Ethanol15 Fuel

Marvin Gardens

Marvin Gardens

New Member
Oct 14, 2007
103
Atlanta, GA
Boat Info
340 DB
Engines
8.1
Well, the EPA's at it again. There is a motion to increase Ethanol in fuel from approximately 10% to 15%. Not sure how familiar everyone is with this, but, from what I can tell, its bad for marine engines.

If you feel as strongly as I do about this, please follow the link to the NMMA's government relations site and let the government know how you feel.

http://capwiz.com/nmma/issues/alert/?alertid=13199386&PROCESS=Take+Action
 
In the May 2009 edition of BoatUS there is an article titled " Ethanol Lawsuit Survives Challenge", in Florida there is a class-action lawsuit against 5 oil companies for the damage caused by ethanol. If this lawsuit is allowed to proceed and the oil companies should be found liable for damage caused by ethanol that will end the use of ethanol. The florida judge has ruled that federal law encourages but does not require the use of ethanol.
 
Message Sent, thanks for the link. Saw this in the boattest email I got but hadn't read it yet.

Yes Ethenol is very very evil to us Gas Boat guys!
 
Got my notice from BoatUS as well. Filed it. Everyone needs to pay attention to this!
 
From what I understand, it's the farm lobby that's really trying to push this through.
 
TurtleTone said:
From what I understand, it's the farm lobby that's really trying to push this through.
Click to expand...

Which is why phone calls & E-mails from individuals will go unheard, unread & dismissed as unimportant. The boating industry as a whole will have to get involved to make any headway. But they won't. Obama has money set aside for them to waste on development of marine engines that run on pureed catfish.
 
Thanks for the link...my message has been sent and I sent the link to all my other boater friends.
 
thats for the heads up. Message sent here as well.

One thing I have noticed at gas stations that advertise "No Ethanol" are slighty higher priced. I always pay a little extra for my cars.

Our Marina also has 0 Ethanol gas, and they arethe highest price on the lake...about 50 cents per gallon premium.
 
mwph said:
Which is why phone calls & E-mails from individuals will go unheard, unread & dismissed as unimportant. The boating industry as a whole will have to get involved to make any headway. But they won't. Obama has money set aside for them to waste on development of marine engines that run on pureed catfish.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true regarding emails and calls, I have already replied to BoatUS' Ethanol request, but there is a reply I received from my representative Ander Crenshaw. I had also received replies back from both Florida State Senator Mel Martinez and Representative Bill Nelson. To me there response were typically PC replies, whereas Ander Crenshaws surprised me.

Representative Ander Crenshaw's reply; (Note it is not a good idea to ever put one's email address, home address or phone numbers on open forums or for that matter anywhere Internet related.)

:thumbsup:

Dear Mr. _____:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opinion regarding the "economic stimulus" legislation. I appreciate your concern and interest in this important issue.

As you may know, President Obama signed H.R. 1 - the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 into law on February 17, 2009. The House of Representatives passed H.R. 1 on February 13, 2009 by a vote of 244-188. I voted against this legislation because I believe the proposal did not contain the tools and resources needed to jump start our economy.

Earlier this year, I was appointed to a working group to develop an economic stimulus proposal focused on job creation. The working group developed a proposal that included fast acting tax relief for working families and small businesses. As a matter of fact, the plan we introduced would have created twice as many jobs for half the cost of the legislation that passed. Even President Obama's Senior Economic Advisor, Dr. Christina Romer, conducted research that demonstrated that our proposal would create 6.2 million jobs over the next two years with only half the cost of the plan that passed. The legislation that became law includes $800 million in spending and creates only 3 million jobs. Unfortunately, the plan we submitted did not obtain the support needed for passage.

Everyone agrees we cannot afford to sit on the sidelines and do nothing, but we also cannot afford to do the wrong thing. Many Americans are hurting, and I understand many people in the 4th Congressional District are anxious about their jobs, the cost of their mortgage and putting food on the table. In response to this crisis, I was hoping that Congressional Democrats would have brought forth legislation that would energize our economy by lowering the tax burden on small businesses, thus enabling them to hire more employees and create long term sustainable growth for our economy.

The final product that Speaker Pelosi brought forward for consideration was loaded with waste and out-dated spending projects that will not grow the economy nor create jobs. As a matter of fact, the new law funds the creation of or permanent expansion of 104 federal government programs, while only $122 billion - or 39% of the spending provisions - will actually be temporary, one-time infusions to stimulate the economy.

An economic stimulus package should be about spurring economic growth and preserving long-term job creation, not increasing the national debt and placing additional burdens on hard-working families. The new spending contained in the law will have to be carried forward into future years and future budgets will have to increase by at least 42 percent each year to keep pace. When the interest on the debt the government will incur to borrow the money to pay for this package is included, the $789 billion price tag increases to $1.1 trillion.

This so-called "economic stimulus" bill will cost each American family $9,900 and only grows the federal government, NOT the national economy. Spending billions on aid to the National Endowment for the Arts, sexually transmitted disease (STD) education and prevention programs, digital TV converter box coupons, climate change research and a whole host of other government programs will do nothing to create new permanent jobs.

During debate on the House Floor, I stated that any stimulus package should have been targeted, timely, and temporary. In my opinion, this package failed to meet all three criteria. Much of the money won't be spent until after 2010 - when the recession is predicted to be over. In addition, there are no sunset provisions to keep these programs from becoming permanent.

At the end of the day, the American people do not want a lot of wasteful Washington spending. We should make deliberate and restrained funding decisions based on what is best for our country, our communities, and the taxpayers that pay the bill. The bill that passed is too big, too expensive and too slow. Allowing hard working American families to keep more of what they earn and providing small businesses, the economic engine of our nation, with the tools they need to expand and grow their enterprises, remains the best way to ensure a permanent and long-term economic recovery. Unfortunately, the legislation signed into law does not accomplish these core objectives.

Again, I want to thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please feel free to contact me if I can be of any further assistance on this matter or if you would like additional information on this topic or other issues facing Congress, please visit my Website at http://crenshaw.house.gov.



Sincerely,
Ander Crenshaw
Member of Congress
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,206
Messages
1,428,572
Members
61,109
Latest member
Minnervos
Back
Top