On Judi Dutcher's ethanol commentPosted by Craig Westover | 11:55 AM |
Honesty is refreshing, but it is not an excuse.
Update: Independence Party candidate Peter Hutchinson's statement:
"I have known Judy Dutcher for many years; I consider her a friend. And I know that she is no dummy. I am confident that she asked Mike Hatch to brief her on his plan for energy independence. So, I went to his website and looked it up. It is 27 pages long with 217 footnotes. But the word“ethanol” does not appear a single time.I disagree with some of the finer detail in each of Hutchinson's plans, but the key point is -- He has plans. Both Hatch and Pawlenty offer a lot of one-off options, but neither put their options in the context of the larger issues.
Tim Pawlenty is wrong to attack only Judy Dutcher on this issue; the problem is that Mike Hatch has no plan for how to make ethanol an important and sustainable feature of howwe solve our long-term energy needs.
In contrast, I worked side-by-side with my running mate, Dr. Maureen Reedand our Team mates (John James for Attorney General, Lucy Gerold for StateAuditor, and Joel Spoonheim for Secretary of State) to develop a bold, comprehensive environmental and energy plan. I encourage the voters of Minnesota to read it on our website - www.TeamMN.com/issues.php - and ask any one of us about how we plan to move the state forward in the energy arena. We did the same for our plans for reforming health care, educationand transportation. Our team is ready to take the field and move forwardon these issues.”
70 percent of money to the classroom is great; so is lowering college tuition. But what about the achievement gap? E-85, okay. A 20 percent ethanol mandate, maybe. But what happens when we we run up against the water-use wall or the corn-consumption wall in ethanol production? Hutchinson lays out plans -- the major, and an important distinction between him and the other candidates.