If the mandate is phased out, the farmers will go bust.
Cruz couldn't care less. Goldman Sachs will take care of him.
Trump has always been a supporter and benefitted from Crony Capitalism.
There is no scarcity of food in America and food prices are at historic lows. Agricultural price supports ensure a stable food supply and prevent dangerous deflationary forces from wrecking havoc in our economy. We learned this lesson the hard way during the depression. Agricultural price support is good for America.
Buy your fuel from Iowa,
or al-Queda and al-Exxon
take your pick
I’ve listened to Trump’s response in regards to ethanol. Basically he’s pro-American industry. Anything to screw OPEC who are ripping Americans off
“match the statutory level set by Congress”
Oh! The horror of it! Donald Trump is advocating following the laws made by Congress! This is definitely not Conservative! ;-)
Trump says what he has too, where and when he needs to say it.
Meet the New Boss!
Same as the Old Boss!
No matter - it might get donnie more votes.
I just don’t want to have to put the fecal crap into my cars tank!
Alternatives to fuel are a good thing that the government should invest in , because buying Saudi oil is what fuels terrorism.
If the mandate is phased out, the farmers will go bust.
Cruz couldn't care less. Goldman Sachs will take care of him.
I would rather have my car run badly than have to live in fear of a doomed Amercan culture. I am tired of accommodating non English speaking people.
I would support scrapping the ethanol program.
But let me ask you this:
In what states, post-Iowa, is ethanol an issue in the primary campaign for either party?
NH?
SC?
Florida?
NV?
If not any of them, which super-Tuesday states?
You know the answer: none of the above.
And do you know why, because VOTERS ELSEWHERE LOOK AT THIS AS A SMALL ISSUE IN THE OVERALL CAMPAIGN.
And let me ask you this:
If this is such a big issue, tell me in which year the non-Iowa states (you know, the other 49 states) have made this a big issue on the Senate floor, or on the floor of the House?
2015?
2014?
2013?
Any year in this century?
What about the 90s?
Sure, you can google this issue with regard to congress and get plenty of hits, there have been plenty of proposals, but in which year did congress say: no more ethanol.
After all, Iowa is only 1/50 states. (Notice I am using the 50 number, not the Obama-count 57 number which might change the math somewhat if used.)
The answer is: this issue has NOT been addressed by this country as a whole and everyone just assumes that it is just part of the quirky nominating process in the US to give Iowa their damn ethanol subsidies.
Do I like it? No. Has ANYONE done anything about it? No.
Is it my Number One issue (stacked against things like the Muslim Invasion of the Western world): no.
Is it the Number One Issue of Trump Voters (stacked against things like the Muslim Invasion of the Western World): no.
So Trump is not going to fix this for you, Oh Great Conservative Purists.
Deal with it.
I want a wall.
I want the muslim invasion kept out.
I want an end to ethanol subsidies (but not as much as I want a wall and the muslim invasion kept out).
So go ahead, whine, wail, gnash your teeth, jump up and down, hold your breath until you turn blue... or even something more futile, vote Canadian in the primary... but it won’t change the minds or votes of the broad majority of the Republican voters in ANY of the post-Iowa states.
So deal with it.
Ethanol is about the 98th most important issue facing the country, right between Kelo and Gardasil.
Still trashing Trump without having anything good to say or post—ever—about Cruz.
You must still be working for the GOPe.
yeah it’s all Trumps fault..
this as a political scientist,, you know one of Trump’s major positives is he is number one by 40% or more on being the best candidate to bring the economy back.. this is really a no poll changing subject so it’s to Trump’s major advantage they keep talking about ethanol.... hey did you hear Trump likes ethanol can we start 10 daily threads on it until Iowa gets together in a few weeks?.. this subject has NEVER moved one blinkin poll number in the history of Presidential campaigns.. so Trump says please keep talking about this it’s like taking a knee at the end of a football game
If you don’t like Trump’s pandering to Iowan farmers, just be patient. His position on ethanol will change as necessary. It must be great to lead a personality cult.
But it’s good for his election chances and probably his wallet. And really, isn’t that far more important than American taxpayers?
In discussing ethanol from corn, we need to consider the factors of supply, demand and cost of production. I think Trump has examined the economy of corn and how the introduction of the ethanol economy makes that product bring the maximum benefit to both the consumer and the producer.
We have seen how the cost of corn production is driven by oil prices, fertilizer, seed etc. which in the past has driven up corn prices. Today the price of corn, if it were primarily used for food, would be lower then the cost of production because there is no market for all of the corn U.S. growers are capable of producing. Because of technology, U.S. corn production has gone from and average of 35-50 bushels per acre to close to 200 average today. With the increased costs of production, the profitability of raising corn quickly reaches a threshold where crop failures can create a disastrous results. To increase demand and raise prices so that corn producers can operate in the safety margin of profitability, U.S. growers have been paid by government not to grow corn.
One needs to understand supply/demand economics to see the value ethanol production has on corn’s price and the profitability to raise it. Corn prices will rise if there are markets for it. If not, corn prices will go down and with it, cause corn production to go down until the market price comes to a point that it is profitable to raise it. In fact, this encourages producers to grow less corn to drive profits as high as possible. When this happens, and if food production is the only use of corn, you will not like what happens. Ethanol production for fuel is like a buffer on the demand side of the equation. When demand is low from the food production side, the production for fuel will increases the demand which increases the price and makes the production profitable. This is the demand side of the equations.
Now on the supply side, when more corn is produced, it should drop the price for the consumer. That is not good for the producer because it reduces the profitability to produce corn. However, with the use of corn for ethanol, corn is made profitable to produce, no matter how much is produced. That is because the price of ethanol is determined by the fuel market, not the food market. It is a win win situation for the producers and the consumer because the overall effect is it keeps the price to the consumer as low as possible while maximizing the profitability to raise it.
Pray tell, what is the strategy to change what we already have?
Does Cruz, the rigid and expert Constitutionalist write an executive order or something? Does he usurp the legislative branch and write his own spending bill?
Does he veto an entire omnibus legislation since he has no line item veto and become the target of the MSM government shutdown chorus? Is there a Stop Ethanol button on the big desk in the oval office?
Or is this a crystal clear perfect example of an empty campaign promise that they all spout but which makes no difference in the end?
Congratulations on everyone ( including Levin ) who are easily distracted while the country is at stake. The question is who can successfully pick up the twelve swing states that remain on the table. That is the only consideration left as to picking the nominee. The luxury of boutique issues and doctrinaire litmus tests ended decades ago when the playing field was still relatively level.
P.S. Diverting food crops to Ethanol added into fuels is plain stupid, just like countless other leftist idiocracies. It took me all of three seconds to state that fact. It doesn't require any discussion in the campaign unless you really want to lose this thing.
The Panderman shows he is no conservative once again. We are sick of subsidizing rich corn farmers in Iowa with our dwindling pay checks. We can’t afford to buy votes for that “very very rich” man.