It’s Interesting To See When Agriculture Matters
By: Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President
The legislative process is normally an interesting activity to watch, especially as those with important constituent groups need to work around the problem areas to get to a pre-determined place, making it look like they actually did the people they serve a good thing. Herein lies the intrigue for the U.S. Senate’s work on their version of the Climate Change bill. As we read here the tight-rope of not wanting to damage agricultural producers when the whole reason for doing the legislation in the first place is to tax the snot out of energy use tends to be a bit of a problem.
We also see that the Senate as a whole has to figure out how to concede where they need to in order to get enough votes, but still answer to the zealots of the myth of Global Warming that they’ve done enough to protect us from the horrors of a warmer climate. How do you go two different directions at the same time?
The final solution will probably involve ethanol and the promise of how this farm-produced, renewable energy resource will be beneficial for the climate as well as the pocketbooks of those who produce the crops that get used in making the additive. We probably will also see some type of pay-off for agricultural producers who engage in the deemed practices of getting carbon into the soil and retaining it there…again, using the impression of the opportunities for farm income to make up for the government imposed penalties for using energy that isn’t “green” and politically blessed.
As the visible and also behind the scene dramas play out, leading up to the probable Senate vote in September, it would be very important for all of us to swamp Senate e-mail boxes on how misguided the entire concept of the Climate Change legislation really is.
Our country should not be going in the direction that others have found to be folly.
The legislative process is normally an interesting activity to watch, especially as those with important constituent groups need to work around the problem areas to get to a pre-determined place, making it look like they actually did the people they serve a good thing. Herein lies the intrigue for the U.S. Senate’s work on their version of the Climate Change bill. As we read here the tight-rope of not wanting to damage agricultural producers when the whole reason for doing the legislation in the first place is to tax the snot out of energy use tends to be a bit of a problem.
We also see that the Senate as a whole has to figure out how to concede where they need to in order to get enough votes, but still answer to the zealots of the myth of Global Warming that they’ve done enough to protect us from the horrors of a warmer climate. How do you go two different directions at the same time?
The final solution will probably involve ethanol and the promise of how this farm-produced, renewable energy resource will be beneficial for the climate as well as the pocketbooks of those who produce the crops that get used in making the additive. We probably will also see some type of pay-off for agricultural producers who engage in the deemed practices of getting carbon into the soil and retaining it there…again, using the impression of the opportunities for farm income to make up for the government imposed penalties for using energy that isn’t “green” and politically blessed.
As the visible and also behind the scene dramas play out, leading up to the probable Senate vote in September, it would be very important for all of us to swamp Senate e-mail boxes on how misguided the entire concept of the Climate Change legislation really is.
Our country should not be going in the direction that others have found to be folly.
Comments