I write this during FREE’s second conference of the summer for federal judges. The first program focused on energy, while this one is on terrorism and civil society. The two seemingly distinct topics intersect as politicians opportunistically seek justifications to curry favors and further the interests of constituents and contributors.

Exploiting fear of terrorism exemplifies political opportunism working in the ethanol campaign. U.S. Senator John Thune (R-SD) recently pronounced:

“Countries such as Venezuela currently make a hefty profit from American consumers by forcing us to pay close to $70 a barrel or more for oil. The excessive oil profits enjoyed by these countries constitute a tax which all too often ends up fueling terrorist activities of radical extremists who hate America. It is imperative that our nation slash this terrorism tax and thus stymie petro-funded terrorism.”

His cure—ethanol of course. And he has plenty of company, for successful politicians are ever alert to identify, exaggerate, and then capitalize on fears. U.S. Representative Jean Schmidt (R-OH) reported that she has struck her own blow in the war on terrorism: she bought an ethanol-powered vehicle. "I will be one of the first in line to buy ethanol this month," said Schmidt, the proud owner of a 2007 Chevy Tahoe that runs on either the E85 blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline or, normally, just gasoline. Her license plate reads, "E85 4 OH." Schmidt said she didn't buy the SUV because ethanol is better for the environment, but to reduce the amount of money being sent to the Persian Gulf.

According to the Wall Street Journal, former CIA chief James Woolsey has been wooing corn growers with extravagant language. "American farmers, by making the commitment to grow more corn for ethanol, are at the tip of the spear on the war against terrorism," he told the annual meeting of the Virginia Soybean, Corn and Grain Association.

This is ethically, ecologically, and economically perverse. Only in politics does it make sense—and there it is a big winner. Publications as diverse as Foreign Affairs and Rolling Stone explain why the ethanol obsession is idiocy and immorality enshrined as law.

In the June issue of Foreign Affairs, two agricultural economists at the University of Minnesota observed that, “...thanks to a combination of high oil prices and even more generous government subsidies, corn-based ethanol has become the rage.” The politics of ethanol is creating an industry dependent on billions of dollars of taxpayer subsidies. An ever-larger share of corn production is going to ethanol factories, and, under current legislation, within a few years these factories will consume half of U.S. domestic corn supplies.

In economics, as in ecology, things are interconnected. Thus, it’s hard to do just one thing. The enormous volume of corn consumed by the ethanol industry has broad affect throughout the food system. Not only has the price of corn nearly doubled, the prices of substitutes like wheat and rice are also at decade highs. Further, farmers have planted more acres with corn and fewer acres with other crops—and increased fertilizer, herbicide, and pesticide use.

It takes over 450 pounds of corn, enough calories to feed one person for a year, to produce 25 gallons of ethanol. Pressures on world food crops caused by increased ethanol production mean higher world prices for both processed and staple foods.

While ethanol subsidies and mandates benefit corn producers, consumers, especially those in poor countries, are hit with the shock of much higher food prices. The World Bank estimates that nearly 3 billion people live on $2 a day or less. Consider the devastating impact of the increased cost of staple grains.

Rolling Stone magazine recently nailed the problem in an article by Jeff Goodell, “Ethanol Scam: Ethanol Hurts the Environment And Is One of America's Biggest Political Boondoggles.” Goodell says, “The great danger of confronting peak oil and global warming isn't that we will sit on our collective [behinds] and do nothing while civilization collapses, but that we will plunge after ‘solutions’ that will make our problems even worse. Like believing we can replace gasoline with ethanol, the much-hyped biofuel that we make from corn.”