The Tax-Cut Resolution, or How To Fail Again

We are on the verge of an Administration and Congressional agreement on extending the Bush-era tax-cuts for all Americans. As usual our illustrious and politically savvy leaders have failed to demonstrate a smattering of intelligence in their usual and pathetic legislative manner. The Republican side staked out a non-negotiation position that they would only support an extension of tax-cuts if it included every American. The critical aspect of this position being the preservation of the tax-cuts for the higher income individuals (particularly the very wealthy or it would not have been at all important to the Republicans). The Democratic position represented via the Obama Administration was to patch together a variety of attachments to the Republican position so as to create the sludge that feeds the politicians and the political process. Before considering how the tax-cut position is more of the same special-interest disaster for America, let's look at the the decorations added by the assorted visionless champions of the American electorate.
A couple of presents being offered up as a placating placebo for the economy are for ethanol. We get a subsidy for corn-based ethanol production and tariff protection from ethanol imports. Now I am sure that there are a couple of folks who will benefit from this, mostly politicians but there will even be a farmer here and there that get a little benefit. Of course, both could have gotten a really good benefit and the public would have benefited even more if they had crafted the law in an effective manner rather than the simple-minded and dysfunctional way that they always do.
So if encouraging ethanol production is good for America, then here's a couple of questions:
Why just limit it to corn-based ethanol? Wouldn't the same amount of ethanol produced via other organic matter be good for our economy, environment and electorate? It gets the same amount of money in the economy, and may do it at a lower cost to our food supply. And does subsidizing corn-based ethanol really add any jobs to the economy?
The tariff on ethanol imports extends the costs but doesn't actually promote any derivative benefit. So how does this generate more jobs? Might it not actually cost more jobs since it adds to the cost of the fuel used by other employers?
Finally, why not make the bill a productive impetus for the farmers and the energy industry, an economically stimulative action in support of the country, and something beneficial for the public both monetarily and in terms of new jobs? Just because these legislative light-weights can't see beyond their own limited horizons shouldn't prevent them from seeking the guidance and creativity of those who could serve the country's interests far better then they seem able to. After all, really good leaders don't actually have to know much or be able to do anything on their own, as we have evidence from many of our corporations' leadership; they just need to have people who can get things done show them the way.