Posted on 01/06/2016 11:23:15 AM PST by springwater13
...because, ya know, reduced demand and lower prices never lead to drastically reduced supply.
He was for it before he was against it. In between March 2015, he changed his position to an immediate repeal of RFS and now he flipped back to his March 2015 position.
FLIP FLOP FLIP. He’s John Kerry.
Cruz has supported RFS consistently. What he doesn’t support is Federal subsidies for it. He’s been clear, and as always, completely consistent.
But nice try. Meanwhile, let’s talk about your Kelo-loving, Democrat-contributing, single-payer health care conservatism. Whenever you’re ready.
What he is now saying is that he will do nothing about ethanol, so he can still claim to be free market while giving a wet kiss to Big Corn. Tedthanol is weaseling again.
Not yours. But rather, Trump’s.
You would do away altogether with the renewable fuel standard and wind production tax credit, correct?
A. "That is accurate. And I filed legislation to phase out the RFS over five years.
I support ethanol and biofuels and I support wind. Texas is the largest wind producer in the country. But both ethanol and wind can compete on their own merits. ... I would note couple weeks ago when I was in Iowa at the Agriculture Summit every other candidate there supported the RFS including some who previously had different positions. ... What you can count on from me is I'm going to tell you the truth and I'm going to do what I said I'm going to do.
And what was astonishing is that that received hearty applause from the crowd, and that was not the response I necessarily expected and I was certainly gratified by the reaction."
TED CRUZ... being consistant once again.... Nothing changed here
The article that has a misleading (on purpose) title
Senator Ted Cruz listens to Iowa farmers, supports phasing out the Renewable Fuel Standard (Ethanol) by 2022 - There fixed it.
He's always been going to phase it out. He's always been for deregulating it (breaking the blendwall).
From Jan 2015 (That's a year ago, for those of you in Rio Linda):
Cruz, though, opposes what he calls government intervention into the market for energy and has specifically proposed phasing out the RFS over five years. On Friday, he reiterated that position and said he'll maintain it regardless of the political cost in Iowa should he run for president. “I very strongly support corn and farmers and ethanol, but I don’t think Washington should pick winners and losers” Cruz said after a supporter asked him to clarify his stance. “I think what we need to do, instead of having a government mandated subsidy, we ought to do is remove the government barriers so that ethanol can end up having a larger share of the market through competition rather than through government putting mandates in place,” Cruz added.
src
So how many sTrumpets have thrown dirt in the air and claimed a filp-flop?
Check out the reprint of Rush’s comments about Trump that will appear today.
I don't know one way or the other.
But as a political observer I say this hurts Cruz as he will have to give a lengthy explanation many, many times before the campaign is over.
Time that could be spent on something else.
Ethanol is a piss-poor motor fuel.
If it were viable, there would be no need for subsidies.
Any politician that supports ethanol subsidies is a common pos.
The state director of an ethanol lobbyist group?
Yes, I see his statement as intentionally misleading.
Ted Cruz cannot as president, repeal laws already passed by congress and already signed into law. Nor has he ever implied that he could.
His previously submitted bill called for a 5 year phase out.
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/214430-ethanol-is-explosive-for-cruz-and-paul
I don't care what the politician Barnstead (who is under a lot of pressure because he supports Cruz) thinks. Look at what Cruz said in March and look at what Cruz is saying today.
I already posted on this thread the Cruz bill in March that says he wants to phase out over five years the RFS. That is the very same position that Cruz says in the video.
There is no flip on the issue.
The subsidy is set to expire in 2022 so Cruz will let it expire - that is not flip-floping.
So it has been a public declared issue for Ted Cruz longer than Donald Trump. Do you support the claim that Cruz copied Trump on this issue?
But he dismissed the protesters in Oregon and lost our support. Trump 2016
http://m.youtube.com/watch?sns=fb&v=bx4ocLdWE90
If you are against them, then you want to end them by a simple change in the law. This isn’t like promising to reverse Roe V Wade or Gay marriage that has gone to the Supreme Court.
What he is now saying is that he will do nothing about ethanol, so he can still claim to be free market while giving a wet kiss to Big Corn. Tedthanol is weaseling again
___________________________________________________________
His position hasn’t changed. Saying he has is disingenuous. If you want a President that can just ignore an existing law with a pen and phone call then you already have your guy in office. Cruz has always maintained that the existing law should sunset in 2022. Look at articles from early in the primary season on Cruz’ position or look to what others have posted.
It is all out there.
Is not a flip flop. The subsidy is set to expire and Crruz will let it expire.
You own the troll pushing liberal crony republican green energy claptrap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.