Ethanol will be fine without the Iowa caucuses
- Geoff Cooper, a Drake University alumnus, is president and CEO of the Renewable Fuels Association.
For years, cynical pundits and journalists have theorized that the U.S. ethanol industry owes its remarkable growth and success to the Iowa caucuses. Some have even claimed the industry wouldn’t exist today if not for Iowa’s first-in-the-nation nominating contest. They say aspiring presidential candidates must pander to the state’s corn farmers and ethanol producers if they want to have any chance of winning Iowa and taking the pole position in the race for the party’s nomination. Then once elected, the theory goes, successful candidates must pay fealty to the farmers and ethanol producers who helped kickstart their victorious run.
There was even an episode of “The West Wing” dedicated to this narrative in 2005. On the show, advisers encouraged presidential candidates to “take the ethanol pledge” while campaigning in Iowa and warned that “if you come out against ethanol, you’re dead meat.” Indeed, ethanol’s fabled influence on the Iowa caucuses has reached mythic status in political pop culture.
While the “ethanol pledge” is just fictional fodder for Hollywood dramas and Twitter battles, the theory somehow persists. Today, some suggest the Democrats’ recent move to demote Iowa’s first-in-the-nation contest could spell doom for the ethanol industry. That’s rubbish. Ethanol’s future has never been brighter. Our industry’s growth and continued success will not be deterred by the Democrats’ decision to move their first primary contest elsewhere.
Lest we forget, Ted Cruz and John Kerry both prevailed in the caucuses despite their vocal opposition to ethanol and the Renewable Fuel Standard. And in the 2016 Democratic caucus, Hillary Clinton edged Bernie Sanders after both mostly side-stepped ethanol issues on the Iowa trail.
Ahead of the 2000 caucuses, Texas Gove. (and oil man) George W. Bush told an Iowa crowd “I’d support ethanol whether I was here in Iowa or not.” And he did. Whether he was campaigning in New Hampshire or South Carolina or California, Bush consistently voiced his support for domestically made renewable fuels.
Bush’s support for ethanol wasn’t about winning the Iowa caucuses. It was about reducing dependence on oil imports and boosting energy security. It was about providing consumers a cleaner-burning, lower-cost option at the pump. It was about reducing harmful emissions. And, yes, it was about opening new markets for farmers who were facing untenable grain surpluses and prices below the cost of production.
In 2005, Bush signed the RFS into law, finally establishing marketplace certainty for ethanol and triggering unprecedented growth. The success of the RFS led Congress to vastly expand the program just two years later.
Today, thanks to the RFS, ethanol is ubiquitous in the nation’s fuel supply. It is used in every state, bringing down gas prices and reducing emissions. Nearly 200 high-tech biorefineries operate in 25 states and scores of congressional districts, from New York and Pennsylvania to Texas and California. Ethanol isn’t some Iowa novelty — it’s a nationwide phenomenon. The industry supports more than 400,000 jobs, contributes $52 billion to U.S. GDP annually, adds value to farm products, and stimulates economic growth in rural communities from coast to coast.
That’s why President Joe Biden — who finished fourth in the 2020 Iowa caucuses — has also strongly supported renewable fuels. To reduce gas prices, the Biden administration issued emergency waivers last April allowing the year-round sale of lower-cost E15 (gasoline with 15% ethanol). In August, he signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes numerous tax incentives and grants supporting further growth and investment in biofuels. And a month ago, Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency proposed the highest-ever RFS volumes for 2023 to 2025.
While the Democrats’ decision to demote Iowa will have no meaningful impact on ethanol’s future, it is nonetheless troubling for what it says about the party’s apparent lack of interest in connecting with Farm Belt voters. Having candidates compete in Midwest farm country forced largely urban Democratic politicians to learn about agriculture and meet the people who toil every day to produce our nation’s food, feed, fiber, and renewable fuel.
There’s a reason most rural areas across the country are shaded red today — in recent years, Republicans have generally done a better job connecting with the Heartland, listening to the concerns and aspirations of the nation’s farmers, and understanding the kitchen table issues in small-town America.
Some Democrats seem to recognize that eschewing the Iowa caucuses may very well exacerbate the party’s “flyover country” problem. Newly retired Illinois Congresswoman Cheri Bustos, who served on the Democratic leadership team in the last Congress, recently said it’s bad for both the party and the country if Democrats “don’t have a loud enough voice representing rural America and the Midwest” in Washington.
In the end, the ethanol industry will be just fine. But let’s hope demoting the Iowa caucuses doesn’t mean Democrats are demoting the interests and priorities of rural America.
Geoff Cooper, a Drake University alumnus, is president and CEO of the Renewable Fuels Association.