Renewable Cronyism

PowerLine ^ | December 29, 2015 | Steven Hayward

[Isara]

I take a more benign view than most conservatives of some of the dreadful budget compromises of the recent omnibus, because spending packages are always going to contain a lot of give and take. Better to look at the long game, to judge if any small victories or compromises may make possible better outcomes down the road. Such small details are as unsatisfying as cold peas, and often don't pan out, or get lost in the shuffle. But I think expecting Paul Ryan to turn around Congress in three months was more than a but unrealistic.

Much worse in my mind is the concessions to continued crony capitalism, such as the renewal of the Export-Import Bank, which was seemingly killed a few months ago but was revived in the omnibus by corporatist members of both parties. These and other kinds of subsidies and mandates are more politically corrupting than wasted money.

Even worse is the renewable fuels mandate that distorts Iowa politics. The Washington Post's Daily 202 e-mail report today shows corporatist Republicans at their very worst-mounting an effort to attack Ted Cruz because he won't bow to the Iowa corn gods:

Recognizing [Cruz] poses an existential threat to the special benefits it receives from the government, the corn lobby is going all in to stop Cruz in Iowa.

Eric Branstad, the son of the popular Republican governor, is leading an industry-funded initiative called America's Renewable Future. The group says it has hired 17 field staffers-more than some of the presidential campaigns have themselves-and already collected pledges from more than 50,000 people to make the issue a priority when they caucus. There are also radio ads, direct mail and robocalls.

GOP operative Nick Ryan is working for both the Branstad group and is currently on TV with a separate $200,000 advertising campaign, from the so-called "Iowa Progress Project," which attacks Cruz on the same issue. The commercial, running in the Sioux City market, slams Steve King, one of the most conservative members in the House, for endorsing Cruz. King, who represents an agriculture-heavy district, has supported the RFS.

"Cruz is the most anti-ethanol, anti-renewable fuel, of all the candidates," the governor, Terry Branstad, told Bloomberg earlier this month. "They've got a whole army of people that are working on this ... If they are able to stop the Cruz momentum, that will show the real clout of the renewables."

Calling Cruz "the most anti-ethanol, anti-renewable fuel, of all the candidates" is a terrific endorsement! Pretty sure I know who I'd caucus for if I lived in Iowa right now. Need more reason? Let's keep going with the Post's analysis:

Here's the bottom line: If Cruz wins Iowa, it could become untenable for a Republican to embrace the RFS in 2020 and win over fiscal conservatives. Outside groups - and major donors - will be able to cite Cruz's victory and refuse to be as forgiving as they have historically of a politician breaking with free-market orthodoxy in the name of political exigency.

"The ethanol mandate represents the kind of Washington insider politics that taxpayers hate," Club for Growth President David McIntosh told the 202. "The fact that Sen. Cruz is leading in Iowa and has been clear in his opposition to the mandate should put all of the subsidy-hunting lobbyists on notice that their days are numbered."

A spokeswoman for America's Renewable Future, Majda Sarki, said there's still more than a month to defeat Cruz. But she both warned and acknowledged that, if he wins, "It would kill investment in second generation biofuels" by creating "uncertainty" about future levels of government support.

P.S. Guess who's come out in favor of the ethanol mandate? Three clues: he's very rich, very loud, and has wacky hair.

[Isara]

Calling Cruz "the most anti-ethanol, anti-renewable fuel, of all the candidates" is a terrific endorsement!

[Isara]

P.S. Guess who's come out in favor of the ethanol mandate? Three clues: he's very rich, very loud, and has wacky hair.

[DesertRhino]

“Better to look at the long game”

Ahhh yes,, the beloved long game. That’s the one we have been secretly winning for the last 25 years, right?

[DesertRhino]

I want some short game wins. Big ones. You know, like the Democrats get to have.

[DesertRhino]

Don’t know how to break it to you. But Iowa corn subsidies is not the main battlefield of the electorate just at the moment. Try borders out of control and losing in every trade and diplomatic deal.

After a year or two of corrective action, VP Cruz can be tasked with corn subsidies.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Screw IA. These clowns care more about burning food for fuel than about their fellow countryman. I just paid $30 for two NY strip steaks and it ain’t due to a shortage of beef.

[DesertRhino]

Letting Iowa always go first is a nutty establishment plot to pick a very progressive mentality state, with a malleable and dishonest caucus system they can manipulate.

[SamuraiScot]

I just paid $30 for two NY strip steaks . . .

And that ain't all. I just paid $83.71 to have the carburetor on my snowblower--used for one full season--soaked and cleaned. The shop said ethanol in the fuel caused deposits and pitting so the engine no longer would start. The fellow added that fire departments and EMS only use ethanol-free fuel, 'cuz their stuff has to work.

The dollar amount of the damage to engines nationwide over the years, added to the inflation of food prices, would make a great campaign weapon.

[Isara]

Presidential Candidates Comparison (Cruz vs. Trump)

Please click on the pictures at the top of the columns for more details on the ratings of the candidates.

Budget, Spending & Debt
Civil Liberties
Education
Energy & Environment
Foreign Policy & Defense
Free Market
Health Care & Entitlements
Immigration
Moral Issues
Second Amendment
Taxes, Economy & Trade

More at Conservative Review: https://www.conservativereview.com/2016-presidential-candidates

[Isara]

In case you don't know, Trump supported TARP, auto bailout and Porkulus bill, i.e., Trump is for big government and big businesses.

And, of course, he is for Renewable Fuel Standard (ethanol mandate), so governement can pick winners and losers (cronysm).

Trump's Record on Free-market Issue: (from the Conservative Review)

Trump has a terrible record on free market issues. The only bright spot is the Federal Reserve's quantitative easing, but this glimmer is countermanded by his repeated support for bailing out Wall Street and the auto industry, and increased stimulus spending. Of particular concern is Trump's belief that the government can use eminent domain powers to seize private property in the name of private economic development. This comes as no surprise, given his support for using eminent domain to profit his own company.

Trump supported the Supreme Court’s 2005 decision in Kelo v. City of London, allowing public authorities to seize private land for economic development by private investors; Trump said, “I happen to agree with [the decision] 100 percent.” (National Review)  This is no surprise given Trump’s attempt to use eminent domain in his own line of work. (Institute for Justice)

Trump supported President Obama’s 2009 stimulus, saying: “The word stimulus is probably not used in its fullest…you know, certain of the things that were given weren't really stimulus. They were pork, as we call it, or they were gifts to certain people. But overall, I think he's [President Obama] doing very well. You do need stimulus and you do have to keep the banks alive.” (CNN) 

Trump supported TARP, saying, "You had to do something to shore up the banks, because ... you would have had a run on every bank." (CNN) 

Trump supported the 2008 auto bailout, saying, “I think the government should stand behind them 100 percent. You cannot lose the auto companies. They’re great. They make wonderful products.” He also said that the federal government could “easily save the companies.” (Daily Caller) 

Trump criticized the Federal Reserve’s intervention in the debt market, saying quantitative easing creates “phony numbers” that mislead the marketplace and “will not ultimately benefit the economy. The dollar will go down in value and inflation will start rearing its ugly head.” (CNBC) 

Donald Trump has a history of using eminent domain to complete business deals. Multiple times Trump has supported the use of government agencies to take possession of homes and businesses for use in his private business plans. Eminent domain seizures are reserved only for public use of property rather than abuse by the government taking property from one individual and giving to another. (Washington Post) 

Donald Trump has sought and received crony capitalist tax breaks for his commercial properties in New York. These tax breaks, and even an abatement, force the property taxes of other property owners to rise at the expense of the connected. Special treatment for one business or industry over another with the tax code conflicts with free market principles. (National Review) 

In 2009, Trump supported Barack Obama's call for limits on the pay of executives. (CNN)

[Tzimisce]

Better to look at the long game, to judge if any small victories or compromises may make possible better outcomes down the road.

....your look at the "long game" doesn't include seeing a GIANT TIDAL WAVE of debt needing to paid off?

[trebb]

P.S. Guess who's come out in favor of the ethanol mandate? Three clues: he's very rich, very loud, and has wacky hair.

Thass nice - if that's the worst thing about him, he's still viable, but only if Cruz stumbles..