The new studies showing that ethanol is even worse than we thought only actually proved that ethanol was exactly as bad as I'd previously thought. You see, it turns out that I'd been mis-informed about the state of research before this new study came out. Then I read the new study everyone's talking about and it turns out to say about what I'd thought the previous research had said. So let's give two cheers for misinformation. Kevin Drum sees an opportunity:

With the Iowa primaries safely over, surely it's safe for our brave presidential candidates to use these studies as an excuse to do an about-face and promise to kill corn ethanol subsidies in their first term. Right?



That seems wise to me. Meanwhile, every time every politician goes pandering on the corn business I feel like someone needs to smack them around a little bit and remind them that John McCain didn't win Iowa in 2008, Mike Dukakis didn't win Iowa in 1988, George HW Bush didn't win Iowa in 1988, Bill Clinton didn't win Iowa in 1992, etc., etc., etc. Iowa's obviously an important state, but it's not genuinely so central to American politics that people should be falling all over themselves to implement terrible Iowa-friendly policies.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.