Connect with us

Politics

Good news: Dems admit ethanol mandate failed – Bad news: Trump promised to save it

Published

on

During the 2016 GOP presidential primaries, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) took a political gamble leading up to the Iowa caucus when he called for major changes to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program, including a call to end ethanol subsidies. Meanwhile, Donald Trump praised ethanol and called for raising the standard in an attempt to curry enough political favor in the Big Corn state to beat Cruz. Despite the reality that most of the corn used in ethanol production came from Iowa, Cruz beat Trump.

Created as a means to combat so-called climate change, the RFS required that ever-increasing amounts of ethanol be blended into gasoline. And despite documented evidence of ethanol’s damage to consumers and the environment, the RFS became little more than another taxpayer-subsidized, crony-capitalist, corporate-welfare program where the federal government picks the winners (Big Corn) and the losers (everyone else).

In a sort of good news/bad news announcement last week, key Democrats behind the biofuel push contained in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 announced that they had “made a mistake” with the ethanol mandate, and they introduced new legislation to fix it.

“The law hasn’t worked out as we intended,” said former California Congressman and Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee Henry Waxman. Following a joint call with reporters, Waxman joined current members of Congress, Rep. Peter Welch (D-VT) and Sen Tom Udall (D-NM), to introduce legislation that will phase out corn-based ethanol. Speaking for the group, Welch said:

“We’ve now had more than a decade of experience with it, and it had the best of intentions. But it has turned out to be a well-intended flop.

“It actually doesn’t cut down on greenhouse gas emissions, it expands them. It’s had a significant impact on overplanting in fragile areas of the corn belt. It has had significant impacts on small engines. And it’s also had a significant impact on feed prices … and there is a lot of evidence it has increased the cost of food.”

So, that’s the good news. The bad news is that Trump promised to protect corn-based ethanol and he, along with a host of ethanol-loving Republicans from red state producers of corn, wants the RFS to stay.

It was just a few months ago that Trump caved to Big Corn when he overruled an effort by EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt to make major modifications to the RFS following heavy resistance from a gang of Midwestern Senators led by Chuck Grassley. And with his reelection campaign officially launched, Trump will be in campaign mode for the rest of his first term as he prepares for Iowa in 2020.

Trump promised in 2016 to protect ethanol mandates, a promise that he’s already bragged about keeping. And even though he’s demonstrated a propensity to break his promises when politically convenient, it’s very likely that Trump will continue to keep his ethanol promise to Iowa.

Not because it’s good for America, but because it’s good for his campaign.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is nationally syndicated with Salem Radio Network and can be heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Advertisement
5 Comments

5 Comments

  1. Matthew Frihart

    March 12, 2018 at 9:44 am

    I gotta say on this one, trump is wrong. Hopefully he’ll get more info and come around.

  2. Dogood

    March 12, 2018 at 10:12 am

    This is one promise I hope Trump doesn’t keep, but I’m afraid he will. Yet he’s deregulating as much as he can via executive actions.

  3. Larry Folds

    March 12, 2018 at 11:10 am

    Trump is only a little better than a democrat president. He has totally blown up the gun rights people in favor of gun control, not common sense control, just plain gun control. He has signaled the anti-gun lobby to go after the NRA and us, the gun owners. He told Feinstein to put her dream list of guns to ban and Marco Rubio is helping her. Cornyn is showing his anti-gun colors by depriving 18-21 year olds of their rights, may as well take their voting rights away if we can’t trust them to carry a gun even to go hunting. Roberts of KS is showing his anti-gun colors and on and on it goes all because Trump call them the cover to do it. FL and IL has already banned whole groups from purchasing weapons to defend themselves. Trump is a traitor and I will not support him in the future. Yeah, he made nice with the NRA but his dog whistle has already blown and now he tries to distance himself so he can have his cake and eat it too.

  4. Steve in Missouri

    March 12, 2018 at 1:43 pm

    The corn or grain alcohol mandate not likely to be overcome. Going by these enormous ethanol factories in corn growing areas on roads and highways, they are enormous buildings and grain storage bins on the plains. I had gone by them in Kansas, but they are all over in the corn growing areas, they have turned farm communities into factory, industrial centers. I’m sure it will be enormously difficult to change now that it’s been instituted on a widespread scale.
    Definitely politics, and electoral college politics are involved. Thousands, if not millions of jobs are involved.
    International fuel alcohol programs are widespread as well. I think Brazil has an enormous sugar cane industry, nearly 600 million tons of sugar cane, much of it converted to ethanol to supply vehicle fuel, while biomass is used to produce electricity.
    Even with that, due to sugar being produced from the sugar cane and being more cost effective than alcohol, Brazil has at times imported ethanol for vehicle fuel from the US.

    • Charlie Peters

      April 9, 2018 at 1:24 pm

      Ethanol Waiver for Clean Air & Clean Water

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinions

Where is America headed?

Published

on

Where is America headed

Have you ever wondered why the Framers of the U.S. Constitution mandated that the President of the United States must be at least 35 years of age? Looking at this in historical perspective, we know that the average age in the United States today is around 78, whereas when the Constitution was written, it was about half that. Obviously, sturdy individuals would be needed who could outlive their expectancy.

In Hawaiian culture, kupuna are elders who have the life experience to be family and community leaders. This is the same concept that those who set America on course understood as vital to having leaders who actually know how to lead.

This is not to say that 77-year-old Bernie Sanders is qualified to be president, whereas 37-year-old Tulsi Gabbard is not. I would submit that neither embodies the American vision. Donald Trump is 72-years-old but lived a very different life from most of the rest of us, having been born into a wealthy family of privilege.

But life experience is an extremely urgent and essential factor in choosing leaders. Whereas I’m sure Barack Obama was actually born in Hawaii, his life experience growing up in Indonesia under foreign Islamic influence is at odds with the life experience we have favored in previous presidents.

So where do we go from here?

We can stay with the insomniac who tweets bizarrely in the middle of the night because wannabes vicariously see themselves in his place. Or, we can choose one among dozens from the other party who are ready to throw out the baby with the bath water.

Unless a conservative alternative emerges from among the masses to mount a primary challenge. That should actually be welcomed by the incumbent because it will enable an invigorated discussion of conservative visions of America. Otherwise we abandon the campaign to the other side which wants to tear down all that has been built over the centuries.

We can remember all the way back to Plymouth Rock and Jamestown. Or, on the other hand, we can elect somebody who doesn’t even remember Ronald Reagan.

As a baby boomer, when I was a youngster, I found it awkward that adults who had all lived through World War II ~ which was still an everyday topic back then ~ had life experiences that I could never share. So I asked them about it as well as studying it because I realized even as a child that it was important.

But that was in an age when even television was very new. When we finally got one, it was a small black and white picture with just a few local channels.

Today I see that parents often give even toddlers an elementary electronic device which they skillfully manipulate pictures around using their thumb or forefinger. In many ways, this is not the America in which I grew up.

Our next president needs to have a firm understanding of where we have been and where we are so he or she can lead us into where we must go. But, in this short-attention-span ersatz society, we are hard-pressed to find such a person of substance.

I herewith categorically deny that I am running for President of the United States. Having said that even though it’s obvious, let’s look at what has occurred during the 70 years that I’ve been here on Planet Earth.

In the 1950s, most of this country was still small-town America with only a handful of major metropolises. Today, that is often condescendingly referred to by self-centered politicians as flyover country. Large urban centers and suburban areas have a proportionately significant impact on elections. If Democrats succeed in eliminating the Electoral College, then the large geographic majority of our country that usually votes red, will be overwhelmed by a blue wave of pampered new voters.

Patriots from the American heartland remember the lessons of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Vietnam War, Watergate, American diplomats taken hostage in Tehran, Reagan ending the Cold War, Billy Bob and Monica, 9/11, Dubya deposing Saddam and leaving a vacuum, Obama fundamentally transforming America and The Art of the Deal taking control.

The so-called progressive, emerging urban core are ready to start from scratch, go back to square one and create a Banana Republic where election losers never accept the results of the vote. Once they create a new normal, they will never release their grasp on it.

Integrity is doing right because it is right regardless of what may be politically expedient. Just listen to what Democrats in Congress and on the political trail, many of whom are the same people, are saying now. They have zero concept of national sovereignty. The “we are the world and the world is us” attitude is not realistic. You have only to look at failed states and tyrannical regimes around the globe to see that borders serve an inalienable purpose.

Proposals of infanticide and racism by Democrat Governor of Virginia Ralph Northam have been swept successfully under the rug. But unfounded and politically-motivated character assassination of a Supreme Court nominee for accusations relating to his high school days led to a C-SPAN circus. The double standard has never been so blatant!

I have only recently concluded that term limits for Congress are necessary. If our elected representatives had integrity, that would not be necessary. But due to fallen human nature, power makes the man or woman. Perpetuating their own time in the sun is more important than acting objectively based upon substantive facts. Human frailty is also an important consideration.

I joined term-limit advocates while watching the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court. Former Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa is probably a very nice individual, though I don’t know him personally. But he was either unable or unwilling to control the Democrat sideshow. There is no way he should have been Judiciary Chairman.

We need citizens with life experience beyond the constraints of government employment who understand what most Americans go through in daily life. They will never find this in their ivory towers on Capitol Hill or anywhere in our nation’s capital.

I spent three years inside the DC Beltway working just a few blocks, but a million miles, from the White House. The history of Washington DC, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and other states that have history from the Revolutionary and Civil Wars, was fascinating. That was 30 years ago when I was there, but I was ever so ready to get back to the real world.

Hawaii has its own unique set of circumstances which I have discussed before and will undoubtedly delve further into in the future. But right now, we’re looking at the future of our political system that will be involved in next year’s national election.

What can you or I as individual patriotic citizens do to make a positive difference? First, we need to sense the urgency of our mission.

You can watch a video here which includes Representative André Carson of Indiana declaring a plan for an Islamic America which is undoubtedly shared by new Congresswomen Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota.

We better have a game plan to counteract this or it is our future. In Pakistan, the Islamic government purposely & deliberately makes life a hell on earth for Christians & all non-Muslims. Ask Asia Bibi! Is that the America we want?

NOQ Report is here to provide a conduit for objective facts to be conveyed both to decision-makers and to the voting public. We are crowdfunded and your support can make all the difference.

Let’s keep America America!

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Healthcare

San Francisco demonstrates pure hypocrisy by wanting to boot Juul

Published

on

San Francisco demonstrates pure hypocrisy by wanting to boot Juul

Some believe vape products are a wonderful way to stop cigarette smoking, both for those who are currently smokers as well for future smokers. Others see it as a gateway through which kids can become addicted to nicotine and eventually start smoking real cigarettes. That’s a debate that should be happening through education and public awareness. Unfortunately, San Francisco doesn’t believe in people being able to think for themselves properly, so they’ve decided to consider another measure that will protect the people from their own stupidity.

At the center of this measure is Juul, the fast-growing vape company that happens to be based in San Francisco. Lawmakers have been out in force proclaiming the company is evil and how they don’t want them anywhere near San Francisco. They don’t want e-cigarettes sold in the city. They don’t want the people to be able to have them shipped to the city. They don’t want them used in the city.

Let’s keep in mind that this is a city with more drug addicts than public school students, a rampant homelessness problem, and so many regulations that people need a herd of lawyers just to navigate the process of trying to do business there. They’ve elevated the cost of living to be so prohibitive, only the truly wealthy can live there comfortably, yet it’s a city that proclaims to be caring of their fellow men. In reality, they’ve crafted an authoritarian society within the boundaries of the United States that has been empowered to subvert rights at a grand scale.

Here’s their grand plan:

One bill that Herrera and Walton introduced at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting would ban the sale and shipment of e-cigarettes to San Francisco stores and customer addresses until the U.S. Food and Drug Administration begins a vetting process known as a pre-market review, in which manufacturers must prove their products are appropriate for public health before selling them on the market.

The city already bans youth-friendly flavors like candy and fruit in tobacco products through Proposition E, which voters passed in 2018. Physical stores are barred from selling them. The bill would ban all e-cigarettes regardless of flavor so long as they contain nicotine, and it would also ban the shipment of such items to private residences in San Francisco.

The second bill would ban companies that sell, manufacture and distribute tobacco products, including e-cigarettes, from city property. San Francisco already prohibits tobacco companies from doing business on city property, and this measure would explicitly add e-cigarettes to the existing ban. The proposed bill would not be applied retroactively, so it would not kick Juul out of its current space at Pier 70, but it would prevent e-cigarette companies from leasing city property in the future.

Juul is not producing an illegal substance. It has not been accused of breaking other laws in the way it operates its business. Studies have been done with mixed results about whether or not Juul is a gateway for nicotine use by children, which is why the city voted to ban fruity and other kid-friendly flavors. But rather than address the actual problems within their dysfunctional city, they’d rather draw attention to the evils of vaping.

It’s a wonder how any Libertarians or liberty-loving conservatives can continue living there. It’s the nanny state of nanny states.

San Francisco has become a punchline of a city. They don’t believe in individual rights. They do believe that government can and should try to solve everything. If any American city needs an infusion of conservatism, it’s San Francisco.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conservatism

Mark Levin on conservatives and tyranny

Published

on

Mark Levin on conservatives and tyranny

There are times when I really hate government. It’s not that I’m an anarchist or I believe there should be no laws or rules, but in recent years it seems as if government is the root cause for many of our problems. This is why it perplexes me so that people willingly ask the government to intervene in their affairs. For leftists, this is understandable as they are entitled to have the government solve all of their problems. But when I hear conservatives ask for government intervention on particular issues, I cringe.

Perhaps conservative commentator Mark Levin said it best to describe how I and many other conservatives feel. Those of us who appreciate the need for government to handle many issues such as national defense and infrastructure but who despise it when government gets involved in so many issues where it simply doesn’t belong can break our feelings down with this one line from Levin:

“The Conservative does not despise government. He despises tyranny. This is precisely why the Conservative reveres the Constitution and insists on adherence to it.”

The Constitution is not a document that grants us rights, despite what many claim. It’s a document that prevents government from trying to take away our rights bestowed on us by our Creator and affirmed by our free will.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report