THE ISSUE: Whether the government should be subsidizing farmers growing corn for ethanol.
* Rich Lowry might as well be writing about ObamaCare, because the similarities between healthcare’s and ethanol subidies’ dysfunctional market interventions are uncanny (“The Tax Deal’s Corn-Lobby Kickback,” PostOpinion, Dec. 14).
ObamaCare’s subsidies create an instant demand that will outpace supply, driving up costs for ever scarcer government-regulated services.
Ethanol’s subsidy lowers blended gas prices but increases consumption, creating more net emissions in a self-defeating perversion.
Where ethanol makes less corn available to feed the world’s hungry, ObamaCare will ration care away from the sickest Americans.
Like ethanol, ObamaCare requires “many levers of government to prop up one woeful product,” and the fact that it rests upon an unconstitutional premise should make us all sick.
Ray Arroyo
Westwood, NJ
* Rich Lowry, in stating his objection to the ethanol subsidies, overlooks the obvious solution: Eliminate the
subsidies, but simultaneously pass legislation mandating that every American purchase corn for consumption.
This simple solution will not only replace the needless subsidies granted to the American farmer, it will also increase the security of our nation by assuring the consumption of healthy vegetables to fight obesity and provide a new generation of GIs.
Yussie Brick
Brooklyn