Fueled By South Dakota
By Rep. Kristi Noem
It might surprise many of us, but there are a lot of people out in D.C. who don’t seem to know the difference between South Dakota and North Dakota. I know my counterpart in North Dakota often gets the question: “Is that the state with Mount Rushmore?” No, that’s South Dakota. For me, the question is: “Are you the state with all of that oil?” No, that’s North Dakota, but while North Dakota has all that oil, South Dakota’s corn and soybean production plays its own role in America’s energy security.
Every year, South Dakota harvests more than 400 million bushels of corn and 100 million bushels of soybeans. These commodities provide a pathway toward North American energy independence that can help boost our economy and our national security.
Today, about one-third of the petroleum used in the United States is imported from foreign countries, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Most of this petroleum is refined into gas or diesel. Especially with conflicts arising in energy-rich areas of our world, the need to decrease our reliance on foreign fuels grows every single day. Now is the time to double down on domestic energy production, but unfortunately, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is looking to let off the gas.
In early 2014, the EPA proposed new Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) volumes. These volume requirements, which impact corn-based ethanol and biodiesel alike, tell refineries how many gallons of renewable fuels should be blended into our overall supply. This gives both farmers and consumers more certainty and greater price stability.
The EPA’s initial proposal was very disappointing, as the agency moved to significantly roll back our commitment to ethanol and biodiesel. Not only could this curb production, but the move would send the wrong message to investors, risk jobs, and threaten the creation of more developed biofuels.
I, along with a bipartisan group of 30 lawmakers, reached out to the EPA shortly after their announcement. It was important that they reverse course.
When the final numbers were announced in late November, the RFS remained beneath the levels I believe are appropriate. Nonetheless, the EPA did adjust the requirements at least slightly higher because of the pressure we put on them.
Especially at a time when the Middle East remains so volatile, our commitment to homegrown renewable fuels should not be in doubt. While the EPA is backing down, I am not. In recent weeks, I introduced an extension of the biodiesel tax credit. This legislation would ensure that domestically produced biodiesel was given a $1-per-gallon tax credit through the end of 2016. The legislation has bipartisan support and I’m hopeful it can be wrapped into an end-of-the-year tax extenders package.
My number one responsibility is to keep the American people safe – protecting economic opportunities comes in at a close second. By throwing our support behind homegrown fuels rather than foreign oil, we are accomplishing both and creating a nation that is fueled by South Dakota in the process.
###
This is where Kristi loses me.
The RFS isn’t any different than the government mandating what kind of health care I need to buy.
Basically she’s saying in this column that if ethanol wasn’t mandated it wouldn’t sell as much because there is a better cheaper alternative out there so the government had to step in and mandate it use to guarantee a lesser product that wouldn’t survive private markets would be used.
Ethanol needs to sink or swim on its own at this point in it’s development.