Heavyset man dies during assault on elderly woman
Gay judge's repeal of same-sex-marriage ban in Calif. is upheld

Senate vote keeps $6B in ethanol subsidies -- for now

By Michael Winter, USA TODAY

The Senate voted against ending debate on an amendment to end $6 billion in ethanol subsidies. That keeps the tax breaks alive for the time being.

Update at 4:55 p.m. ET: Just to be clear, because Democrats still control the Senate they provided the bulk of votes against ending debate and moving to a final vote -- 45 Democrats and Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. They were joined by 13 Republicans, all from farm states.

The Associated Press has a fuller explanation of the political maneuvering, pointing out that today's vote was "anything but the final word on the issue."

Original post: The Senate has rejected a move to end $6 billion in tax subsidies for ethanol producers.

The amendment, offered by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), was defeated, 40-59. Joining Coburn were 34 Republicans.

As The Hill notes, the vote pitted fiscal conservatives/deficit hawks against corn-producing states and anti-tax conservatives, who wanted the estate tax eliminated to offset what they called the "Coburn tax increase."

Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), the group led by conservative stalwart Grover Norquist, lobbied against the amendment on the grounds that the elimination of any tax break, including those seen as corporate subsidies, should only be eliminated if they are offset with other tax cuts.

Norquist and ATR said they had no problem with eliminating the tax credit, as long as other taxes were also lowered. With such an "offset," they viewed Coburn's measure as a tax increase and a violation of the Taxpayer Protection Pledge signed by many lawmakers.

Coburn argued the tax break benefited major oil companies that sell gasoline blended with ethanol. He also argued Norquist's orthodoxy was so rigid it would make it difficult to lower deficits by eliminating wasteful tax breaks, which Coburn argued came at the expense of other taxpayers. ...

In the end, the debate and the vote broke down largely along geographic lines, with farm-state Republicans who support the ethanol industry voting against the amendment and Republicans from states without major corn-growing interests voting against it.

Republicans from major corn- and ethanol-producing states -- Sens. John Thune of South Dakota, Mike Johanns of Nebraska and Chuck Grassley of Iowa --- argued that ending the subsidies would raise fuel prices and cut domestic production.

Heavyset man dies during assault on elderly woman