Eğitimde Oyunlaştırma Yaklaşımının Kullanılması ile İlgili Araştırmalar

Um fator decisivo para a não renovação dos subídios ao etanol foi a formação de uma coalizão que Lewis (2012) chamou de "No2VEETC5, envolvendo associações empresariais diversas como a Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), National Turkey Federation e

National Restaurant Association, como organizações relacionadas à fome e desenvolvimento,

grupos agropecuários, grupos ambientalistas, defensores dos cortes orçamentário e do livre-

5_{Não foi encontrado nenhum documento oficializando a coalizão com essa nomenclatura, além dessa matéria}

comércio, tais como: Friends of the Earth6, Environmental Working Group, e ActionAid USA, Taxpayers for Common Sense, National Taxpayers Union e Competitive Enterprise Institute.

ErnstFriedman (2011) também ressaltou o fato de uma inusitada coalizão constituída por organizações que representam questões tradicionalmente em conflito entre si elaborou uma carta expressando seu apoio para acabar com os subsídios ao etanol. Nesta coalizão estariam organizações como o Sierra Club, Oxfam America, the Union of Concerned

Scientists, the National Restaurant Association, e associações produtoras de carne, aves e

produtos lácteos.

A Friends of the Earth e a Taxpayers for Common Sense já faziam parte da coalizão “Green scissors” criada desde 1994. A Green Scissors se descreve como uma coalizão diversificada de grupos de contribuintes, consumidores e ambientalistas que se reúnem para mostrar como o governo pode economizar bilhões de dólares de impostos e melhorar o meio- ambiente, por meio da elaboração de relatórios anuais que pretendem destacar os desperdícios encontrados nos gastos federais e que sejam ambientalmente prejudiciais. No relatório da

Green Scisors de 2010, seu posicionamento sobre o VEETC era:

Once the primary driver of ethanol consumption in the US, VEETC no longer encourages biofuel consumption because the RFS now mandates the purchase of ethanol by fuel blenders at a greater volume than the market demands e VEETC tax credit serves only as another form of corporate welfare for some of the most pro table companies in the world. Combined, the RFS and VEETC will subsidize corn ethanol at approximately $56 billion dollars from 2011-2015, including both direct (tax credits) and indirect (market price support) subsidies congress could save taxpayers money and help the environment by eliminating both the VEETC and the RFS mandate for corn ethanol. (GREEN SCISORS, 2010, p. 11)

Ben Schreiber (2015) afirmou que o etanol de milho se tornou alvo da Friends of the

Earth a partir de 2007, demostrando seu posicionamento contra o VEETC e trabalhando para

que fosse extinto tanto em 2010 quanto em 2011, principalmente buscando congregar outros interesses contrários para sua Coalition Building strategy.

Friends of the Earth opposed the VEETC: we saw it unnecessary. It was a bad use of taxpayers’ dollars. […] Friends of the Earth, at that point, was very much a convener, we spent a lot of time organizing other environmental groups and other interests who want support of VEETC concerns and got them focus on VEETC. We wrote a roll of letters, we respond a roll of bills, roll of lobbying, we do have a membership but that was a campaign that was actually in some ways much more focused on the cost of the subsidy and the fact of that was unnecessary with the mandate, that was a massive public support. (SCHREIBER, 2015)

6_{No site da Friends of the Earth é possível verificar uma compilação das ações e cartas enviadas aos}

congressistas defendendo o fim dos subsídios ao etanol. Disponível em: <http://www.foe.org/news/archives/biofuels-coalition-work> Acesso em: 20 maio 2012.

Outros grupos ambientalistas também atuavam na estratégia de convencer a opinião pública e os congressistas de que o VEETC deveria ser extinto. A EWG divulgou 10 razões pelas quais o Congresso deveria dizer não ao VEETC:

1. Tax credits should go only to truly renewable and sustainable energy alternatives. 2. Taxpayers have passed up $17 billion in revenue for virtually no gain in energy independence

3. Industry’s job creation and job loss claims are inflated. 4. VEETC’s expiration won’t affect farmers’ bottom line. 5. Corn prices and ethanol production will barely change. 6. Big oil companies like BP, not farmers, are the biggest winners. 7. Ethanol’s environmental benefits are dubious at best.

8. Wildlife habitat is being converted to grow corn.

9. Pollution flowing into the Gulf of Mexico has increased because of ethanol. 10. The economy would grow without VEETC. (KORTH, 2010)

A NRDC em seu Green Jobs Facts também argumentava que o etanol importado não deveria ser tarifado porque o VEETC já estaria benefiando os produtores do etanol de milho, além de afirmar que esse tipo de combustível não era sustentável e que estaria colaborando para o aquecimento global, além da contaminação da água:

Multiple federal policies encourage the production and consumption of ethanol as an alternative to gasoline. […] Ironically, we have no tariff on importing oil but impose a $0.54 per gallon tax on imported ethanol to protect domestic producers against foreign competition. The government also provides oil companies a $0.45 tax credit (the VEETC) for every gallon of ethanol blended with gasoline, regardless of environmental performance. The tax credit almost exclusively supports ethanol from corn, which, when all direct and indirect costs are added, creates more global warming pollution than the oil it is supposed to replace! On top of that, it increases water pollution, erodes our soils, and raises the price of corn fed to our livestock and sold in our stores. The cost of this redundancy is egregious: nearly $5.4 billion in 2010 alone and over $31 billion if the VEETC is extended for five years. (NRDC, 2010)

A nova coalizão também estava atuando na oposição a esquemas que previam substituir o VEETC por garantias a empréstimo para a construção de alcooldutos e créditos fiscais para a instalação de bombas de combustíveis flex-fuel para vender E-85 (motor de combustível feito com etanol 85%) nos postos de gasolina (LEWIS, 2012).7

No dia 14 de abril de 2011, a National Turkey Federation, com outros 15 grupos, organizou um fórum chamado “Corn Ethanol Policy in the 112th Congress” para tratar

7 _{Carta enviada por esses grupos ao Committee on Energy and Commerce pedindo que o VEETC não fosse}

renovado, disponível em: <http://www.idfa.org/files/resources/final_anti-veetc_coalition-letter_091211_e-c.pdf> Acesso em: 09 Jun 2012; e carta enviada pela Green Scissors aos deputados, disponível em: <http://greenscissors.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/GS-VEETC-Letter-House.pdf> Acesso em: 09 Jun 2012; Vídeo da campanha tentando convencer os candidatos a não apoiarem o etanol de milho, disponível em: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fOyI2mhTd8&feature=player_embedded>.

questões sobre o impacto do etanol de milho na independência energética, segurança alimentar e estabilidade nos países em desenvolvimento, responsabilidade fiscal e gestão ambiental. Neste evento, Tom Elam, presidente da FarmEcon LLC, teria declarado que o “Ethanol policy has added little, if anything, to the U.S. economy and has significantly raised

the cost of U.S. and global food production.” (BRANDENBERGER, 2011).

Para se ter noção da dimensão da disputa entre as coalizões pró e contra os subsídios ao etanol, só no primeiro trimestre de 2011, segundo o First Street CQPress (apud SCHROEDER, 2011b), foram gastos um total de aproximadamente US$12 milhões incorporados ambos os lados. Neste período, 32 empresas de lobby representaram 36 clientes, num montante de US$ 8.895.893,00 para pressionar os senadores, e mais 22 empresas de

lobby ativo representando 18 clientes a fim de pressionar os deputados, totalizando

US$3.645.862,08.

Se no início foi possível identificar que a GMA estava se aproveitando da crise derivada da alta das commodities, o movimento anti-etanol de milho ganhava cada vez mais aliados. Na carta enviada ao Comitê Ways and Means, no dia 12 de setembro de 2011, houve o apoio de 92 grupos, entidades e associações (Tabela 12), cujo conteúdo era:

The undersigned diverse group of business associations, taxpayer advocates, hunger and development organizations, agricultural groups, free-market groups, religious organizations, environmental groups, budget hawks, and public interest organizations urge you to allow the refundable Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC) to sunset this year and to resist calls for spending on infrastructure for conventional biofuels. The tax credit is already set to expire on December 31, 2011, and should not be renewed. Congress has the opportunity to end the $6 billion a year subsidy to gasoline refiners who blend corn ethanol into gasoline. At a time of spiraling deficits, we do not believe Congress should continue subsidizing gasoline refiners for something that they are already required to do by the Renewable Fuels Standard. Experts like the Congressional Budget Office and the Government Accountability Office have concluded that the subsidy is unnecessary, and leading economists agree that ending it would have little impact on ethanol production, prices or jobs. We urge you to let VEETC expire this year and resist calls for spending on infrastructure for conventional biofuels. As our country moves to reduce our budget deficit, it would be irresponsible to commit to new tax incentives or additional spending that continue to subsidize corn ethanol. (ActionAid USA et. Al., 2011)

Tabela 12- Coalizão anti-VEETC no final de 2011

ActionAid USA Africa Action

Alabama Poultry & Egg Association Alliance of Western Milk Producers American Bakers Association American Beverage Association American Frozen Food Institute American Jewish World Service

John Locke Foundation Kentucky Poultry Federation KyotoUSA

League of Conservation Voters Let Freedom Ring

Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns Michigan Allied Poultry Industries Milk Producers Council

American Meat Institute

Americans for Limited Government Americans for Prosperity

Association for Dressings & Sauces Beyond Pesticides

Bread for the World

Broiler & Egg Association of Minnesota California Dairy Campaign

California Poultry Federation California Safe Schools Center for Auto Safety Center for Biological Diversity Center for Food Safety

The Center for the Celebration of Creation Citizens for

Pennsylvania’s Future (PennFuture) Citizens for Tax

Justice

Clean Air Task Force Clean Water Action

Columban Center for Advocacy and Outreach Competitive Enterprise Institute

Council for Citizens Against Government Waste Dairy Producers of New Mexico

Dairy Producers of Utah Defenders of Wildlife Dogwood Alliance Earth Day Network Environment America

Environmental Working Group Food First

Foreign Policy In Focus Freedom Action FreedomWorks Friends of the Earth Georgia Milk Producers Georgia Poultry Federation Greenhorns

Greenpeace

Grocery Manufacturers Association Heartland Institute

Idaho Dairymen’s Association

Indiana State Poultry Association

International Center for Technology Assessment International Dairy Foods Association

Minnesota Turkey Growers Association Mississippi Poultry Federation

MoveOn.org

National Association of Margarine Manufacturers National Black Chamber of Commerce

National Catholic Rural Life Conference National Center for Public Policy Research National Chicken Council

National Council of Chain Restaurants National Meat Association

National Restaurant Association National Taxpayers Union National Turkey Federation National Wildlife Federation Natural Resources Defense Council

NETWORK, A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby

Nevada Dairy Commission North Carolina Poultry Federation

Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance Northwest Dairy Association

Northwest Environmental Defense Center Oil Change International

Oregon Dairy Farmers Association Oxfam America

Partners for the Land & Agricultural Needs of Traditional Peoples (PLANT)

Pax Christi USA The Poultry Federation Public Citizen

Safe Climate Campaign Safe Lawns Foundation Sierra Club

Snack Food Association Southeast Milk Inc.

Southern Alliance for Clean Energy Taxpayers for Common Sense Taxpayers Protection Alliance Tennessee Poultry Association Texas Poultry Federation

Union of Concerned Scientists U.S. Poultry and Egg Association Utah Dairy Producers

Virginia Poultry Federation Washington Fonte: ActionAid USA et. Al., 2011

Nesse sentido, é possível identificar que a coalizão contra os incentivos conseguiu se organizar e teve a capacidade de reorganizar seus valores de modo a incorporar interesses contrários para atingir uma política pública que existiu durante 30 anos. A seguir verificaremos como esse movimento se refletiu no Congresso.