Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article

To: 2ndDivisionVet

It’s really disappointing to see these republican hopefuls pandering to the Iowa voters on ethanol. Every Presidential election, we are forced to go through this same silly exercise in trying to straddle the fence on this issue, and I do not understand why such small states as Iowa and New Hampshire get so much say in who our nominees will be. Corn ethanol is just a bad idea for fuel, as it not only requires more energy to come up with a gallon of fuel than gasoline, but it also diverts corn from food supplies, badly needed across the world.

Now, cellulosic ethanol, i.e., sugar cane ethanol, may make more sense, but in general, I don’t see how we justify subsidies to generate ethanol fuel, except to buy votes in the Iowa caucuses. And, as to those candidates who felt they could not do away with the RFS because it would be unfair to Iowa, well, so what? Some fuels are superior to others from a national perspective, and choices have to be made. Kudos to Cruz for not pandering and holding his position.


80 posted on 03/08/2015 12:20:40 PM PDT by mtrott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mtrott
...I don’t see how we justify subsidies to generate ethanol fuel, except to buy votes in the Iowa caucuses.

Well said.

82 posted on 03/08/2015 12:31:21 PM PDT by Finny (Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. -- Psalm 119:105)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
GOP Club
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson