reduction in ethanol production to reduce the cost of the corn they feed their animals.  

“We’re moving away from a sole reliance on corn-based ethanol, so I think it’s also ill-timed,” Vilsack says. “We’re in the process of trying to identify alternative feed stocks including corn stover which won’t necessarily conflict with our need for feed or food, so my hope is this proposal will not be passed and I certainly would not be supportive of it.”

The federal mandate requiring a certain amount of ethanol be produced gets support from groups like the Farm Bureau and the Corn Growers Association as well as the ethanol industry. The separate federal subsidy, worth 45-cents-per-gallon for ethanol producers, is due to expire at the end of the year.  The subsidy has been cited by environmentalists and even the National Council of Chain Restaurants as a prime example of the kind of federal spending that should be cut. 

Vilsack made his comments this morning during a telephone interview with Radio Iowa.


Print pagePDF pageEmail page

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Google
  • Facebook

Filed Under: Agriculture, Business, Politics & Government Tagged With: Corn & Soybeans, Democratic Party, Pork/Cattle, Tom Vilsack

Featured Stories

Appeals Court throws out murder verdict saying jury influenced by social media

Packing 40 years of memories, Iowan heads to Barbara Bush’s funeral

Governor approves new Iowa law on ‘food shaming’ and unpaid school lunch debt

Iowa Senate honors Wally Horn for 46-year legislative career

Clive massage therapist facing sexual assault charges

TwitterFacebook

Drake pitcher earns another Missouri Valley weekly award

Former Iowa State coach Earle Bruce dies at 87

Golfers tout economic impact on Iowa

Iowa NASCAR driver pays tribute to hockey team

Morris headlines women’s pole vault at Drake

More Sports

Tweets by @RadioIowa

eNews and Updates

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

RSS O.KayHenderson.com

  • Campaign surrogates: asset or liability? September 22, 2016
  • Proposed slate of 2016 RNC delegates from #IAGOP May 20, 2016
  • AUDIO: #IAGOP chairman talks about idea of ‘brokered’ convention March 18, 2016
  • @TerryBranstad statement on Obama nominating his cousin to SupCo March 16, 2016
  • ‘Substantial growth’ in voter registrations for both parties from #IACaucus March 15, 2016

Archives

Copyright © 2018 · Learfield News & Ag, LLC