Posted on 01/20/2016 3:24:57 PM PST by Isara
EXETER, N.H.-In Iowa, Ted Cruz is under fire from the highest-ranking Republican in the state over his opposition to the ethanol mandate. But Cruz found a friendlier audience for that position in New Hampshire on Wednesday.
"There should be no mandates, no subsidies whatsoever for any energy source, whether ethanol or oil and gas or anything else," he said at a town hall here after a voter expressed concern that perhaps he was now in favor of the Renewable Fuel Standard. Stressing that he does not support that ethanol mandate, Cruz continued, "Right now I am the only major candidate in Iowa who is taking that position. Right now, my opponents are all attacking me."
Those remarks played well in New Hampshire, even as Cruz is grappling with fall-out over the issue in Iowa. A day earlier, Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad indicated that he wanted to see Cruz defeated in Iowa because he opposes the ethanol mandate. The remarks from the popular governor, who has pledged to stay neutral in the caucuses and hasn't endorsed since 1996, were highly unusual (his son, Eric Branstad, is also leading a pro-ethanol group that has tussled with Cruz). The comments come as Cruz faces an increasingly tough race for first place in the state, a place where he for a time appeared to be the dominant poll-leader but has since seen that lead over Donald Trump narrow considerably.
"Just yesterday, Donald Trump promised not only to protect the ethanol mandate, but to expand it," he continued. "To have the federal government do even more picking winners and losers by mandating ethanol be a larger part of the markets. I'm getting hit literally with millions of dollars of attacks on exactly this issue."
He went on to describe the Iowa Ag Summit last spring, in which many of the candidates went to "kiss the ring" of the ethanol industry, but where he spelled out his support for phasing out the mandate over five years.
"Listen, when I said that, I didn't know if they would boo and throw tomatoes," he said. "That's like coming up to New Hampshire and saying, 'I'm for the Broncos.'"
"It's just not a safe course of action," he continued. "I'm not for the Broncos, by the way. That was a hypothetical. Go Patriots."
Please click on the dots 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
Trump wants to expand the EPA
And, of course, he is for Renewable Fuel Standard (ethanol mandate), so governement can pick winners and losers.
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)
There should never be subsidies with any part of our economy. A product should fail or succeed due to market conditions. If something can’t succeed on its own due to supply and demand, then it should fail.
The Dangers of Ethanol and the damage it does
Environmental issues and what is happening
On this week’s Jacki Daily Show, Jacki speaks with Pam Villarreal of the National Center for Policy Analysis about other options besides college. She also talks with the Car Coach, Lauren Fix(www.laurenfix.com)about how bad E15 ethanol is for your cars. She is also joined by the CEO of Nouveau Inc, Brigham McCown, to discuss federal transportation safety and energy infrastructure policy.
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/fracking-lifts-hs-drop-out-rate-real-oil-safety-record-pipelines-rail-ethanol15-kills-warranties
.
On this week’s show Jacki speaks with Kathleen Hartnett White of the Texas Public Policy Foundation about her new book, Fueling Freedom, laying out the economic and ethical case for fossil fuels. She also weighs in on the President’s job-killing “Clean Power Plan.” Jacki also talks with Jim Amos, Chairman of Proctor & Gamble’s Franchising Division, about why the International Franchise Association opposes the Renewable Fuel Standard.
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/why-wendys-opposes-ethanol-law-amospg-franchising-fossil-fuels-lift-billions-from-poverty-white
.
Jacki is joined by Vance Ginn, an Economist in the Center for Fiscal Policy at the Texas Public Policy Foundation in Austin, TX. Jacki speaks with Leigh Thompson, Attorney & Policy Analyst at the Center for the American Future &
Armstrong Center for Energy and the Environment Texas Public Policy Foundation.
Jacki also talks with TX State Geologist, Dr. Scott Tinker,about his new project to track and study earthquakes in Texas.
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/green-jobs-fail-cas-critters-before-humans-water-policy-txs-new-earthquake-fracking-study
.
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/moral-case-for-fossil-fuels-restricting-them-means-loss-of-human-life-ethanol-mandate-kills-jobs
.
On this week’s show, Jacki is joined by Kathleen Hartnett White, who will talk about Obama’s new ozone rules: No Cost Too High, No Risk Too Low. Then Mike Ciandella of the Media Research Center talks about his new publication: “Climate Hypocrites and the Media Who Love Them; The Not-So-Green Habits of Hollywood Gasbags.” Then, Gifford Briggs of the Louisiana Oil and Gas Association talks about how lawsuits against Louisiana energy companies are enriching lawyers, killing tens of thousands of jobs, hurting the economy for the people of LA, and doing nothing to clean LA’s environment.
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/hollywood-climate-hypocrites
.
Jacki is joined by Rob Henneke of the Texas Public Policy Foundation to discuss the upcoming At the Crossroads: Energy & Climate Policy Summit on November 19th 2015 Jacki is also joined by Robert Zubrin, author of” Merchants of Despair: Radical Environmentalists, Criminal Pseudo-Scientists, and the Fatal Cult of Antihumanism”
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/radical-environmentalist-are-anti-humanist-11815
.
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/media-bias-with-climate-news
.
Do Meat Eaters or Vegans create more carbon emissions? Jacki answers that question on this week’s Jacki Daily show.
Jacki is joined by Chet Thompson the President of The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers to discuss the renewable fuel standard.
Jacki also talks with Leigh Thompson of the Texas Public Foundation to discuss the Paris Climate Conference and the upcoming Policy Orientation on January 6th, 2016.
https://soundcloud.com/jacki-daily/the-radical-green-movement-and-vegans-are-hurting-the-earth
.
A Frightening History of the Militant Greens
http://jackidaily.com/2016/01/08/a-frightening-history-of-the-militant-greens/
Robert Zubrin’s book, Merchants of Despair, shows how some of the most tragic events of the 19th and 20th centuries were inspired by radical environmentalists who used the “green†agenda to mask scary ambitions.
They can buy all the politicians and advertising they like, I am not biting.
Give ethanol hell Ted.
Good.
Subsidies and mandates are the antithesis of what Conservatism is about.
He also, apparently, refuses to budge wrt to providing proof that he is, at least, a US citizen by providing his CRBA.
Stonewalling & rationalizing doesn’t cut it. It’s not going to go away.
Just out of curiosity, do you think that medical expenses and home mortgage interest should no longer be tax deductible?
Isn't this exactly the type of Conservative we have been begging for since 1989?
I do. Dump the deductions and lower the rates.
I do. Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income in taxes. Everyone. No exceptions. No personal deductions. For every dollar you make, part of it goes to the government regardless if it is the first dollar earned or the last. If you earn $500/yr, you pay taxes. If you earn $5 billion/yr, you pay taxes. And you pay the same percentage as the person making $500/yr. No exceptions.
And if you decide not to work (i.e. not pay taxes), then you don't get to vote. Only people that are vested in our government (i.e. taxpayers) get to vote.
Unless Donald Trump is for them, of course . . .
</sarc>
If I could have my druthers. Eliminate the IRS... Get a flat consumption tax on new goods only. Eliminate all other forms of taxation, eliminate all payroll taxes. Eliminate tax deductions.
I just don’t think a product should be given an elevated status (subsidy) because somebody feels it needs a leg up.
I believe the government should not be in the business of picking winners or losers. Like Solyndra for example.
But with that said... in our current tax system as is, if there is a deduction I am going to take it. To not do so is to shoot myself in the foot. So if I would actually qualify for a deduction I would take it
My question to you is:
Do you think that a government subsidy that picks winners and losers in the economy is the same as taking a personal income tax deduction? Curious because I have never thought about that.
The ethanol mandate.
Another George Dubya Bush turd dropped in the nations punch bowl.
Floating around in there with the Patriot Act, the unionized Government TSA airport screeners, the No Child Left Behind act, the $700 billion financial bailout and the “Religion Of Peace” mantra.
Yup. There are those who give lip service to supporting conservatives. Then there are those who actually support conservatives. Finally there are the trolls who smear and work against conservatives.
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.