Appearing on CNBC's "The Call'' yesterday, New Hampshire U.S. Sen. Judd Gregg touted his proposal to reduce the tariff on imported ethanol to help lower gas prices.

Gregg also criticized Democrats for what he called a political stunt that could jeopardize health-care access for millions of the country's seniors.

On "The Call,'' Gregg said Brazilian sugar-based ethanol is much cheaper to produce than domestic, corn-based ethanol. He said domestic ethanol cannot be moved through pipelines, making it more expensive for consumers on the East and West coasts.

He said reducing the tariff is a reasonable solution that would help East Coast consumers with lower gasoline prices.

"I wanted to eliminate the tariff altogether, but that got killed by my friends in the Senate who grow corn in the Midwest," Gregg said.

He said using corn to produce ethanol has been a disaster, driving food prices up around the world. Gregg noted corn topped $7 a bushel yesterday and said the market should set the price.

Subsidizing the production of ethanol "is not good economic policy and (results in) not enough food for the people in the world to eat," Gregg said.

►Click here for video of Sen. Judd Gregg's appearance on 'The Call.'

Under the bill, sponsored by Gregg and Democratic California U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the current 54-cents-a-gallon tariff on imported ethanol would be lowered to 45 cents a gallon, which is the same as the subsidy for producing ethanol in the latest Farm Bill.

The bill prohibits the tariff on imported ethanol from being higher than the subsidy to produce ethanol.

Gregg said the bill encourages the use of an alternative energy source rather than depending on foreign oil.

This year, refineries will be required to use 9 billion gallons of ethanol under the Renewable Fuels Standard, according to information from Gregg's office.

Faced with an 11 percent cut in payments July 1 to physicians treating Medicare patients, Democrats filled a bill leaving many key areas blank, Gregg said, rather than bringing forward a responsible dealing with the issue and funding essential services.

Instead of a responsible bipartisan effort, the Democrats' bill adds billions of dollars of entitlement spending that further threatens the fiscal viability of the Medicare program.

Gregg said, "I'm disappointed that the Democrats decided to walk away from our months-long bipartisan process to produce a responsible bill for our nation's seniors in favor of political posturing and election year gimmicks."

"Instead of rolling up our sleeves and working together for a viable solution, we are spending our time on a partisan, political stunt that could jeopardize access for millions of seniors," Gregg said. "It is clear we need to resume working in a bipartisan manner, and offer real legislation with real language that has the potential to ensure quality care for our seniors and the financial well-being of our future generations."