Milwaukee Biz Blog

For many users of the Internet, the online lobbying effort that blocked two “internet piracy” bills from whizzing through Congress was best summarized by the recent 24-hour blackout of the English-language version of Wikipedia.

For one day in late January, would-be users of the online encyclopedia were greeted with a message about why the “Stop Online Piracy Act” and the companion “Protect IP Act” would hamper creativity and threaten free speech.

“In short, these bills are efforts to stop copyright infringement by foreign web sites, but, in our opinion, they do so in a way that actually infringes free expression while harming the Internet,” read a message from Wikipedia.

That view, amplified by similar appeals on web sites as large as Google.com to tens of thousands of blogs to millions to Twitter messages, sidelined both pieces of legislation last week. The bills (S.968 and H.R. 3261) were backed primarily by the entertainment industry and may yet come back in an amended form.

Whatever happens next in Washington, however, won’t diminish the significance of the largest “e-lobbying” effort in the history of the Internet – or the commitment of its users to the principle of largely unfettered expression.

One of the uniquely American innovations of the last quarter century has been the Internet. It has been a model of innovation from the start and continues to be so, creating opportunity, companies and jobs for millions of Americans.

Of course, the Internet is not immune to manipulation. That is evidenced by the proliferation of rogue websites, most often established offshore, that are essentially dedicated to counterfeiting, copyright infringement and other criminal activities. That’s why the internet piracy bills were introduced.

Unfortunately, both overshot the mark. As written, they would have exposed law-abiding U.S. Internet and technology companies to uncertain liabilities, private rights of action and technology mandates that would hamper the historically free-flowing, innovative nature of the Internet itself.

The bills would have forced tech companies to pre-screen and monitor all user comments, pictures and videos – all but killing the burgeoning social media industry. In addition, they would have compelled all Internet search engines, ISPs, social networks and any website with a hyperlink to police all these links and could shut a website down that linked to any type of pirated content.

These bills would make it harder for young companies to grow, to attract investors and to generally operate in an environment that isn’t dampened by the constant threat of red tape and litigation. If you’re launching a new Internet company, the last thing you want to do is spend time fighting web-o-crats.

Congress already has at its disposal a better mechanism. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 provides a safe harbor for Internet companies that act in good faith to remove infringing content from their sites. The DMCA is one of the big reasons companies such as Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter weren’t crushed in their early days by frivolous lawsuits. Existing law works for the vast majority of online companies.

That’s not to say pirating isn’t a serious problem. It can be addressed, however, in other ways that don’t disadvantage domestic Internet and technology companies that aspire to be fair, conscientious players.

Those include the Internet’s own self-policing functions. Internet governance is currently restricted to a non-profit, multinational body based in California. The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers maintains a host of technical standards, which allows traffic to flow throughout the global communications network. ICANN is a private organization with an international board of directors, but there is already some oversight by Washington because it’s a U.S.-based corporation.

At an international conference on the Internet about six years ago, a member of then-President Bush’s administration said it well: “The Internet itself is not controlled by any single government; it is not controlled by any single person. It is a manifestation of the creativity and the genius of the world spirit… The promise of the Internet is not fulfilled by economic growth alone.  Its greater promise is the opportunity it offers to the people of every nation to pursue educational, cultural, political, medical, scientific and commercial achievements for the betterment of all.”

As last year’s Arab Spring protests and subsequent events have demonstrated, the Internet has become a foundation for 21st century democracy. While the Internet should be neither above nor below the law, Congress must take care not to undermine a platform rooted in the most exportable of American values – freedom of expression.

Still is president of the Wisconsin Technology Council. He is the former associate editor of the Wisconsin State Journal in Madison.

U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Janesville) found himself at the center of a controversy he did not create this month.

The controversy stemmed from H.R. 3261, the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), which would empower the U.S. Justice Department and copyright holders to demand that search engines, Internet providers and ad networks cut off access to sites “dedicated” to copyright infringement. The bill is aimed at blocking foreign sites that offer illegal and cheap copies of movies, music and television shows with impunity.

A broad coalition of forces, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, organized labor and advocates for Hollywood and the recording industry, are supporting the bill, which was sponsored by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas).

However, consumer watchdog groups and major Internet companies, including Facebook, Google and Yahoo, are opposing SOPA and warn that the bill could stifle innovation and censor free speech.

The division between support and opposition on the bill is not falling directly down party lines.

Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, became a target of “Operation Pull Ryan” (www.pullryan.com), a Reddit campaign community, last month, and Internet rumors quickly spread that Ryan was a sponsor of the bill. He was not. Ever.

Ryan originally declined to take a stance on the bill. Eventually, as the Internet campaign against him grew, Ryan issued a statement announcing his opposition to the bill: “The Internet is one of the most magnificent expressions of freedom and free enterprise in history. It should stay that way. While H.R. 3261, the Stop Online Piracy Act, attempts to address a legitimate problem, I believe it creates the precedent and possibility for undue regulation, censorship and legal abuse. I do not support H.R. 3261 in its current form and will oppose the legislation should it come before the full House.”

Smith said his bill does not apply to lawful websites, and opponents such as Google are “spreading lies” about SOPA.

“Chairman Ryan is usually very knowledgeable on issues before Congress, which is why it’s surprising that he appears not to have closely read the manager’s amendment to the Stop Online Piracy Act," Smith said in an emailed statement to The Hill, a web site that tracks Congress.  "Had Chairman Ryan read the manager’s amendment, he would have realized that the bill targets only foreign websites dedicated to illegal activity.  It’s not regulation to enforce the law against online criminals. And it’s not censorship to prevent online criminals from stealing the products and profits that rightly belong to American innovators."

Smith claimed foreign websites are costing American businesses billions of dollars and thousands of jobs every year.

As “Operation Pull Ryan” progressed, members of the movement began to gravitate toward Rob Zerban, Ryan’s Democratic opponent in the 2012 elections. Zerban, a Kenosha County Board supervisor, was quick to denounce SOPA and credited his opposition with helping him to raise more than $220,000 in campaign donations in the final quarter of 2011.

Zerban said, "Paul Ryan has bowed to public pressure and decided to join me in opposing SOPA legislation, which endangers our freedoms online. This legislation is clearly contrary to the will of the people, and thousands of people helped get that message through to Paul Ryan. I realize I am a partner in this effort with the public and I am not claiming credit for this. The American people rallied behind this effort and my position, and they got results.”

The House Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on the bill when Congress returns from its recess later this month. The Senate is also set to vote on its version of the legislation, the Protect IP Act, when Congress returns.

Steve Jagler is executive editor of BizTimes Milwaukee.

A new wind farm is complete in Columbia County and it will soon be killing more birds than a Sarah Palin Thanksgiving photo op. Or, for you heavy metal fans, more mosquito-eating bats than Ozzy Osbourne ever killed.

It’s the largest wind farm in Wisconsin, 90 turbines spread over 17,000 acres of farmland. It is expected to generate 162 megawatts of electricity, enough to power 45,000 homes.

We Energies was expected to spend $363.7 million on the project, although it appears to have come under the target set by the Public Service Commission. Of course, the over $300 million in cost will soon be passed on to electricity rate payers as soon as 2013.

To be fair, We Energies did not build the wind farm because it hates birds, bats or ratepayers. Nor did it build the wind farm because the company wanted to build a giant ice ball thrower.

And it certainly did not build the windmills because wind energy is cheaper than the alternatives. Because it is not.
The wind farm was built as part of a plan to increase WE Energies “renewable energy” portfolio. The company is mandated by the state of Wisconsin to increase its use of renewable energy sources from less than three percent of the electricity generated by WE Energies to 8.27% by 2015.

The mandated renewable share of total generation must be at least 6 percentage points above the average renewable share for WE Energies from 2001 to 2003. It’s part of a statewide renewable energy mandate of 10% by 2015.

Wind power is the most popular choice for filling the renewable energy mandates as it is closer to coal-generated electricity than other forms of renewable energy. However, wind is still unreliable in capacity because wind, while free fuel, is unreliable in providing a steady quantity, especially at peak demand times. As a previous report by the MacIver Institute has shown, Wisconsin is not even a good candidate for windmill siting, increasing the unreliability of wind power for our state.

Ironically, according to one environmentalist group, Clean Wisconsin, the windmill farm may not even further the goal of the renewable energy mandate, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, because We Energies will still be reliant upon the coal-burning power plants for primary electrical generation.

Because wind is not a reliable source of energy here.

Renewable energy does not come cheap. If renewable energy were cost competitive, power companies and energy consumers would not need a mandate to prefer renewable energy sources over coal, oil and natural gas.

As the U.S. Energy Information Agency indicates in its 2011 Annual Energy Outlook projections, coal is already dropping as a share of the nation’s energy mix. However, it is naturally occurring due to the lower costs of natural gas generated electricity, including lower infrastructure costs.

The growth in renewable energy as a percentage of the nation’s energy portfolio (to 14 percent by 2035) is because of state renewable portfolio standard (RPS) requirements and federal tax credits.

It could be even worse. During the last session of the legislature, Wisconsin narrowly avoided imposing a new renewable energy mandate of 25 percent by 2025. Bipartisan opposition to the mandate, largely due to the weak economy, prevented its passage.

But as we have seen, the desire of the government to support a so-called green economy continues despite the costs to the public. Perhaps we can expect Department of Energy bureaucrats to tour the new windmill farm in new Chevrolet Volts.

Somebody has to buy them.

After all, President Barack Obama’s administration set a goal of 1 million electrified vehicles (including advanced hybrids) on the road by 2015. So far the Chevy Volt is going to fall short of the company’s goal of 10,000 vehicles sold by the end of this year, and USA Today reports interest in electric vehicles is declining.

After $3 billion in subsidies, Americans are showing that the only silent vehicle that doesn’t consume gas in which they have an interest is Santa’s sleigh at Christmastime. Good thing he managed to avoid the new windmill farm… this year

James Wigderson is a freelance writer and blogger living in Waukesha. His website is www.wigderson.com. This blog originally was posted as a contributed blog for the MacIver Institute at http://maciverinstitute.com.

I wrote the following article because I spent a year searching for a job in Milwaukee without any luck.  I was torn between leaving the city I love, my family and friends to pursue my career. I choose to move away and pursue my career.

This was a very difficult decision. I am hoping regional leaders can begin to understand what is needed to bring metro Milwaukee up to speed.

Wisconsin you’re a winner. With the Packers, Brewers and Badgers how can you not feel like a champ? However, outside the stadiums we are not giving a 110 percent. And metro Milwaukee has a particular responsibility to succeed as the economic engine and primary cultural center of Wisconsin.  

When comparing metro Milwaukee’s high-tech prowess to 60 leading U.S. metropolitan areas, the TechAmerica Foundation has shown Metro Milwaukee to be performing like the Packers of the 1980s — hard times indeed. 

High-tech employment comprises scientists, engineers and technicians — all well-paying professions that help indicate a metro’s overall performance. TechAmerica, using Bureau of Labor Statistics, has found metro Milwaukee lagging near the bottom of key indicators:
· 36th in high-tech employment.
· 42nd in high-tech job growth.
· 44th in high-tech employment concentration
· 41st in high-tech average wage.

High-tech employment is already lagging and worse, we lost high-tech jobs at a faster rate compared to many other metros between 2007 and 2009. Ironically, we have excellent regional educational institutions and resources that prepare the next generation of high-tech employees. But we need to establish a two-handshake system for our students, one with a dean and one with a boss.

There are plenty of open jobs in Metro Milwaukee. However, the right skills are necessary to fill these evermore technically specific jobs. Therein lies a problem, we have people, job openings, educational resources, workforce development programs, hardworking civic leaders and transportation programs, yet we are not performing well.

Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results. We need to change our approach — this may be particularly difficult given stubbornness is a Wisconsin tradition. A single workforce development agency for southeastern Wisconsin, strengthening the relationships between regional educators and business operators, may be one approach to effectively use limited resources to better match people with jobs.

We can better connect people and jobs but reliable and reasonable methods of travel are a precursor for success. Regional transportation means more than automobiles. It means external and internal movements, freight, ships, air, rail, cars, trucks, buses, bikes and people power. Our transport system is a complex integrated web of many modes and all must be top performers on a national and increasingly global scale to attract and retain business and industries.

Connecting people, educators, trainers and employers through regional personal and transportation networks may not be enough. Perhaps, in our Midwestern neck of the woods, the world may seem less capricious. Yet the winner and losers of the 21st century are being decided right now.

Connecting to Chicagoland is metro Milwaukee’s competitive advantage in the global economy. Globally, Milwaukee must become an assumed element of the Chicagoland market. Metro Milwaukee can roll out the red carpet for global investment by linking to Chicago via high-speed rail. Visit Chicago but stay in Milwaukee should be our 21st century ethos.

And why not, we have more fun up here, we have better food and da Bears still suck. So, what’s keeping metro Milwaukee from its rightful place in the winner’s circle?

Jason Biernat is a fifth-generation Milwaukeean, proud Wisconsinite, Marquette University Engineering graduate in 2008 and University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Urban Planning Graduate in 2010. Not finding any employment opportunities in Milwaukee, he now lives and works in Baltimore, Md.

Given recent news, more people are learning about the planned combination of AT&T and T-Mobile USA. This transaction will benefit the citizens and businesses of Wisconsin. 

We all know today’s consumers are rapidly migrating from traditional wired phones to wireless devices that allow us to do more than just talk. They enable us to work, pay our bills and use many applications – all on the go, anywhere wireless coverage reaches.  We’ve seen this growth firsthand.  Data usage on our network grew by more than 8,000% from 2007 to 2010, and we know this growth will continue. In the first several weeks of 2015, we estimate we’ll carry the same amount of mobile data traffic we carried in all of 2010.

The combining of AT&T and T-Mobile is the fastest way to meet this increasing demand. Both companies have compatible technologies, complementary spectrum assets, and well-matched cell site locations. This combination will truly be “1 + 1 = 3,” as network efficiency and capacity are increased. That means better coverage, fewer dropped and blocked calls, stronger in-building connections, and faster data downloads.

It also means AT&T will be able to expand deployment of 4G Long Term Evolution (LTE), the premier next generation advanced mobile broadband technology, to many more Americans than without the transaction. Over 97 percent of Americans, or 55 million more people, would be covered by AT&T’s 4G LTE network, including 1.75 million Wisconsin residents. These incredible numbers align with the National Broadband Plan’s goal to make broadband available to all Americans by 2015.

This expanded deployment will allow more businesses to connect to the global marketplace and provide more Wisconsinites with the opportunities LTE brings.  It will also substantially contribute to the nation’s economy.  A recent study estimates the $8 billion infrastructure investment AT&T will make as a result of the transaction will result in an additional 55,000 to 96,000 direct and indirect jobs.

This transaction is good for Wisconsin, businesses, and customers of both companies. It will improve existing service, dramatically expand 4G LTE technology across Wisconsin, and provide new means for economic growth for our state’s businesses.

Scott VanderSanden is president of AT&T Wisconsin.

The Oct. 31 bluff collapse at the We Energies power plant in Oak Creek sent coal ash and construction equipment tumbling into Lake Michigan, and several local companies are still working to clean it up.

Oak Creek-based Edgerton Contractors Inc. has assisted with earth-moving, and Milwaukee-based Edward E. Gillen Co., with overall coordination and Massachusetts-based Clean Harbors, has assisted  with water cleanup, said Barry McNulty, manager of media relations and special projects at We Energies.

Ten companies in all, including six from Wisconsin, are working to repair the bluff and remove debris from the site.

The cause of the collapse, which happened near an air quality control construction project at the plant, has not yet been determined, McNulty said.  Both plant operations and construction continued after the collapse.

“There’s an ongoing investigation that continues,” McNulty said. “Once that is concluded, we’ll have a better understanding.”

Dawes Rigging and Crane Rental Inc., a Milwaukee company that was working on a We Energies wind turbine project in Cambria, quickly disassembled a 440-ton capacity crane at that site and transported it to the bluff collapse site, said Joe Ruddell, rental division sales manager for Dawes.

The large crane was needed for the last heavy piece of debris yet to be moved, a filter press used for collecting and compacting sediment that weighs more than 40 tons, McNulty said.

The crane reassembly was completed Thursday, and the filter press will likely be moved early next week, he said.

Dawes has also provided smaller cranes from the start to lift other equipment off the collapsed bluff, Ruddell said.

“This is kind of an ongoing process to determine what we’re going to be lifting and how to lift it from a safety standpoint,” Ruddell said.

There’s no clear sign yet when that work will be finished, but emergency work is familiar for Dawes.
The company is on permanent standby with the Milwaukee County Zoo and the Airforce National Guard for emergency situations, he said.

Weather conditions will heavily impact the completion time for the project, Ruddell said.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources tests conducted at the site on Nov. 11 showed no threat to public health or safety from the coal ash and other contamination in the lake.

“While having coal ash get to Lake Michigan is certainly a cause for concern, the amount of environmental risk in this situation is small,” said Lloyd Eagan, DNR water leader for southern Wisconsin. “Water quality at the spill site is close to the normal water quality of Lake Michigan. Outside the spill site, the water quality is normal. There will not be long-term impacts to the aquatic environment once the spilled material is removed.”

David Lee, We Energies water quality manager, testified at a Wisconsin Great Lakes Caucus briefing at the Capitol on Thursday about the incident.

We Energies also posted a blog about the bluff cleanup on Thursday. It gave an update and summary of the project, as well as details on who will be responsible for the cost of clean-up.

“As we continue to conduct the root cause analysis of the bluff collapse, we can say that a portion of the expenses, such as those incurred to remove material and equipment that washed into lake, will be incurred by the company this year as an operational expense and will not be passed on to customers. Completing the root cause analysis of the bluff failure at the site is necessary before we can accurately answer the entire question of who will pay for the recovery costs,” the blog said.

Molly Newman is a reporter at BizTimes Milwaukee.

Throughout Wisconsin, people depend on their mobile devices more than ever before. From day-to-day business, to keeping in touch with family and friends, to public safety, reliable wireless service is a necessity everywhere people live, work and travel.

Soon, on your mobile device you’ll be capable of making high-quality video calls, making payments, sending real-time data to your doctor or lifesaving pictures to a 9-1-1 operator. People living in urban areas will soon experience these exciting new applications, but our rural communities are in danger of being left behind.

That’s because a proposal, sponsored by landline telephone service providers and currently under consideration by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) if adopted, would dramatically cut funding for rural mobile wireless networks.

Over the next decade, the proposal would lead the Universal Service Fund – established by Congress to help bring telecommunications services to rural areas – to invest $14 in outdated landline networks for every $1 invested in high-speed mobile broadband networks.

Does this imbalance make sense to anyone other than to the landline companies proposing it?
Wisconsin could potentially lose up to $208 million that could be used for new mobile wireless broadband sites and infrastructure over the next 10 years.

A recent report by Deloitte projects the creation of 15 jobs for every $1 million invested in mobile broadband. If we invested $208 million into new mobile broadband networks, up to 3,100 new jobs could be created in Wisconsin.

The FCC is making a decision soon. Make your voice heard at www.wirelessbroadbandforall.com by urging the FCC and Congress to prioritize high-speed wireless broadband over yesterday’s landline technology.

Every investment decision we make must look to the future and make all our communities more competitive. Our country cannot afford to leave its rural towns behind.

Mary Dillon is president and CEO of U.S. Cellular Corp.

IT professionals are finding it hard to avoid discussing mobile computing. As advances in technology and mobile apps on devices like smart phones and wireless tablets push the boundaries of computing further away from convention, companies struggle to move faster to adopt mobile.

How can business leaders allow new devices on the network and still maintain strong security? Within business, mobile devices have moved beyond email, contacts and calendar to the preferred tool for business. Mobility has quickly become a method for companies to transform the way they do business, which can be the differentiator between the business leaders and followers.

Let’s look at the security challenges from the perspective of a traditional environment.

When you have an end-user driven computing model, traditional security strategies fall apart. Customary end-user devices remained on the corporate network, which created a safe haven or walled garden for the corporate data and infrastructure. When organizations consider allowing access to the corporate network through mobile devices, they often expose business to many of the security threats and data loss, which they have been working to prevent since the beginning of networking.

User choice initiatives just add complexity and cost of delivering IT services to support mobility. That’s because there are no standards for devices or software compared to the traditional end-user environment. How are they going to adapt their infrastructure to deliver mobile?

If we are to transform the way we do business by extending beyond the walled garden of traditional computing, we need to modify infrastructure to accommodate mobile. IT does not need to abandon standards to deliver mobility.

Instead we need to examine the intent of the standards. By moving to a published application infrastructure, and using virtualized sessions, IT can achieve greater security and standardization than can be established with traditional computing since the end-user device simply becomes a viewer for the workload.

For example, pay-per-view TV is hosted at a centrally managed location. Users subscribe to programs as they need them and are granted access as appropriate. The program never is contained in the TV; rather it is just a session being viewed. Regardless of what TV brand is being used, the program is viewed in a standard format provided the TV meets minimum requirements. We can do this with IT.

By moving to a mobility ready infrastructure, organizations can transform the way they conduct business without sacrificing security or functionality.

Alan Arenas-Grube is a practice manager for Paragon Development Systems (PDS) in Oconomowoc.  He will be presenting a session on Managing Enterprise Mobility as part of the PDS 2011 Technology Conference, a free event which will take place Sept. 14-15 at the Frontier Airlines Center in Milwaukee.  Business leaders and IT pros are invited to register at www.PDSpc.com.

The Justice Department is correct to be concerned about the potential anti-competitive effects of a merger between ATT and T-Mobile. Such a merger would threaten the viability of Sprint-arguably the more aggressive of the top three wireless carriers in introducing new technology-and solidify the grip of two legacy Bell companies.
 
Together, T-Mobile and Sprint have been more nimble and aggressive in building out technology, while the legacy Bell companies have been more interested in monopolization of the industry. The latter simply does not service wider business competitive and consumer interests.
 
AT&T and Verizon have not been quick to fully build out new technology, and an oligopoly on internet service dominated by those two companies and cable monopolies would almost guarantee rates would not fall and consumers would have too few choices.
 
A strong flexible and rapidly advancing internet backbone is essential to U.S. international competitiveness. Leaving it in the hands of AT&T and Verizon makes little sense from the perspective of broader business needs.
 
Peter Morici is a professor at the Smith School of Business, University of Maryland School, and the author of “Antitrust in the Global Trading System.” He is a former chief economist at the U.S. International Trade Commission.

Congress has recognized the absurdity of subsidizing the ethanol industry, but unfortunately the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has its own agenda.

In January, the EPA issued a waiver to allow E15 (gasoline with a 15 percent ethanol blend) to be sold for vehicles with model years 2001 and later. This decision was made at the behest of the ethanol industry but it will come at the expense of American drivers.

While the EPA deemed E15 environmentally safe for models produced after 2001, this higher blend of gas could seriously damage cars. 

I sent letters to the major US automakers to investigate how E15 would affect people’s cars.  Overwhelmingly the automakers complained that E15 would void warranties, damage engines, and lower fuel efficiency. To date, I have received 12 responses, and all 12 oppose EPA’s waiver.

According to Honda, “Vehicle engines were not designed or built to accommodate the higher concentrations of ethanol. . .There appears to be the potential for engine failure.” Chrysler wrote, “We are not confident that our vehicles will not be damaged from the use of E15.”

It is summer time and we don’t just use gasoline for our cars. Boats, motorcycles, ATVs, and lawnmowers all use gasoline.  The EPA did not approve E15 for small engines, but small engine manufacturers are worried that E15 will find its way from gas pumps to small engines, where it can do significant harm. 

Thus far, the EPA’s only solution to consumer confusion is to impose more regulations and rules on manufacturers and business owners. 

The decision to increase the allowable blend appears to have limited environmental benefits with huge costs for American consumers.  According to Volvo, “the risks related to emissions are greater than the benefits in terms of CO2 when using low-blend E15 for variants that are designed to E10.”

The government has artificially propped up the ethanol industry with a 45-cent- a-gallon subsidy to oil refiners and a 54 cent-per-gallon tariff on imported ethanol. The ethanol lobby claimed the biofuel would reduce our dependence on unstable sources of oil and reduce greenhouse gas. After $6 billion per year of taxpayer money, ethanol has achieved neither goal. Instead, research and analysis shows that increased ethanol production raises the cost of food and emits more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels.

In southeastern Wisconsin, we already have to deal with the consequences of the EPA-imposed reformulated gas. Despite history’s warnings, the EPA has allowed E15 to be widely available in the marketplace.

The House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology recently held a hearing to examine the science behind the EPA’s decision to allow E15. While the political tide on Capitol Hill is turning against prolonging the ethanol boondoggle, the Administration seems to have missed the memo. The EPA is moving forward with a bad policy that will cost consumers dearly.

Congressman F. James Sensenbrenner Jr. represents Wisconsin’s Fifth District.