I can remember before and the onset of ethanol production when we had a surplus of corn every year. The diverted acres program came into effect, trying to get farmers to plant less because there was too much supply of corn and soybeans. The commodity prices follow the rising cost of inflation, thus, higher food prices. The ethanol money stays here and doesn't go overseas. Is there something wrong the money staying here in the U.S.? Farmers buy new equipment, trucks, semis, trailers, build buildings, grain storage, and spend their money in their local economy. Would you rather give all your money to an overseas oil company? We could get rid of farm subsidies and get more section 8 housing, more people living off of the government, and more of your hard earn dollars to help some foreign country that couldn't care less about the U.S.

Battle I think that what some people are saying myself included is that if it was such a good thing it would support itself by now. Sure they needed "startup capitol" but by now they should be able to make it with out subsities if they had such a good thing.

Audio, I agree. The oil industry is subsidized more than the ethanol industry. It needs to be a level playing field.

I have always wondered,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, why?

"Farm subsidies" are people living off the goverment.

with sacrifices in economy/less efficient, ethanol doesn't make a tiny dent in oil dependency or $ leaving the country
the only thing it does is help to mask our woefully inadeqate refining capability
so I guess what your really saying in your sparking patriotism about keeping money here is that I should get raped in terms of lower economy (buy more gallons), repairing my equipment/buying products to fight all the negatives of ethanol, and have my tax money spent on farmer welfare? Most of whom that are big in this game were wealthy to begin with?
and if you don't believe that, where do you think the lobbying $ to pull this con over on us came from in the first place?

its all a crock! its a left tree hugging push to "save the planet". There are too many who think this way and those who push for it are trying to get rich and appeal to the tree hugging left.

btw: when i think of al gore, i think of "global warming" (you know the made up bs to help ruin our boating world) he claimed oceans will rise and flood out coastal areas...why did he buy a home on the californian coast? I heard that on fox news.

point being this push is far from over and we are just going to have to live with the unrealistic bs until 2012.

What is really a crock is that the proposed compromise tax deal with Obama includes an extension of the ethanol subsidies! This is what is sickening with the way the system works, too many "you give me this and I will vote for what you want" deals. What is needed is representatives that vote for what is right, not just for what brings fed money to their districts. They should vote US interests first, district needs second. This isn't easy with our current system, term limits may be the only way to start swaying things in the right direction.

btw: when i think of al gore, i think of "global warming" (you know the made up bs to help ruin our boating world) he claimed oceans will rise and flood out coastal areas...why did he buy a home on the californian coast? I heard that on fox news. bigblue

Following the lead...