Skip to comments.Iowa ethanol industry celebrates Romney-Santorum
Posted on 01/05/2012 1:35:21 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
..........."Romney and Santorum (like Gingrich and Obama) both go 4-for-4 on the ethanol lobby's scorecard. Paul goes 2-for-4 because he would cut oil subsidies and allow 15-percent ethanol blends to be sold, but opposes the mandate and other subsidies. Rick Perry went 0-for-4."
(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...
The Iowa Corn Growers Association sent questionnaires to the Republicans involved in this years caucuses, then issued grades on how it judged those candidates as part of its Iowa Corn Caucus.
The Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) took a different approach, offering its members the chance to listen in on teleconferences with some of the candidates and ask questions.
We call that our town-hall conference call, explains Mark Jackson, ISA president-elect. We want to give people the opportunity to hear the candidates talk about agricultural issues.
The first of those calls came in early December with former Georgia congressman Newt Gingrich. More than 3,000 people listened in.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry was the subject of another call.
The report cards issued by the corn growers spotlighted the differences between some of the candidates.
For example, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, earned a D from the group, and U.S. Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-Minn., earned a D+ while Gingrich earned an A and Rick Santorum earned an A-.
President Barack Obama earned a B as did former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.
Perry earned a C-. Herman Cain, who has since dropped out of the race, earned a D.
Presidential Candidate [Perry] Holds Agriculture Conference Call - [audio]
No subsidies on ethanol, oil and gas, wind, etc.
CUT regulations and let the market place decide.
If states want to invest, fine, but keep the feds out of it.
Oh, by the way, ethanol subsidies are dead. Details here and here: the short version is that the Senate back in June kicked off opposition to continued ethanol subsidies via a bipartisan amendment: it didnt pass, but Congress has just let both the ethanol subsidy and a restrictive foreign tariff (on Brazilian sugar-cane ethanol) lapse. Given that the Iowa caucuses will be finished by the time Congress reconvenes and given that the House of Representatives is currently chock-heavy with people who spit at the very phrase ethanol subsidy getting back either is going to be a problem for the domestic ethanol industry. Mind you, there are still mandates for using ethanol in place, but note again the ending of the tariff; Im not a businessman, but effectively lowering the price of Brazilian ethanol by 54 cents/gallon while simultaneously effectively raising the price of domestic ethanol by 45 cents/gallon sounds to me like it would at least raise some intriguing alternatives.
A quarter of a century ago D.O.
Yep, when Rick does it, it’s okay. Rick directly benefited. Did Santorum?
Rick’s just too slick...
Maybe you’ll like this source better.
Rick started changing his tune in the mid 1990s. That’s not a quarter of a century ago.
It’s a fine souce DO.
But what does it have to do with today?
Gov. Perry isn’t supporting federal subsidies, Santorum and Romney and Gingrich and Obama are.
I stand corrected. My bad math skills don't change the facts on the ground.
Why does Santorum support subsidies?
I don’t support ethanol subsidies either, but it does rub me the wrong way to see Perry’s Crew scampering around the internet trying to find dirt on Santorum, even things Perry himself is guilty of.
Perry himself got tens of thousands of dollars in farm subsidies. His extended family got more.
I haven’t seen where Santorum got one dime’s worth of farm subsidies.
Why did Rick take tens of thousands of dollars worth of them?
Has Rick Perry paid them back? Please let us know when he did.
I didn’t scurry around anywhere.
It’s in plain sight and it is IMPORTANT!
Of the people you mentioned, only one has gotten farm subsidies to my knowledge. That's Rick Perry. Even Obama hasn't gotten them.
Perry’s record is an open book.
I ask again, “Why do Santorum, Romney, Gingrich and Obama support federal subsidies?
Did you happen to notice this little hit piece on Santorum in the same rag?
Santorum comes to a virtual tie in Iowa, and this rag spins it as an anomaly.
It does it’s best to spin Romney winning easily with almost no effort, but doesn’t mention a super-pac spent $3.1 million in one add buy in late 2011. Romney spent more there, and barely eaked out an 8 point victory, and did essentially no better than he did in 2008. That’s kind of a sleazy tactic.
What does your post and link have to do with the score card given to Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and Obama?
When did Perry pay back his tens of thousands of dollars in farm subsidies?
How much money has Santorum gotten directly in farm subsidies?
How much money has Romney, Gingrich, and Obama gotten directly in farm subsidies?
Obama has never gotten a single dimes worth of farm subsidies. Perry has gotten tens of thousands of dollars worth of them.
Thank you for your comments.
We can let the readers decide.
It makes it clear that the Herald Examiner has an axe to grind with regard to Santorum. Santorum has never taken any farm subsidies, but the Herald Examiner finds it valid to take Santorum to task on the issue, even though Perry is the only person to get tens of thousands of farm subsidy dollars.
And thank you for yours. I think the readers will find it interesting who the only candidate to get tens of thousands of dollars was. And as you state, it’s very important information to get out there.
15-percent ethanol blends to be sold?
When 10% ethanol was forced on us my mileage dropped by 10%. Will I lose another 5% if this happens?
I imagine it is important to note that Rick Perry hails from a farming family, farmed himself and was TX AG Commissioner (and an Texas A&M graduate).
This background would make him especially sensitive and cognizant of how the government traps people with their handouts and why he is so 10th Amendment. All his views have been shaped with this knowledge — education, energy, commerce, border security etc.
Think about it.
Rick Perry won the AG seat from Jim Hightower by backing the farmers against the Left’s encroaching “EPA” type dictates and regulations - he has watched how the federal government has choked excellence, enterprise and innovation out of the American people and wants it to stop.
Think about it.
Anything the feds manipulate, costs us.
Yep, it sure seems that way.
Rick Perry received $72,687 worth of farm subsidies. He advocated for farm subsidies as the Texas Agricultural Commissioner. In the mid 1990s he changed his tune.
I do not support ethanol subsidies, but that does not change the fact that Rick Perry is the only candidate who has taken farm subsidy payments from the federal government.
Yes other candidate still do support ethanol subsidies. I do think those subsidies are about to be done away with, if they haven’t been already. That causes me to have less concern about them.
I would say that Perry’s $72,687 dollar payments were an excellent education on the subject.
Perhaps Santorum would be smarter on the subject if he had gotten that type of cash payments.
Interesting. That explains a lot. Still, I’m proud of Perry that he came out and said the truth to them instead of lying and pandering.
Facts are pesky things!!!!
Well, they are for both sides here. I just get tired of folks trying to make mileage off something their own guy has dirty hands on.
Santorum is wrong on this one. That hasn’t a chance in hell of making me change my support to a guy who actually got over $70 thousand dollars in farm subsidy payments, and that’s the rub.
Check this out for a little late night humor.
You mean like Santorum's "cyber-schooling" settlement?
"....State agrees to pay Penn Hills schools for Santorum Saturday, September 02, 2006 - By Eleanor Chute and James O'Toole, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
The state Department of Education has agreed to pay the Penn Hills School District $55,000 to settle a dispute over whether the school district should have paid for cyber schooling for the children of U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum.
The Penn Hills school board is expected to vote Sept. 12 on whether to accept the settlement.
Mr. McDonald said the agreement will save taxpayers money by avoiding a lengthy legal dispute.
Penn Hills school board member Erin Vecchio, who questioned the senator's residency in fall 2004, said, "It should have been Rick who had to pay it back."
Ms. Vecchio, also chair of the Democratic Party in Penn Hills, said the fact that there has been no ruling on his residency "tells me nobody has the nerve to do that."... Source
While emphasizing that the senator was not a formal party to the case, Robert Traynham, a spokesman for Mr. Santorum, said, "We are very pleased that the three parties -- the state, Penn Hills and the charter school -- were able to settle their differences.''
Asked to respond to Ms. Vecchio's claim that the senator should have been held personally liable for the tuition payments, Mr. Traynham said, "I'm not going to dignify the chair of the Democratic Party in Penn Hills by commenting on that.''
But of course you will huh.
Of course CW will. She will cheerfully adapt any ol' Dem talking point to tear down a candidate who is running ahead of Perry. I guess she won't be happy until all candidates are as unviable as he has made himself.
Of course it's IMPORTANT! You MUST tear down the other candidates! Perry sure as heck ain't getting back in the race on his own merits!
Complain all you want dirtboy.
This primary is important and we need the nominee who is going to tear down this wall of government that has been built to enslave us.
That person is Gov. Rick Perry.
Funny how you demand the right to tear down other candidates while calling it vetting, yet whine when I vet your own sources, hypocrite.
Farmers don’t turn down farm subsidies. If they do, they are out of business. Ignore the ankle-biters and let them enjoy their flavor-of-the-month. Santorum will be gone soon enough.
Then make that case positively for Perry if you believe in it so much. Using Dem talking points to tear down other candidates does nothing to help the conservative cause.
Yeah, you can tear him down as well. That'll show Romney when no one is left to take him on!
Santorum was a lackluster Senator & Representative whose main claim to fame is that he is a strong social conservative. Weak on the fiscal conservative side, no executive experience, and no private business experience. Plus, he’s just another lawyer.
Sorry. I’ll support a successful big-state governor, veteran, farmer, with a clear, good record on conservative values and ideas anytime over a lame resume like that.
Then support Perry’s positives. If Perry is so strong a candidate, there should be no need to be tearing down the other candidates.
You tear down Perry constantly.
I do! And I'm called a shill, a perrywinkle, a fan-girl and worse.
And the threads have their legit "topics" removed by mods to be sidelined, and posters like you come to trash him.
No argument from me.
I think if you also didn't spend so much time bashing other candidates, and often using Dem talking points in the process, you would be attacked a lot less in that regard.
Exactly right. Newt has already said he’d partner with Santorum to go after Mitt. I bet Perry goes after everyone BUT Mitt.
Bullcrap. My issue is mainly with the antics of his campaign shills on FR and their efforts to tear down the other candidates when those candidates start polling ahead of Perry - and you are the worst of those. My primary critique of Perry is that he has not run an effective campaign (which is true and documented) and often is not prepared for his appearances, that is not a policy difference. I have some differences with Perry on some policies, but do not harp on those , and I could support Perry as the nominee, and think he actually still has a chance - but Perry also has to show he can campaign effectively on a national level, just as Santorum will now need to show he can transition from an Iowa-type situation to the grueling run of the next few months of the primary cycle.