GOP Divisions Stall Year-Round E15 as House and Some Senate Leaders Balk
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) keep ethanol out of funding bill while Senate split — with John Thune (R-S.D.) supportive and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) opposed — clouds any path forward
Some Republican leaders in both chambers are again standing in the way of year-round E15, with House leadership blocking the ethanol provision from the FY 2026 spending bill and deep divisions in the Senate leaving little chance of a quick legislative fix.
House: Leadership and Oil-State Republicans Draw the Line
In the House, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) opted to move must-pass appropriations legislation without adding year-round E15 language, despite pressure from Midwest Republicans representing corn- and ethanol-producing states. In the House, leaders paired that decision with a procedural compromise: creation of an E15-focused rural energy council meant to signal momentum without changing the law.
While Johnson and Scalise did not publicly oppose ethanol policy itself, they prioritized advancing funding bills without major policy riders, citing vote-count risks and concerns about fracturing the GOP conference. Their approach effectively blocked E15 from hitching a ride on government funding.
That strategy aligned with oil-state Republicans and senior appropriators, including House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole (R-Okla.), who has argued that sweeping energy policy changes “don’t belong” in appropriations bills. Refining-state members warned that attaching E15 to a spending package could cost GOP votes and imperil passage.
The result left farm-state Republicans empty-handed, even as they warned that delayed action on E15 would worsen already-tight farm margins heading into the 2026 planting season.
Senate: Farm-State Support Meets Oil-State Resistance
Even if House Republicans had advanced E15, the Senate remains a formidable obstacle.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), representing a major ethanol-producing state, has long supported year-round E15 and broader biofuel market access. Thune is closely aligned with corn-belt Republicans who see permanent E15 authorization as essential for farm income, domestic energy security, and lower consumer fuel costs.
Other pro-E15 Senate Republicans include:
• Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
•Joni Ernst (R-Iowa)
•Deb Fischer (R-Neb.)
• Roger Marshall (R-Kan.)
• Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.)
However, the Senate’s procedural dynamics amplify opposition from oil-state Republicans — led by Ted Cruz (R-Texas). Cruz has repeatedly objected to ethanol legislation, arguing that higher ethanol blends distort fuel markets and threaten refinery jobs. He has used Senate holds and objections in past Congresses to block or delay bipartisan E15 efforts.
Other GOP senators generally aligned with Cruz or skeptical of ethanol mandates include John Cornyn (R-Texas), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), and Mike Lee (R-Utah).
Why Year-Round E15 Keeps Stalling
Together, the House and Senate dynamics show why year-round E15 remains unresolved despite broad Republican support in farm states:
• House leadership is unwilling to risk spending bills over ethanol riders.
• Senate rules allow a single determined opponent to block progress.
• GOP leaders, including Thune, have been reluctant to force a floor fight that would split the conference.
Absent a broader bipartisan deal or regulatory action from the EPA, year-round E15 once again appears stuck between House leadership caution and Senate oil-state resistance — leaving ethanol advocates to search for yet another legislative path.
Why the Council Matters — and Its Limits
The House council reflects leadership’s attempt to defuse a spending-bill standoff while keeping E15 alive procedurally. But absent statutory changes or an EPA fix, the council cannot deliver year-round sales on its own. With House leaders avoiding riders and Senate opponents retaining veto power, ethanol advocates face a familiar reality: process without progress.
The council, to be appointed by the Speaker, is tasked with developing legislative solutions to what the resolution describes as a growing crisis facing farmers and refiners. Its scope goes well beyond E15 sales alone, directing members to investigate the broader ethanol policy landscape, including refinery capacity, the Renewable Fuel Standard, Renewable Identification Numbers, market access challenges, and federal regulations viewed as barriers to U.S. energy dominance.
Importantly for ethanol supporters, the council comes with an accelerated timeline. It must submit legislative recommendations to Congress by Feb. 15, 2026, with the express intent that lawmakers consider E15-related legislation no later than Feb. 25, 2026. That schedule signals continued pressure from Midwestern lawmakers and farm-state interests who have been seeking a clear pathway to year-round E15 authorization after repeated failures to secure the provision through appropriations bills.
The move reflects a strategic shift rather than a retreat. With E15 excluded from the FY 2026 spending measures themselves, House leaders are using the rules process to keep ethanol policy front and center — creating a formal venue to bridge divides between biofuel producers, refiners, and leadership ahead of another legislative push.
For corn growers and ethanol advocates, the council offers a concrete, if indirect, step toward action. For leadership, it provides a way to acknowledge mounting political pressure on E15 without reopening fragile funding negotiations — while preserving a near-term window for a standalone ethanol deal in early 2026.
Corn Growers Lash Out
The House is expected to advance legislation today that leaves out language authorizing nationwide, year-round access to E15 fuel — gasoline blended with 15% corn ethanol — frustrating farm-state advocates who have pushed for the change for years.
In a sharply worded statement, Ohio farmer and Jed Bower, president of the National Corn Growers Association, blasted lawmakers for sidelining the issue despite what he described as a completed legislative and industry deal.
Bower said corn growers are “disgusted, disappointed and disillusioned” that Congress is now floating the idea of a rural energy council to study E15 — a move he characterized as a stalling tactic rather than action. He argued that lawmakers already have a bill and an agreement with the petroleum industry in hand, and that creating a new task force simply delays progress yet again.
According to Bower, the decision amounts to Congress “choosing to leave America’s 500,000 corn farmers behind in favor of a handful of refineries,” underscoring deepening tensions between biofuel advocates and congressional leadership over the future of higher-ethanol fuel blends.
| Will Trump Talk Ethanol in Iowa? Signals Point to Yes — But Year-Round E15 Backing Is Less CertainPresident likely to nod to biofuels and corn demand, though a clear endorsement of year-round E15 may remain elusive As President Donald Trump prepares to travel to Iowa next Tuesday, ethanol is once again looming as a key question for farm and energy watchers: Will Trump use the Midwest stop to explicitly back year-round sales of E15 gasoline? History and politics suggest ethanol will almost certainly be part of the conversation. Iowa sits at the center of the nation’s corn and biofuels economy, and Trump has repeatedly highlighted ethanol, corn demand, and renewable fuels during past appearances in the state. With the White House framing the trip around the economy and energy, a nod to biofuels fits naturally into the administration’s broader messaging on domestic energy production and rural prosperity. That expectation is reinforced by the current legislative backdrop. Midwestern Republicans in both chambers are pressing leadership to revive year-round E15 language after it was excluded from recent funding packages, keeping the issue at the forefront in farm-state politics. Against that backdrop, avoiding ethanol altogether would be notable. Still, a clear, explicit endorsement of nationwide, year-round E15 is far less certain. While Trump has often expressed sympathy for ethanol producers and corn growers, the issue remains politically delicate inside the Republican Party. Refiners continue to oppose expanded E15 sales, and some key Senate leadership has shown little appetite for attaching the policy to must-pass legislation. In that environment, the White House may prefer strategic ambiguity — signaling support for biofuels without committing to a specific regulatory or legislative outcome. More likely is a familiar middle ground: praise for ethanol and biofuels, references to strengthening corn demand and rural economies, and language about reducing regulatory barriers or letting markets work. Such framing would reassure farm-state audiences without locking the administration into a definitive position on E15. For ethanol advocates, the precise wording will matter as much as the mention itself. Phrases about “unleashing American biofuels,” “ending unfair restrictions,” or “supporting our corn farmers” would suggest alignment with the spirit of year-round E15 — even if Trump stops short of naming the policy outright. In short, ethanol is expected to be part of Trump’s Iowa message. Whether that translates into a firm commitment on year-round E15 remains an open question—and one farm-state lawmakers and biofuel groups will be listening closely to answer. |
Bottom Line: Congress did what Washington usually does when they can’t figure out an issue… they study it. The House’s council compromise keeps year-round E15 on the agenda but postpones a decision, while some Senate resistance — despite support from Thune and other farm-state Republicans — continues to block a clear legislative path.
One Washington policy veteran said: “I think the House development is a context issue. I don’t think anyone wants a government shutdown over an issue. I think that the supplemental (spending bill) will provide another venue. It’s not a who-hoo victory but nor is it an eternal defeat. It’s a hurdle.”
