Skip to comments.Gingrich cashed in supporting subsidies for big businessRead more:
Posted on 11/17/2011 1:34:10 PM PST by Fred
Since leaving office in 1999, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has spent much of his time convincing conservatives to support government subsidies for large corporations, reports the Washington Examiner.
In addition to his work as a strategic consultant for government-sponsored mortgage lender Freddie Mac, the Examiner reports that tax filings show Gingrich received money from the ethanol lobby.
Green Energy, a lobbying group that works to secure and create government subsidies for the much-criticized ethanol industry, paid the Gingrich Group more than $300,000 as recently as 2009. Unlike most conservative experts on the industry, Gingrich is a staunch advocate of ethanol, an expensive corn-based alternative fuel opposed by many conservatives due to its price tag and incompatibility at high concentrations with some modern automobile engines.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
NO! Don’t you understand! NO one is allowed to criticize St Newt. We must all just bow down an worship his “genius”./s
It looks more and more like we are stuck with Romney.
NO! Dont you understand! NO one is allowed to criticize St Newt. We must all just bow down an worship his genius./s
And no one is allowed to spam the boards with crap but you...
I’m not stuck with him.
Hey, libs LOOOVVVVE subsidies, so this is good, right?
Tiffanys is expensive.
Here comes the Bush/RINO wing of the GOP to smear Newt.
Name any former member of congress (I know there may be a few)who hasn’t done far worse. I am not a Newt supporter.
Looks like any plan to reduce the deficit should involve locking up Newt or at least banning him from DC.
Each of his “consulting” jobs seem to cost the taxpayers billions.
attack, attack attack....Newts on top
U STILL AT IT BARNEY?
Newt’s really got u boys tored up huh?
GIVE’EM HELL NEWT.....THEY SMELL THE BUTT WHOPPIN COMING HA HA
These recent revelations of how Newt Gingrich made big bucks by using his 'government experience' to help lobbying firms push congress for ethanol subsidies, among other interests, simply crystallizes the fact that Newt, for all his intelligence, is really just an establishment Republican who talks a good conservative game but likely wouldn't be the change agent we need to defeat Obama and start the road back from his deliberate trashing of Americas economy and it's place in the world. I remain a Herman Cain supporter. He doesn't pretend to have a glib answer to every question and he doesn't have that vaunted government 'experience'. You know, the kind that helped get us where we are now, some 15 trillion in debt.
Why is this in breaking news?
I don’t know if Cain can recover or not, and I wasn’t really certain about him in the first place.
But I WILL NOT support Newt. He talks like a conservative but he acts like a RINO. Always has, and still does.
And if a bunch of false stories about sexual harrassment can sink Cain, what will all those true stories about affairs and divorces do to Newt? They wouldn’t even have to make stuff up.
I think when people see that Newt keeps him promises as in say the Contract With America. When they see that he reduced government spending, balanced the Federal Budget and reformed welfare they just might conclude that Newt is the kind of insider they would like to see back in the inside. Just saying
Funny how the media’s long knives never seem to be quite long enough to reach Mittens. Only anyone who gets in his way.
This is getting comical.
please see 21
They’re waiting for Mitt to be the nominee before they bring out the knives for him.
Well now we can see how brilliant he is at handling this even though this isnt a debate question.
How is this a criticism and not a hit piece?
” Just saying”
Facts mean nothing to liberals.
The problem with Herman is that he has less breadth and depth concerning world affairs than the average poster here at FR. And I might add that I like Herman and think you are absolutely correct about the debt run up by the best and brightest.
I think the foreign policy stuff is hurting Cain much more than the sexual harassment stuff. His polls numbers held up and his donations skyrocketed after the allegations.
I haven’t heard a word about Herman’s fundraising since his Libya moment and his poll numbers have cratered since Saturday’s foreign policy debate.
Yes, always go where you’re led. Do no research. Do no thinking. Believe what you’re fed. The media will guide you.
So, he made a living doing what people in Washington do after they leave office?
how is this news?
Newt is part of the Bush/RINO wing of the GOP.
Spending was cut
End of welfare as we know it
Compare it to today?
Ann Coulter is right about 1 thing, sorry we don't have Ronald Reagan on the Ballot.
Congressman Gingrich’s strongly supports expanded drilling both onshore and offshore. In 2008, he started a movement for drilling in the US and wrote a book titled “Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less.” To aid in energy efficiency, Congressman Gingrich has proposed a series of prizes to be awarded to individuals or companies that develop new energy efficient automobiles and other items. He supports the removal of bureaucratic and legal obstacles to responsible oil and natural gas development in the United States, offshore and on land. He also supports ending the ban on oil shale development in the American West. He has stated that to incentivize safe oil production, the federal government should create a federal royalty revenue sharing to give coastal states an incentive to allow offshore development.
In addition to immediate drilling, Congressman Gingrich supports a rapid expansion of nuclear energy, hydrogen energy, wind, and solar energy. He also supports tax incentives to retrofit coal energy facilities for new carbon sequestering technologies. He has stated that he supports the goal of obtaining 25% of US energy from renewable sources by 2025.
Although his views on energy are definitive, Congressman Gingrich’s views on the environment and it’s relation to energy are not. Congressman Gingrich testified in hearings (not as a Congressman) against the Waxman-Markley cap-and-trade program, and has asserted his strong opposition to the program numerous times. However, Congressman Gingrich has also advocated for programs that incentivize the reduction of carbon emission.
Congressman Gingrich’s views on global warming are also nebulous. In a 2007 debate with Senator Kerry, Congressman Gingrich stated that the evidence was sufficient that global warming existed and that action needed to be taken immediately. The obvious implication being that if action can address the issue, then it was man made. That same year, he introduced a “Contract with the Earth” and spoke about the concept of “Green Conservatism” as a method of winning the environmental debate against the left. In 2008, Congressman Gingrich made a public service announcement with House Speaker Pelosi noting the dangers of global warming and the need to take action to solve the problem. However, at a conference that same year, he stated that as a historian, it was impossible to known the extent of global warming and how much humans were contributing.
Congressman Gingrich has opposed EPA regulation of carbon emissions and has called for the EPA to be abolished.
Look at Greece and Italy soon Spain, Portugal and Ireland and you can gaze into your future America.
If people really want a conservative President there is only one choice Newt. Sorry Sarah is not running, Perry is not ready and Cain is just trying to sell some books. Newt is a proven conservative. Proven to govern as a conservative. No one, and I mean NO ONE has done more for conservatives then Newt since Reagan.
Every green tax credit is a tax loophole
Q: The oil companies got government handouts in the form of tax breaks, tax exemptions, loopholes. Is that fair?
A: Every green tax credit is a loophole. Why did we get to breaks for ethanol, breaks for oil and gas, etc.? We have a simple choice. We can depend on Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, or we can encourage development of oil and gas in the US. I’m for an energy-independent America, and that means I favor people who create energy.
Q: If you eliminate some of those loopholes, whether for ExxonMobil or some other companies, there are those who argue that is, in effect, a tax increase and it would violate a pledge that so many Republicans have made not to raise taxes.
A: Yes, a lot of people argue that. They’re technically right. Look, I’m cheerfully opposed to raising taxes. We have a problem of overspending. We don’t have a problem of undertaxing. I want to shrink government to fit income, not raise income to try to catch up with government.
Source: 2011 GOP Tea Party debate in Tampa FL , Sep 12, 2011
I don’t know of any conservatives who abandoned Herman Cain over the cheap shots and dirt thrown at him. But you won’t help him by doing the same thing to Newt.
Truer words have never been spoken, Jim! I agree 100%.
60% of republican voter don’t have a firm candidate.
This race is wide open!
Perry and Bachmann were run off all because of a person that didn’t even end up running.This ticks me off!
Apparently Congress has exempted themselves from insider trading laws. This is the most egregious thing since the check cashing scandal, and far more serious. Time to rein those critter in, big tingh~!
It’s now between Romney, Cain and Gingrich. Unless Cain polishes up his act, he’s done. Too many “deer in the headlights moments”, can’t afford any more.
Between Romney and Gingrich, I’ll choose the lesser of two evils.
Any one of the republican candidates would be far more better than Obama. None of them hate America. Like Mark Levin said, I’d vote for an orange juice can.
We’re stuck with this field, someone in this group will be our nominee. We can not let obama win re-election. All you sit it out folks, remember, it’s more dire than any time before in our history. Even re-electing Carter isn’t this bad.
Billion-dollar prize for first mass-produced hydrogen car
The America that works focuses on inventing a better future and knows that customers will rapidly switch to a better solution. The same will be true for a new energy strategy. We need very large prizes for fundamental breakthroughs.
There ought to be a billion-dollar tax-free prize for the first hydrogen car that can be mass-produced for a reasonable price. Hydrogen has to be the ultimate basis for a truly bold energy program because it has no environmental impact and it is universally available as a natural resource. Therefore it would have huge appeal to China and India if it were commercially competitive in price.
American technologies for hydrogen vehicles might be one of the biggest economic winners of the next generation.
There should be a substantial tax break for investing in both ethanol and hydrogen supply stations and hydrogen pipelines so the fuel can be delivered when the automobiles are available at a reasonable cost.
Source: Real Change, by Newt Gingrich, p.203 , Dec 18, 2007
Kyoto treaty is bad for the environment and bad for America
Kyoto is a bad treaty. It is bad for the environment and it is bad for America. It sets standards that will require massive investments by the US but virtually no investments by other countries. The Senate was right when it voted unanimously against the treaty. We should insist on revisiting the entire Kyoto process and resolutely reject efforts to force us into an anti-American, environmentally failed treaty.
The US should support substantial research into climate science, managing the response to climate change, & in developing new non-carbon energy systems. It is astounding to watch people blithely propose trillions of dollars in spending on a topic on which we have failed to spend modest amounts to better understand.
It is astounding to have people focus myopically on carbon as the sole source of climate change. The worlds climate has changed in the past with sudden speed and dramatic impact. Global warming may happen. On the other hand it is possible Europe will experience another ice age.
Source: Gingrich Communications website, www.newt.org , Dec 1, 2006
Focus on incentives for conservation & renewable resources
A sound American energy policy would focus on four areas: basic research to create a new energy system that has few environmental side effects, incentives for conservation, more renewable resources, and environmentally sound development of fossil fuels. The Bush administration has approached energy environmentalism the right way, including using public-private partnerships that balance economic costs and environmental gain.
Hydrogen has the potential to provide energy that has no environmental downside. Conservation is the second great opportunity in energy. A tax credit to subsidize energy efficient cars (including a tax credit for turning in old and heavily polluting cars) is another idea we should support. Renewable resources are gradually evolving to meet their potential: from wind generator farms to solar power to biomass conversion. Continued tax credits and other advantages for renewable resources are a must.
Source: Gingrich Communications website, www.newt.org , Dec 1, 2006
Stop scare tactics about drilling in Alaska
It is time for an honest debate about drilling and producing in places like Alaska, our national forests, and off the coast of scenic areas. The Left uses scare tactics from a different era to block environmentally sound production of raw materials. Three standards should break through this deadlock.
Scientists of impeccable background should help set the standards for sustaining the environment in sensitive areas, and any company entering the areas should be bonded to meet those standards.
The public should be informed about new methods of production that can meet the environmental standards, and any development should be only with those new methods.
A percentage of the revenues from resources generated in environmentally sensitive areas should be dedicated to environmental activities including biodiversity sustainment, land acquisition, and environmental cleanups in places where there are no private resources that can be used to clean up past problems.
Source: Gingrich Communications website, www.newt.org , Dec 1, 2006
Who are you referring to?
Sources involved with the companies lobbying efforts said Gingrich was on their payroll as a consultant at the time. Gingrich reportedly called Washington conservatives in order to sell the bill even though, the Examiner reported, it amounted to a new federal entitlement.
[Gingrich] received a monthly retainer, a former pharmaceutical company lobbyist said, adding that the former House Speakers price was at the high end. A spokesman for Gingrichs Center for Health Transformation declined to comment on specific contracts, but admitted they had clients that included health care companies, hospitals and drug companies.
i agree with u bro.. I wished we had a reagan but since we don’t, i can vote for newt, cain, bachman, santorum, or ron.
i like the cfa and like newt’s new contract.