If the mandate is phased out, the farmers will go bust.
Cruz couldn't care less. Goldman Sachs will take care of him.
Posted on 01/21/2016 2:17:48 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
One of the most destructive environmental subsidies in the United States has found an enthusiastic supporter in Donald Trump.
"The EPA should ensure that biofuel ... blend levels match the statutory level set by Congress," he said yesterday in Iowa, adding that he was "there with you 100 percent" on continuing federal support for ethanol. "You're going to get a really fair shake from me."
The ethanol lobby has rigorously courted Trump since April, arranging to speak at least weekly, including at least three in-person meetings, in addition to an ethanol-plant tour, the Wall Street Journal reports.
Trump's support for ethanol may win him votes in Iowa, but federal support for ethanol is a bum deal for Americans.
Under the 2007 Independence and Security Act, Congress mandated that the United States use 36 billion gallons of biofuels, including corn ethanol and cellulosic biofuel, by 2022.
And the federal government not only requires the use of ethanol; it also subsides it. Tax credits between 1978 and 2012 cost the Treasury as much as $40 billion. Moreover, numerous other federal programs, spanning multiple agencies, allot billions of dollars to ethanol in the form of grants, loan guarantees, tax credits, and other subsidies.
Taxpayers suffer in other ways, too. Vehicles can drive fewer miles per gallon using ethanol blends than they would with pure gasoline. So Americans end up spending an extra $10 billion per year for fuel, the Institute for Energy Research estimates.
Ethanol also guzzles 40 percent of the U.S. corn crop, and the resulting scarcity drives up the price of food. This year alone, the Congressional Budget Office estimated, American consumers will spend $3.5 billion more on groceries because of the ethanol mandate.
Rising prices of corn feed have even put some small feedlots and ranches out of business. And as grocery prices increase, so does federal spending on programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
In a further hallmark of terrible policy, it's probably not even possible for Americans to meet the ambitious ethanol goals Congress and the bureaucrats at the EPA have envisioned.
Ethanol-intensive fuel blends can wreak havoc on car, lawnmower, and boat engines. In fact, many vehicle manufacturers will no longer offer warranties when ethanol comprises 10 percent or more of fuel; engine erosion simply becomes too common.
So, we can't really increase the total amount of ethanol mixed into our gasoline much more, but - especially as vehicles become more fuel efficient - Americans aren't consuming enough gasoline to meet the Renewable Fuel Standards with a 10 percent ethanol blend. The EPA acknowledged this inconvenient mismatch last spring, setting three-year ethanol-use requirements at 3.75 billion gallons below the legal minimums.
Ethanol's green benefit is also far from certain, explaining why even many within the environmentalist Left question - or outright oppose - the federal government's support.
It takes about 29 percent more energy to refine a gallon of ethanol than gasoline, and that process is often fueled by dirty sources like coal. Factor in the emissions generated during this production process, and ethanol sometimes comes in less green than old-fashioned gasoline. On top of that, burning ethanol also emits higher quantities of the chemical compounds that produce smog.
Then again, perhaps it's not surprising that Trump likes federal support of ethanol. After all, the real-estate mogul's business model has historically hinged on using tax abatements and other subsidies to make his building projects profitable.
(An example: As we reported in August, Trump Tower - which features a Gucci store Trump claimed was "worth more money than Romney" - has received a $163.775 million tax break from the city of New York.)
Many of Trump's constituents have rejected the so-called Republican establishment because of its corrupt preferential treatment for Wall Street and Big Business. But Trump's support for ethanol belies his populist Main Street rhetoric. In reality, he's just another rich, East Coast politician who would prop up special interests at the expense of the taxpayer.
-Jillian Kay Melchior writes for National Review as a Thomas L. Rhodes Fellow for the Franklin Center. She is also a senior fellow at the Independent Women's Forum and the Tony Blankley Fellow at the Steamboat Institute.
No matter - it might get donnie more votes.
I just don’t want to have to put the fecal crap into my cars tank!
We have no shortage of oil. There’s a glut if you hadn’t notice... In fact our own oil producers could use more demand right now. Our own oil is much cheaper than ethanol and contains significantly more energy per gallon. Everyone mileage would go and it would cost less and none of it would have anything to do with OPEC.
Do you have any idea how many Iowa jobs are on the line? I don’t agree with the subsidy, but; we can’t kill these jobs before we shrink the FED bureaucracy and before we create new jobs. We damn sure do not need more living on Gov programs. I do not even notice my money going there as much as I see it going to state, fed and other gas taxes.
Alternatives to fuel are a good thing that the government should invest in , because buying Saudi oil is what fuels terrorism.
Yes it is.
Ethanol in yer gas tank AINT!
I don't mind the subsidy, as much as I do having to put it in my car!!!!
That's the TRUTH! You've said so yourself many times now.
Do you know which stations sell sober gasoline? Very few, and we all know where they are.
Trump is supporting crony capitalists against Americans, who PAY HIGHER GAS PRICES to support these companies through ethanol quotas. Ethanol also damages engines.
Ethanol Companies Get Boost From U.S. Quotas
Anything to screw OPEC who are ripping Americans off
Fracking "screws" OPEC and doesn't cost taxpayers a dime.
Aside from Cruz, Trump agrees with all the other candidates in the race, and every candidate who has come before, who have supported ethanol subsidies to buy votes in Iowa.
If the mandate is phased out, the farmers will go bust.
Cruz couldn't care less. Goldman Sachs will take care of him.
Hell the only good thing Obama has said i genuinely agreed on him was that America needs to invest in alternative fuels so we could stop buying oil from the Saudis
And prices would be lower without ethanol quotas.
So we should thank Trump for supporting crony capitalism?
Thank you Trump for trying to make gas prices higher. May we have another subsidy?
Paying a higher price for fuel so we can stop funding states that prop up jihadis is a sacrifice we should bare
It might be nice to have our oil producers be profitable too. That industry is crashing right now. It also supplies jobs and national security. More demand would help them out.
Through government you pick winners and losers. It is whomever has the best lobbiest and on goes the sewers of Washington. How about letting us consumers decide what we want to buy?
You talk about depression era laws to help farmers, that was the biggest business that employed the most people back then. Not anymore. Not even close. Things change.
So exactly how much oil to we buy form Saudi Arabia, virtually none. If you use more expensive fuels here you are only damaging consumers here that end up have a lower standard of living as a result while the rest of the world continues on using cheap oil and benefiting from it.
Think these things through.
Yay! Trump is going along to get along with Congress!
Yay! Trump is an outsider!
Yay! Trump supports ethanol quotas for special interests!
Yay! Trump is a "conservative"!
Yay! Yay! Yay!
Well Cruz was advocating changing the law, not expanding its use. Not even remotely the same thing. At least be honest.
If the corn belt would invest in power generation by an ethanol burning engine, it would be Win Win Win!
Not just for our beloved farmers, but from the nation they would be supplying power to from a renewable resource!
Plus it would be even ANOTHER source local jobs!
Plus a source for state revenue!
No longer dependent on a handout, but giving a hand up and walking upright.
“Paying a higher price for fuel so we can stop funding states that prop up jihadis is a sacrifice we should bare”
That makes no logic sense at all.
LOL!
The Trump team thanks you for supporting higher gas prices to get Trump elected.
Yay!
Branstad, the governor, convinced Trump apparently on a one on one, that ethanol on the whole is good for the country.
Now, I don’t know where it stands now as being subsidized. I heard that it is not subsidized any more, but the mandates are, ie that a certain percentage of ethanol needs to be in our gas.
What bugs me, is why don’t WE have a choice? I mean a legitimate affordable choice? I can buy gas without ethanol, but it’s almost double the price. This is not fair or right.
So, now I’m leasing a car, and I don’t care what gas is going in it.
“Agricultural price support is good for America.”
No, what is good for america is giving $$$ to ME !! I can be your Dictator
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.