Ethanol; if you can't sell it, mandate it
by Bob Dohnal, Publisher of the Digest

January 15, 2006

Growing up, my mother would vociferously challenge some errant statement of mine by saying: "you're full of beans". My dad used other
comparisons. Well Sheila, you are "full of corn" when you, State Sen. Sheila Harsdorf say that ethanol is a good deal for Wisconsin.

First, let's discuss the theory of mandates. If ethanol was such a great deal, then the public would be demanding it. They aren't, in fact the poll on our website, widigest.com, is 99% against. Since our poll is a non-partisan survey of the entire state, I wonder how can anybody be for it? It's Money obviously.

I sense that a few people are going to make a lot of money from this mandate. Specifically those who are able to buy in, with full tax credits, to the ethanol industry. And it won't be the average taxpayer, that's for sure. I just wonder if anybody in the Harsdorf family is getting in on the action?

Boy, just think of all the dough that we can make once we start down the mandate street. We could mandate that every beer sold in Wisconsin be made from Wisconsin products and that it must be brewed in Wisconsin. Buy stock, quick. Or maybe we should force everyone in Wisconsin that buys an SUV to buy one made in Janesville. Boy what an economic engine that would be. I could go on and on but won't. Government should not do any more mandates, just pass legislation to allow people to do something but, and let the market decide.

Look at Minnesota's mandates for bio-diesel, disaster. Trucks stalled all over the place. Research shows me that people are not
rushing to buy ethanol laced gas where it is sold. Boaters complain of less power and leaky seals when the engines sit over the winter and dry out.

Ethanol attracts water so it can pull out fluid from seals. Costly repairs. Wisconsinites use a lot of fuel in their boats.
Mileage is reduced up to 10 percent or more in cars, plus evaporation is much higher in summer — resulting in higher costs we don't need.

Corn prices might go up in Wisconsin, but higher corn prices mean higher prices for other food products. Beef for instance. So, we are transferring money from the taxpayer to the owners of cornfields and ethanol plants by mandate.

Sen. Harsdorf claims that air pollution is being reduced, that is very debatable as research shows that the gas/ethanol mix increases nitrogen in the atmosphere and that is why WMC is opposing it. It is obvious that it costs energy to create ethanol, whether it is 68 percent or 125 percent, it's a problem when the energy savings go down dramatically.

Finally, the taxpayers in Wisconsin are tired of government by lobbyist with a few people benefiting from these schemes while the general public gets screwed. The rule is obvious, go to Madison, spread around $ millions and you can build more roads, going way over budget, buy off the beer distributorships or reap the wheat by forcing people to buy your products by mandate. We are being ruled by Big Government Democrats and Big Government

The only difference between Democrats and Republicans is what they want to spend the money on.

My father once told me that if some politician comes up to you and tries to sell you this deal that will be great for God, motherhood and apple pie, hold on to your wallet as you are about to get fleeced. That is where we are today, about to get fleeced.