Rush Limbaugh: Trump could have been so much better in Debate Three

Well yeah, but that's been the story since Iowa when Trump sided with the ethanol industry against Cruz.

The guy isn't a conservative policy wonk.

If conservative talk radio had any brains they'd have accepted this from the beginning, supported him, and supplied what was lacking.

Instead it's nag, nag, nag all the way to the destination.

Huge flip-flop tonight by Ben Carson on oil subsidies and ethanol

Said he was wrong to propose taking away oil subsidies to support others, never mentioning he originally meant Iowans and their ethanol back in April. Now he's supposedly against helping any industry.

So Carson finally gets ahead in the polls in Iowa pledging to boost ethanol at big oil's expense and then throws Iowa under the bus.

Breathtaking. The guy's a liberal at heart. 

Big mistake: Donald Trump says he's 100% in favor of ethanol

The Donald, quoted here on September 22nd:

'Trump said that he supports the RFS at Iowa’s Faith and Freedom Forum, “I am totally in favor of ethanol, 100 percent.” This is the first time Trump gave his stance on the topic publicly.'

So far this only amounts to Trump supporting the current Renewable Fuel Standard signed into law by George W. Bush in 2005, but that's still bad policy. Ethanol is inefficient as a fuel, bad for engines and does zero to reduce carbon emissions. It diverts corn from animal feed, driving up the cost of food supplies from beef, pork and poultry, and from corn added to other products. Ethanol also makes it more lucrative to put more and more land into corn production than would otherwise be the case, potentially stressing the environment.

Arguably Ben Carson's success in Iowa over Trump in part has to do with Carson's pledge to push for 30% ethanol fuel blends, a tripling of the current standard.

The crony capitalism involved with ethanol is YUGE, making Iowa more important politically than it otherwise would be were it not for federal gasoline dictates:

"Iowa produces nearly one-third of the nation’s ethanol and nearly half of Iowa’s corn goes into ethanol production, according to the Iowa Corn Growers Association.

"Iowa’s renewable fuels industry, which includes biodiesel production, supports 47,000 jobs and accounts for $5 billion of the state’s gross domestic product, according to the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association."

That's about 3.2% of 2014 Iowa GDP.

Nebraska estimates Iowa production capacity at 25% of the nation's capability, ahead of Nebraska in second at 13%. Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana and South Dakota round out the top six, who all exceed the 1 billion gallon level of capacity per year. At 10.8 billion gallons of available capacity, the top six states produce almost as much as they can at 10.6 billion gallons, over 70% of total national production.

A number of the current crop of Republicans running for president is more or less opposed to ethanol:

"Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former New York Gov. George Pataki and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio have all expressed interest in eliminating or phasing out the ethanol mandate that requires a certain percentage of ethanol in transportation fuel."

Trump's position may reflect a conviction that he generally needs to be supportive of ethanol in these states to win them in the general election even though it appears Carson has outbid him in the primary season.

Trump doesn't get why Carson is ahead in Iowa citing religion when it's support for ethanol giving Carson the leg up

Trump, quoted here:

'“I love Iowa, and I honestly believe those polls are wrong,” he said. “I’m a Presbyterian, I’m a great Christian.”'

Forty percent of Iowa corn gets diverted to ethanol production, without which food prices would drop as feed prices normalize. All of which would mean harder times for Iowans.

Carson wants to add ethanol infrastructure and increase its share in gasoline to 30% instead of the current 10%:

'“Therefore, I would probably be in favor of taking that $4 billion a year we spend on oil subsidies and using that in new fueling stations" for 30 percent ethanol blends, he added.'

If Trump were smart he would exploit the unpopularity of ethanol with the American people revealed in polling to marginalize Carson nationally on the issue, but that will never sway Iowa voters tied to ethanol for their livelihood, sort of like preaching against gambling in Vegas.

Trump can afford to lose Iowa, and probably will.

He should move on.

Rush Limbaugh doesn't understand the number one reason Ben Carson is doing so well in Iowa

Ethanol.

Crony capitalism in nutty Iowa: Nearly 40% of Iowa's corn ends up as ethanol, not feed, driving up food and fuel costs

Since 2010-2011, Iowa has produced an average of 12.7 billion bushels of corn, with an average of 5 billion bushels going to ethanol production, as reported here.

It is estimated food prices would fall 13% by repealing the Renewable Fuel Standard signed by George W. Bush in 2005. Ethanol also reduces MPG by 25%, is bad for engines and does nothing to reduce carbon emissions.

Republicans should kill ethanol! 

At $2.53/gallon, the national average price of gasoline now officially represents a "sale"

The very long-term average price of a gallon of gasoline in June 2013 dollars going back to 1918, as reported here, is $2.60.

Using all items CPI since then to date, up 1.682%, $2.60 a gallon would come to about $2.64 today.

So this morning's national average of $2.532/gallon, if not officially CHEAP, is at least ON SALE at a discount of about 4%.

Sustained for a year, and hopefully longer, that would definitely mean something helpful to the American consumer's bottom line. Republican control of both chambers of Congress means it is more likely to continue than not, but you never know about these things. After all, both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney were for the ridiculously expensive ethanol fuel program and subsidizing it with your tax dollars, which has only driven up the price of animal feed, fuel itself, and food.

Stay tuned.

Propane Prices In MI Skyrocket In Part Because Supplies Were Used To Dry Late-Harvested Taxpayer-Subsidized Crops

But the story, here, never mentions the insane taxpayer-funded feedback loop of government interference in both agriculture and fuels:

Propane prices are up more than 70 percent over last year’s levels amid heavy demand caused by the abnormally cold winter and late harvest that required propane for drying grain throughout the Midwest.

So put it together: corn-growing is subsidized by the federal government which means by you the taxpayer, then the crop happens to be harvested late due to weather conditions and has to be dried with fossil fuel which impacts propane supplies, after which the corn is distilled into ethanol at taxpayer expense to put in your gas tank by government decree which you pay too much for at the pump, and then the hapless souls depending on propane get stuck with enormous bills during a cold snap and above normal snows where bad roads impact the deliveries of already stressed supply.

Brilliant! The taxpayers pay and pay and pay, and the governor, Rick Snyder, condescends to rebate just 10% of a tax surplus.

They should all be in jail!

Your Food Costs More Because Of Obama's Stalinist EPA Ethanol Policy

Feed prices have skyrocketed as a result of drought and dedication of ever larger portions of corn harvests to fuel production instead of for feed, and it will get much much worse according to this in depth story in The Detroit News:

This year, the Renewable Fuel Standard requires the use of 13.2 billion gallons of corn ethanol, the production of which could require using more than half the country's corn crop, up from 5 billion gallons in 2007.

Next year, the standard increases to 13.9 billion gallons. By 2022, the U.S. must use 36 billion gallons of biofuels, though 21 billion gallons are supposed to be from advanced cellulosic ethanol.

Sen. Tom Coburn is the Enemy of Every Traditional Family

With enemies like Coburn, who needs Democrats?

"I’ve argued that Republicans should be willing to consider increases in revenue -- not through higher tax rates but through eliminating tax earmarks, such as that for ethanol, and other expenditure that misallocates capital."

"Tax earmarks" and "other expenditure" which "misallocates capital"?

Read "tax loss expenditures." In other words, the tax deductions which every nuclear family in the country depends on for its survival: mortgage interest, donations to charity, property taxes, state income taxes and the like.

THE GUY VIEWS YOUR TAX PAYMENTS AS THE GOVERNMENT'S CAPITAL. AND EVERY PROVISION OF THE TAX CODE WHICH DIVERTS YOUR MONEY BACK TO YOU HE VIEWS AS A MISALLOCATION.

If it walks like a tax increase and talks like a tax increase, it's a tax increase.

Nutty Romney and Gingrich Support Ethanol Subsidies

Story here.

Pawlenty is against them.

Do Americans not realize that $5 billion of their tax money propped up that industry in 2010?

It's a waste. And 42 percent of corn production now goes to it, when it should be going to food, which is why you are paying so much more at the grocery store, especially for meat.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) Wants To Deep Six Your Tax Deductions

Republicans should deep six Tom Coburn as soon as possible:

I’ve argued that Republicans should be willing to consider increases in revenue -- not through higher tax rates but through eliminating tax earmarks, such as that for ethanol, and other expenditure that misallocates capital.

"Tax earmarks ... and other expenditure that misallocates capital"?

Read "tax expenditures," better yet, "tax loss expenditures."

Like your mortgage interest deduction, your charitable contributions deduction, your property tax deduction, your state and local income taxes deduction, and so on. All these benefits of the tax code misallocate capital, if you're a politician running the business of government, and you are just its employee.

That's who Tom Coburn is, the boss. He wants more of your hide.

His complete remarks are here.

The New Cornhole

Obama's Senate Tax Plan Will Outspend the 2009 Stimulus: $858 Billion in New Spending

A veritable Christmas tree for programs which would die in the free market without federal help, like ethanol, commuter trains, and wind and solar energy.

Conservative Republicans should help the Socialists like Senator Sanders filibuster it.

The story is here.