“Non-partisan agencies like the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office have already concluded that the subsidy is unnecessary, and leading economists agree that ending it would have little impact on ethanol production, prices or jobs,” the groups wrote.
“We applaud you for your leadership on this important issue and encourage Congress to pass this legislation swiftly.”
American Meat Institute President and CEO J. Patrick Boyle who backed the group's letter said: “With the U.S. corn supply at record lows, corn prices at record highs and ethanol production absorbing 40 per cent of US corn production, government subsidies for corn-based ethanol, like VEETC, continue to artificially inflate the market for corn.
"As a result, the cost of feeding livestock has increased, which in turn drives up the cost of food production for everyone in the supply chain, trickling down to the consumer. This bipartisan bill is an important step in reversing that trend, and I applaud Senators Coburn and Cardin for their leadership on this issue.
“This legislation not only would benefit American consumers who are struggling with escalating food prices, but would save American taxpayers $4 billion this year."
“We applaud you for your leadership on this important issue and encourage Congress to pass this legislation swiftly.”
American Meat Institute President and CEO J. Patrick Boyle who backed the group's letter said: “With the U.S. corn supply at record lows, corn prices at record highs and ethanol production absorbing 40 per cent of US corn production, government subsidies for corn-based ethanol, like VEETC, continue to artificially inflate the market for corn.
"As a result, the cost of feeding livestock has increased, which in turn drives up the cost of food production for everyone in the supply chain, trickling down to the consumer. This bipartisan bill is an important step in reversing that trend, and I applaud Senators Coburn and Cardin for their leadership on this issue.
“This legislation not only would benefit American consumers who are struggling with escalating food prices, but would save American taxpayers $4 billion this year."
My comment: the subsidy may well be replaced by a producer-driven incentive, as it is quite unlikely that the USD 6 billion item just disappears from the U.S. budget.
Source: the bioenergy site
No comments:
Post a Comment