President George W. Bush praises the renewable fuel made from corn as helping to wean America from foreign oil imports. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota supports ethanol, as do House Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois and House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt of Missouri.

Fresh from winning a huge new market for ethanol in California, supporters of the fuel believe the next step should be for Congress to require that all motor fuel sold in the United States include ethanol.

But forcing the use of ethanol is making some determined enemies, which could complicate the task of promoting it as a clean, environmentally friendly fuel that funnels money to hard-pressed American farmers instead of Arab sheiks.

CALIFORNIA OUTRAGED

A decision last month to force California to use ethanol as an additive in its motor fuel has outraged some environmentalists and influential politicians, who say that ethanol is not the clean fuel it is cracked up to be.

The Bush administration wants ``to force the use of ethanol on California ... even when it is shown to worsen California's air,'' California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein told Reuters. ``We are going to fight this fight one way or another.''

Federal law requires states with the worst pollution to include oxygen-rich fuel additives like ethanol, or its more popular counterpart, MTBE, in their reformulated gasoline.

With many states phasing out MTBE use in the next few years because it may contaminate groundwater, ethanol demand is expected to boom. But environmentalists say ethanol can actually increase smog in some cases.

The ethanol industry forecasts it will blend a record 1.8 billion gallons of ethanol this year in about 15 percent of the nation's fuel supply, up from 1.6 billion gallons last year. About 25 percent of the nation's gasoline is mixed with MTBE.

LOCKING IN A MARKET

With about a dozen pro-ethanol bills currently pending in Congress, Bob Dinneen, vice president of the pro-ethanol Renewable Fuels Association, said the industry was lobbying hardest for the passage of a renewable fuels requirement.

If approved, the bill sponsored by Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Democratic Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota would require all gasoline sold in the United States to contain at least 0.8 percent of renewable fuels starting next year. The renewable fuels requirement would gradually increase every year, reaching 5 percent in 2016.

Passenger vehicles in the United States used 121 billion gallons of gasoline in 2000, so if just 0.8 percent of this market went to ethanol, demand for the alternative fuel would increase substantially.

``I think it is fair to say this (bill) is not a slam dunk,'' said Monte Shaw, spokesman for ethanol's trade group. ``Some (lawmakers) currently like using their petroleum and are not jumping up and down for this stuff (ethanol).''

The ethanol lobby is focusing on trying to get the provision attached to a broader package of measures now before Congress to deal with the nation's energy problems.

The Senate Energy Committee is expected to begin hearings on Tuesday on the energy plan, including whether renewable fuels such as ethanol should be included.

``In terms of ethanol, everything is on the table and we haven't ruled anything out,'' said Bill Wicker, the committee's spokesman. ``Renewables definitely are in the mix.''

The U.S. government already subsidizes ethanol through a generous excise tax exemption, established in 1979, currently worth 5.3 cents a gallon at the pump. Bush recently indicated his approval for continuing the federal tax credits.

Mindful of its dependence on Washington, the ethanol industry has been generous with political contributions.

ADM POLITICAL DONATIONS

Archer Daniels Midland (NYSE:ADM - news), the largest U.S. producer of ethanol, contributed a total of $935,400 in last year's elections, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

ADM, the biggest political contributor among farm service companies, strategically split the money between the Republican and Democratic parties.

The Decatur, Illinois-based company, with a long history of currying favor in Washington, contributed directly to 42 candidates for the House of Representatives and 34 candidates for Senate in 2000, the nonprofit group said. ADM gave Bush $4,000 in political action committee money, but did not contribute to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore.

In addition to the ethanol subsidies, ADM also benefits from government protection of the domestic sugar industry because the company produces high-fructose corn syrup, and it gets subsidies from Washington for some exports of U.S. grain. The company was one of the most prominent corporate recipients of federal aid in the 1980s and 1990s, according to political experts.

POLITICAL STAKES HIGH

Last month, Bush, who owes much of his election success to the Midwest states, rewarded ADM and the ethanol industry by rejecting California's request to exempt it from federal clean gasoline rules. This should pave the way for a substantial rise in ethanol demand there by 2003.

Ethanol's support originates in the farming region of the Midwest, where the industry uses large amounts of corn every year to help produce the fuel.

Of the top 10 corn-growing states, half voted for Bush and half for Gore in the closely fought presidential race last year. Bush lost the top corn producing state, Iowa, and the No. 10 state Wisconsin by a few thousand votes each, and he seems determined to do better next time.

``We won't and can't win without the support of the Midwest states,'' said Ann Wagner, co-chairman of the Republican National Committee.

But some experts said that when push comes to shove Bush may side with the oil and gas industries, where he got his business start in Texas, rather than ethanol.

``I don't think (the California decision) was as much of a statement of Bush's support for ethanol, but the political realities of the moment,'' said Neil Harl, agriculture economist at Iowa State University.