Ethanol groups are organizing what they call a mini-presidential campaign to elevate the Renewable Fuel Standard at the Iowa Caucuses in hopes of getting the next president to preserve the biofuel mandate.
America’s Renewable Future, a group that has received funding from agricultural and biofuel companies and trade associations, is staffing up early to get the word out on the ethanol mandate. The rule, established in a 2005 law and expanded two years later to include “next-generation” fuels, requires refiners to blend increasing amounts of biofuel into gasoline.
The policy is under increasing pressure in Congress and within the Obama administration. Campaigners in Iowa are trying to make the case that a White House hopeful can’t win the Hawkeye State, the influential first state to vote during primary season, while opposing the Renewable Fuel Standard. That’s because Iowa is the nation’s top corn-ethanol producer, accounting for one-quarter of the nation’s ethanol.
“I think it would be very difficult. It’s one of those unique issues where both [GOP Rep.] Steve King and [Democratic Rep.] Dave Loebsack support it,” Derek Eadon, senior adviser with America’s Renewable Future, told the Washington Examiner. “It’s something that’s not only tied to Iowa’s livelihood but also nationally it helps reduce dependence on foreign oil … It’s a tough sell to be against.”
Some conservatives looking to brandish their bona fides with the party’s base have already taken swings at the fuel mandate, which they say amounts to government intervention in the free market. Sen. Ted Cruz, the Tea Party favorite from Texas, likely will land on the industry’s “naughty list,” said Monte Shaw, executive director with the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association. Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, however, is an unequivocal fan of the policy. But others are still feeling out their positions.
Conservative politicians, however, have found creative ways to boast their free-market beliefs while supporting the Renewable Fuel Standard. Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, perfected the art during her Senate race last fall when she said she hoped for a future without any energy subsidies, including the Renewable Fuel Standard.
“Ernst hit on an approach that tended to diffuse some of the backlash to her concerns about it,” Timothy Hagle, a political science professor at the University of Iowa, told the Examiner. “She basically indicated that she was philosophically opposed to the RFS, but wouldn’t want to get rid of it without also getting rid of advantages other sectors of the energy market currently have. Democrats still criticized her for that position in the general election, but their arguments didn’t get much traction.”
Wrote Steffen Schmidt, an Iowa State University political science professor and longtime observer of the Iowa Caucus: “Politically for the caucuses it’s simply a matter of walking the fine line and each candidate has to do a ‘Full Joni Ernst’ on this issue which means say exactly what she did during her campaign and afterwards. The perfect political balancing act! Only for the smart and clever candidate!”
Opponents of the fuel mandate, largely the oil industry, say declining gasoline demand has made meeting the standard impossible because the rule is based on an amount of ethanol rather than a percentage. The Environmental Protection Agency has sympathized with those views, suggesting cutting biofuel target for the first time in November 2013. Biofuel proponents contend the oil and gas industry is blocking market access to gasoline blends with higher concentrations of renewable fuels.
America’s Renewable Future is trying to get the word out early. It has drafted a petition for voters to sign that says they won’t back an anti-Renewable Fuel Standard candidate. It is making the rounds at local events trying to drum up support for the standard. And it’s trying to make inroads to presidential candidates in hopes of shoring up their endorsement before the Iowa Caucus gets noisy.
Never has there been such a concerted effort around the Renewable Fuel Standard in the Iowa Caucus, Hagle said. Eadon chalked it up to the EPA’s hints that it might adjust the mandate.
“Once the EPA started talking about lowering the volume requirement, you saw companies taking notice,” Eadon said.
Shaw admitted that few Iowa voters are single-issue Renewable Fuel Standard voters. Rather, opposition to the policy would be a knock against a candidate as voters begin a “funneling” process to separate serious contenders from the rest of the pack. Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, intimated that candidates who follow the Ernst model could find success.
“It depends on how they state their opposition and how high it is on their agenda,” he told the Examiner.
Many of Iowa’s staunchest ethanol supporters are politically connected Republicans. Shaw, for example, is a former Iowa Republican Party chairman and last year ran unsuccessfully for former Republican Rep. Tom Latham’s open seat. Eric Branstad, Republican Gov. Terry Branstad’s son, is Eadon’s GOP counterpart at America’s Renewable Future.
Those Republicans realize they’re asking conservative candidates to tap dance around a perceived inconsistency in supporting a government mandate while also promoting free-market policies. They think the message that oil and gas companies already enjoy subsidies through the federal tax code could give those candidates an out — though the oil and gas industry, which donates overwhelmingly to Republicans, is also pushing its case hard.
“We’re hoping that when they do have to view the RFS in the context of the overall energy policy, we’re pretty optimistic people can understand the role it plays and that they can get behind it,” Shaw said.
