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 *

Immigration

As predicted, Trump offers DACA amnesty in exchange for border wall

Published

on

As predicted Trump offers DACA amnesty in exchange for border wall

Throughout Trump’s first two years in office, I’ve been one of only a handful of conservative voices shouting from the rooftops that the New York liberal’s promise to fix America’s out-of-control illegal immigration problem was nothing but a lie.

As a candidate, Trump promised to build a “big beautiful powerful wall” on our southern border at Mexico’s expense, and he promised to overturn Obama’s unconstitutional Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order that allowed illegals to stay in America indefinitely. Unfortunately, the “wall” has become an “artistically designed” barrier of some sort funded by the U.S. taxpayer, and DACA is not only still in effect, it’s on its way to becoming permanent.

While the reality of Trump’s broken promises dealing with illegal immigration have been crystal clear to those not drinking the orange Kool-Aid, his inevitable betrayal on the issue has been brought sharply into focus since last summer.

In May 2018, as Trump and the GOP were looking for ways to save their jobs ahead of the midterms, the House Freedom Caucus joined hands with Democrats to push for a “fix” to DACA.

In June 2018, Paul Ryan proposed a plan that would allow DREAMers to legally stay in the country and be put on the pathway to citizenship in exchange for $23 billion for building a border wall.

Following their September 2018 budget betraying funding everything from Planned Parenthood to DACA and sanctuary cities, rumors began spreading around Washington that Trump was ready to cut an immigration deal with Democrats in light of the reality that the Democrats were about to retake the House in the midterms.

The Democrats did retake the House, and in the days since their victory, Trump and the GOP have been laying the foundation for their inevitable immigration betrayal. With the help of Trump’s son-in-law and advisor Jared Kushner, trading DACA amnesty for a border wall is now the official position of the Trump administration and the GOP-controlled Senate.

So, it came as no surprise when Trump proposed a deal over the weekend to end to his manufactured government shutdown by offering Democrats a three-year extension of DACA in exchange for $5 billion for border security funding — an idea originally conceived by Sen. Lindsey Graham.

Three years? I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, but that’s just enough time to kick the can down the road until after his 2020 election … assuming there is one. And just in case there are any doubts about the motivation behind this three-year timeframe, consider this: Mitch McConnell, who has refused to let the Senate vote on the shutdown, has endorsed Trump’s offer and will hold vote on it this week.

Mickey is also up for re-election in 2020.

For now, Democrats are rejecting Trump’s offer, but it’s only a matter of time before they get what they want. After all, Trump and the GOP want the same thing.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is 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


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

How ‘Progressives’ are a small but vocal political minority

Published

on

By

How Progressives are a small but vocal political minority

The data shows that most people are in the rational majority while the Left is a small but vocal minority.

A recent video from Daisy Cousens makes the very important point that far-Left ‘progressives’ are an extremely vocal minority that dominates the media, culture and government indoctrination centres. Even though they are only 8% of the population, they take on the false pretense of representing everyone else.

Equally important is the fact that the data from the Hidden Tribes Study shows that the people trying to conserve Liberty on the Right have a lot more in common with the exhausted middle. This majority on one side of the issues, while the small minority of the far-Left on the other. As she points out, this is not exactly a ringing endorsement of the national socialist Utopia the Left would like to force on the rest of us.

This is a short description of the 7 groups identified in the study:

Progressive Activists (8 percent of the population) are deeply concerned with issues concerning equity, fairness, and America’s direction today. They tend to be more secular, cosmopolitan, and highly engaged with social media.

Traditional Liberals (11 percent of the population) tend to be cautious, rational, and idealistic. They value tolerance and compromise. They place great faith in institutions.

Passive Liberals (15 percent of the population) tend to feel isolated from their communities. They are insecure in their beliefs and try to avoid political conversations. They have a fatalistic view of politics and feel that the circumstances of their lives are beyond their control.

The Politically Disengaged (26 percent of the population) are untrusting, suspicious about external threats, conspiratorially minded, and pessimistic about progress. They tend to be patriotic yet detached from politics.

Moderates (15 percent of the population) are engaged in their communities, well informed, and civic-minded. Their faith is often an important part of their lives. They shy away from extremism of any sort.

Traditional Conservatives (19 percent of the population) tend to be religious, patriotic, and highly moralistic. They believe deeply in personal responsibility and self-reliance.

Devoted Conservatives (6 percent of the population) are deeply engaged with politics and hold strident, uncompromising views. They feel that America is embattled, and they perceive themselves as the last defenders of traditional values that are under threat.

What was truly interesting was that the nation’s Socialists on the far-Left have their own set of priorities, that just happen to centre around control of others:

The polarization of opinion between the opposing ends of the spectrum is very clear from the issues that different groups prioritize:

After the issue of poor leadership, Progressive Activists rank climate change (47%) and economic inequality (42%) next, both issues that rank high on the liberal agenda. These are both considerably higher than the average (18% and 12%, respectively).

While the majority Conservatives, Moderates and Liberals have their own priorities. They don’t explain how someone favourable to individual rights and freedoms would naturally buy into the strict controls on Liberty that go along with the authoritarian Left’s climate change agenda. Or that the forced wealth redistribution that would have to be a part of Leftists plans to address the economic inequality would square with individual Liberty.

It’s also important to emphasis this statement from the study:

The Politically Disengaged group resemble the Conservatives in their focus on jobs (56%), immigration (60%) and terrorism (59%).

[Our emphasis]

This is how we are in the majority, the Politically Disengaged resembling Conservatives on many important issues.

A very vocal minority is still a minority

While the majority of the country may quibble over some issues, they are still supporters of Liberty. The far-Left, socialist minority is in a world of it’s own, working actively against our rights and freedoms while hiding behind the Liberal label. Please take note of this when considering those who like to throw Liberals into the Leftist camp, incongruously conflating both sides as the same.

The Takeaway

Most people want to be free from the control of others. Most people want to be able to defend themselves and speak freely without constraint. Most people want to keep their earnings and property. This is the rational and largely silent majority that would just like to live their lives in peace.

Contrast this with the far-Left minority that preaches collectivism and control. People who openly want to banish what they deem to be ‘Hate- speech,’ ‘Assault weapons,’ the presumption of innocence and due process. It’s a small group obsessed with political power and denigrating freedom with far too many false labels.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Kevin McCarthy doles out political payback against conservatives

Published

on

Kevin McCarthy doles out political payback against conservatives

When he was still in Congress, John Boehner was a master at selling out conservative values to Barack Obama’s agenda, and he routinely did all he could to silence conservatives who dared to oppose him or the Republican Party.

Boehner’s capitulating cowardice in favor of Obama and the Democrats was so blatant that there was an attempt in 2014 to kick his progressive posterior to the curb as House Speaker, an attempt that failed in large part due to retaliatory threats leveled against those who dared to vote against his re-election for the job.

When another attempt to replace Boehner as Speaker started picking up steam in 2015, he not only re-issued his threats, but he picked up the endorsements of Democrats who were concerned that a TEA Party Republican might replace him.

When Boehner eventually resigned as Speaker late in 2015, Republicans settled on Paul Ryan, the man who reminded America of the song “Won’t Get Fooled Again” by The Who — meet the new boss, same as the old boss. However, before Ryan, there was another Boehner clone being considered for the job, Rep.Kevin McCarthy, the current minority leader after the Democrats retook the House in the 2018 midterm.

McCarthy was rejected in 2015 because he was too close to Boehner, and he was involved in Boehner’s personal vendetta against TEA Party and other conservative Republicans, along with being a participant in Boehner’s five-year sellout to Obama’s agenda.

McCarthy still carries this baggage today.

As the new Congress gets underway, McCarthy is channeling his inner Boehner and has begun retaliating against Freedom Caucus members who voted against him in favor of one of their own, Rep. Jim Jordan.

McCarthy and his partners in crime on the Republican Steering Committee began taking out their revenge by removing Rep. Jody Hice (R-GA) from the Armed Services Committee, and there will likely be more suffering Hice’s fate.

There were six Freedom Caucus members and affiliates who voted against McCarthy including: Hice, Justin Amash (R-MI), Thomas Massie (R-KY), Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Paul Gosar (R-AZ), and Scott Perry (R-PA).

Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows — notice his name wasn’t listed above — told The Hill.com that “removing any member from a committee solely because they voted according to their constituents’ wishes is viewed very poorly by the general public and is the kind of punishment politics that the American people hate.”

I don’t feel all that sorry over the plight of many on the Freedom Caucus. Having abandoned conservatism for Trumpservatism, people like Meadows have lost all credibility.

McCarthy’s deeds simply prove what we’ve known for many years now, the Republican Party is no longer the home of conservatives, and the sooner we realize that, the better.

Originally posted on StridentConservative.com.

 


David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is distributed by the Salem Radio Network and is 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


Subscribe on YouTube

Continue Reading

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report