S.20.2-1: Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act (Tabled) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 03, 2024, 10:33:37 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Regional Governments (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  S.20.2-1: Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act (Tabled) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: S.20.2-1: Ethanol Incentive and Infrastructure Act (Tabled)  (Read 1095 times)
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
« on: May 23, 2020, 01:42:49 PM »

I would suggest doing a block grant to the Department of Agriculture for the subsidy that can then be distributed based on need, rather than allocating a certain $ amount for each farmer.
Logged
tmthforu94
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,402
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.26, S: -4.52

P P P
« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2020, 08:25:37 PM »

Yes, we should change the funding structure.

Per an Iowa State study, there are approximately 938,000 farms in the region.

Quote
A farm is defined as any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during the census year.  Beginning in 1997, operations receiving $1,000 or more in Federal government payments were counted as farms, even if they had no sales reported in the census year.
https://www.icip.iastate.edu/tables/agriculture/farms-by-state

However, many farmers won't be producing subsidies - based on RL, most subsidies were given based on gallons of ethanol produced, so $.45 given back to farmers for every gallon produced. I would incorporate that in here. Now, my recommendation would be to set a maximum amount that the Department of Agriculture can grant per year and then possibly request a CG evaluation a year from now on what this is would cost at full capacity. Because to just grant the $.45/gallon number would require a CG evaluation on how much this will cost, and since we don't have an active CG, we would have to let this bill sit for a while or table it.

Thoughts on which direction we should go?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.018 seconds with 12 queries.