History has a way of repeating itself. In 2006 Democrat Mike Hatch was locked in a tight race for Governor with Republican Tim Pawlenty. A few days before the election Hatch’s running mate, Judi Dutcher, appeared not to know what E85 was and Hatch ended up losing the race. That foggy type of recollection is an issue again in 2010. Except this time the question is not what is E85 or in this case E20.. but did you vote for it or against it.
Here are some excerpts from the Gubernatorial debate at Farmfest Wednesday:
Margaret Anderson Kelliher- DFL endorsed candidate for Governor:
“Now my Republican opponent Tom Emmer has not supported biofuels. And I’m going to be very interested in his answer today. Because he’s voted against it in 2008, in 2008 twice, in 2005. And you know it’s interesting when people don’t… they say one thing and they actually do another. You can always depend, I know where I came from. I know who I’m fighting for.”
Tom Emmer- Republican endorsed candidate for Governor:
“I’m not sure where Margaret’s looking but I had to ask, because I’m pretty sure I voted for the biodiesel mandate.”
Apparently someone spoke to Emmer during one of the breaks during the debate. In his closing remarks Emmer said:
“I got to make it clear, when I was listening to Margaret and I thought I voted for biodiesel, I voted for E20.”
So who’s right?
Tom Emmer did vote against the biodiesel mandate in 2008. But the bill, contained provisions to promote E20 also known as ethanol.
But Emmer also voted against E20 in 2005. That vote was pretty clear cut. The bill was totally about E20. At one point he voted for it, but on the final vote when it counted most, he voted against E20
So this statement:
I voted for E20
Is at best a half-truth.