Haley and DeSantis Pander to Iowans by Praising Ethanol Mandate
Unfortunately, none of the Republican candidates want to scrap the federal ethanol mandates.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley squared off tonight in the final debate before Monday's Iowa caucuses. Haley dinged DeSantis over his past support for ending a federal ethanol mandate. DeSantis denied that he had in fact supported ending the mandate. It would be nice if at least one candidate onstage would support scrapping it.
DeSantis "should tell Iowans why he authored legislation to ban the Renewable Fuel Standard that's so important to Iowans' economy," Haley declared. DeSantis retorted later that he did in fact support the Renewable Fuel Standard, offering as proof that "I've actually visited all 99 counties [in Iowa]. I've actually shown up to people's farms, I've sat and I've listened to people about what they're going through, how their economy is structured, and how it's important that we're producing energy here in the United States."
Former President Donald Trump, who remains the favorite to recapture the Republican presidential nomination, did not participate in the debate. But he has previously criticized DeSantis on the same point, telling a Des Moines crowd in 2023 that "Ron DeSantis is aggressively pushing against ethanol, which I think would be devastating."
In 2017, as a member of Congress, DeSantis did in fact co-sponsor H.R. 1314, the Renewable Fuel Standard Elimination Act. As the bill's title implies, it intended "to repeal the renewable fuel program of the Environmental Protection Agency."
The Renewable Fuel Standard is a federal program that requires "renewable fuel," like ethanol derived from corn, to be mixed in with gasoline and diesel. The purpose, according to the Environmental Protection Agency, is "to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and expand the nation's renewable fuels sector while reducing reliance on imported oil."
In practice, though, ethanol is actually worse for the environment than traditional gasoline. And while ethanol is cheaper than gasoline, it also contains less energy by volume. Depending on the age of your vehicle, it can also be bad for your engine.
One thing ethanol is good for, though, is corn farmers. A 2021 report by Taxpayers for Common Sense called the Renewable Fuel Standard "the largest current subsidy for corn ethanol." A 2022 study found, as Reuters put it, that "as a result of the mandate, corn cultivation grew 8.7% and expanded into 6.9 million additional acres of land between 2008 and 2016."
It therefore makes perfect sense for two candidates desperate for votes in Iowa—the state that produces more corn than any other—to pledge fealty to a federal mandate that requires more people to buy corn-based ethanol. But just because something makes political sense doesn't make it good policy.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Corn farmers were all ears.
They were just being buttered up.
Looking for a kernel of truth.
But left as empty husks in the end.
Those were unable to make a dent in the opposition.
Too bad we're all getting cobbed by the outcome.
Aw shucks, guys, there's a kernel of truth in these puns, and I'm grinning from ear to ear.
Republicans love their mandates.
Burn the food!
Every time I see the word "ethanol" at the pump, that's all I can think. As lefties fall breathlessly to their fainting couches about food insecurity and affordability and all those people starving in the streets or coming illegally from impoverished nations - all I see is us burning perfectly good food for no reason.
Some of us burn plants to heat our homes. The left may bark about that too.
Then they branch out into telling us what kind of appliances we can have.
You must stick to ones on the list.
And yet the GOP will defend to its death all the subsidies. Because the subsidies will get you the votes. Corn subsidies directly cater to the corn farmer, the core GOP voter. Heck, all agricultural subsidies cater to the farmer, both family and industrial, who are predominantly Republican. Tobacco, milk, you name it. And the Democrats love it because it means they can vote for spending.
Now it's not necessarily the Republican Party's fault. It's a problem of Public Choice Theory. Even if they did understand the problem, they can't stand up to it because it would be opposing handouts to their base. They've painted themselves into the corner.
Hell, they can't even manage to push back against the sugar subsidy, the most obvious of obvious payoffs.
Ethanol is redundant at this point. It doesn’t really improve emissions tangibly in cars less than 20 years old. Time to scrap ethanol fuel reformulation regulations.
And it's really bad for ones older than that.
It does make for easier starting on cold mornings, though.
Filled my truck with E85 the other day (it's a flex fuel vehicle) and now that we have this cold snap it hardly wants to start in the morning...add worn out starter motors to the list of reasons why ethanol is a terrible idea
No... What's pathetic is seeing Republicans argue for a So[zi]alist economy on stage. It wasn't that long ago Iowa had practically full support to end farm subsidies by farmers themselves... because ... Farmers didn't want to make their living off the gov-dole (armed-theft of others).
That fact that DeSantis really did propose a bill eliminating mandates makes him BETTER (more of a US-Patriot) than other treasonous traitor RINO'S.
It actually makes him a tree hugger. Patriot, not so much.
I'm curious, when did ethanol become cheaper than gasoline? I think someone failed to recognize it only seems cheaper at the pump because the government is taking the money we pay in taxes to run the minimal necessary government and using those dollars to pay for the ethanol. A gallon of gasoline diluted with ethanol actually costs more than a gallon of pure gasoline until it's subsidized. This is kind of like saying EV's are cheaper than ICE vehicles because of tax credits and subsidies, I don't even own an EV and they cost me more than the gas burner I do own.
Did you know that aviation fuel does not have ethanol in it? Why? Because it ruins engines.
Only ruins engines not designed for it. Most aviation engines are older engines and no incentive to haul them to the junk yard to get the latest model.
Plus, no laws requiring them to use ethanol. Hence the continued use of avgas.
p.s. Heck, a lot of aviation fuel is still leaded.
Many race car engines are actually designed to run on basically pure alcohol (typically methanol but same difference) because of its high octane rating…a lot of people I know (me included) run E85 in our high performance engines as well for the same reason since it’s over 100 octane and far cheaper than race gas – if ethanol weren’t subsidized this would be the only good reason to run it
Bring up the subject of anthropogenic climate change and greenhouse-gas emissions to the average farmer, and he'll loudly scoff at it as a liberal plot to restrict our freedoms and achieve greater control of our lives—
—Unless you're talking about ethanol. When the conversation goes there, farmers suddenly become passionate climate activists, eager to see us reducing our dependence on planet-destroying fossil fuels.
Haley and DeSantis Pander to Iowans by Praising Ethanol Mandate
Sadly, they have to.
Only Democrats can somehow get away with announcing "I'm going to destroy your/your husband's job" and still get elected... somehow.
Iowa is a weird state when it comes to subsidies. They are sacred. I had to spent a few months there and day one I was struck by fricking billboards promoting the corn subsidies. Very odd. So I stumble into a Libertarian Meetup in Des Moines. About a week after Ron Paul ran through to/from Ames. And I mentioned, "hey, what's up with all the corn subsidy billboards?"
I was told to keep my voice down as we were at a back table in a bar and people might overhear us. So yeah, even libertarians afraid to come out against Federal subsidies for corn. The sacred cow of midwest conservatives. Gotta have their big government subsidies.
That is a fundamental weakness of democracies. Good politics and good, or even just realistic policy, are often at loggerheads with each other.
Bigot. Or maybe you think name-calling will actually change anyone's mind?