Do Iowa voters really care about ethanol anymore?

posted at 8:31 am on January 23, 2016 by Jazz Shaw

This seems like it may be a day late and a dollar short as the saying goes, but someone has decided to ask a question in Iowa this week which would normally border on blasphemy. Do Iowans really know much about the ethanol issue and, even more to the point, do they really care? Going by the conventional wisdom this seems like a preposterous prospect. Iowa is the domain of King Corn and it drives all things political out there, right? Well, the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) decided to take the question to the voters directly rather relying on the state GOP leaders and some of the answers may surprise you.

With the Iowa caucuses fewer than 10 days away, research commissioned by the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) and completed this week provides new insights into what 700 likely voters across the state know about corn ethanol mandates, how much they care about or are following them, and whether they’re likely to vote on the basis of a candidate’s position on the issue.

Their answer? Not much, not really, and not at all.

“For as long as anyone can remember, conventional political wisdom dictated that candidates had no choice but to support ever-expanding corn ethanol mandates to win in Iowa,” said George David Banks, Executive Vice President of ACCF. “Unfortunately, they forgot to ask actual Iowans what they thought about it. As this polling makes clear, not only aren’t folks in the nation’s largest corn-producing state paying particularly close attention to the back-and-forth over the RFS, they’re definitely not using it as some sort of litmus test in determining who to vote for. That might qualify as a revelation to the political class in Washington, but something tells me actual Iowans won’t be too surprised to hear that.”

Here are a few of the results that jumped out at me:

  • The RFS and federal corn ethanol mandates fall outside of the top three issues of concern and interest for the overwhelming majority of Iowans (94%)
  • Half of respondents (50%) say they either do not care much, or do not care at all, about the RFS and federal corn ethanol mandates
  • Fewer than two-in-five (39%) say they want presidential candidates to spend more time talking about the RFS and federal ethanol mandates
  • 57 percent say they do not want candidates to talk about the topic at all
  • Only one-third (33%) know if any of the major presidential candidates support or oppose the RFS and federal corn ethanol mandates

If true, that might have made a bit of a difference in the shape of the race this year, but coming out less than two weeks before the caucuses it’s difficult to see what changes at this point. And yet it may at least prove useful for the midterms, assuming anything else backs this up later on. The only real questions I have about these numbers are the same ones that crop up whenever we run into these issue polls as opposed to surveys about candidates and elected officials.

If you’re looking for data on which candidates are doing well it’s not nearly as difficult to manage. Do you plan to vote for [CANDIDATES 1 THROUGH 10 or UNDECIDED] in the upcoming election? Similarly you can poll voters about the people in office with a basic query of approve or disapprove. (Strongly or somewhat.) When you get into issue questions, however, a lot depends on the wording and the ebb and flow of the news cycle. Seeing that 94% of Iowans don’t have ethanol in their top three concerns might say something, but it doesn’t mean it’s not a concern, either. Only a third of respondents knew where the candidates stood on the subject, which might be even a bit more telling, but I immediately found myself wondering if that’s just because they assume that all of the candidates back the RFS. It’s been baked into the cake for so long that perhaps they just take it for granted at this point.

Again, one data point such as this isn’t likely to be a game changer. But by the same token, maybe we’re finally seeing the beginning of a new trend. That would shake up both state and national elections and come as a refreshing change.

Ethanol Gas Corn


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

It always seemed to me that HotAir contributors cared more about ethanol than Iowans. Iowans tend to vote on social issues, and right-wing pundits seem to think they’re obsessed with kickbacks. It’s a pretty odd disconnect between voter behavior and pundit commentary.

Stoic Patriot on January 23, 2016 at 8:39 AM

Trump stormed into a 6-way tie for second with his endorsement of ethanol. Dad gummed flippity floppin’ flap master. He’s all yours Gary.

DanMan on January 23, 2016 at 8:39 AM

well Stoic, if you listen to their GOPe gov. Brainsdead it it the most important thing to Iowans. It sure is to him. Why do I have to subsidize turning food into fuel when fossil fuel is cheaper and cleaner?

DanMan on January 23, 2016 at 8:42 AM

What would be amazing is, if Cruz were to win Iowa after Sarah Palin and the Governor came out against him, it would certainly cause a re-evaluation of the politics. The Republican establishment is as or more out of touch with the country than Barack Obama and, as such, can find no way to do what’s necessary. We need to rein in the budget, the debt, and spending, yet the Republicans keep Ethanol subsidies around because they’re afraid of losing votes. It’s not so much that they’re corrupt, it’s that their priorities are all wrong. The only thing that will change that is for them to get out of the beltway and back to their communities, where they will listen to voters, rather than lobbyists.

bflat879 on January 23, 2016 at 8:45 AM

Jazz-that poll was commissioned by an anti-ethanol group. I would not believe any of it.

ETHANOL is a BIG DEAL in ALL large corn producing states. Minnesota-ed’s home has 24 corn ethanol plants.

Iowa though happens to be the first big corn state in the primary cycle.

Crzu will be lambasted in all big corn states if he’s still in the running.

If you don’t believe me research it yourself.

some area’s use other stuff for ethanol

but all big corn states use ethanol production to keep bushel prices higher

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 8:50 AM

Trump stormed into a 6-way tie for second with his endorsement of ethanol. Dad gummed flippity floppin’ flap master. He’s all yours Gary.

DanMan on January 23, 2016 at 8:39 AM

I’m a Trump supporter, and I can’t support him at all on this point. Not at all. I was hugely disappointed when I heard a recording of Trump reading a bunch of technical gobbledygook from an ethanol policy paper obviously written by someone else. It wasn’t written in anything close to Trump’s voice. (I mean, the guy speaks barstool, fer cryin’ out loud.)

Well, it showed how important winning Iowa is to him. But it sadly showed something else as well.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 8:55 AM

If you don’t believe me research it yourself.

some area’s use other stuff for ethanol

but all big corn states use ethanol production to keep bushel prices higher

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 8:50 AM

Yes, but it’s basically burning food. And the program doesn’t even accomplish what it set out to do. Never has, may never will.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 8:58 AM


Ethanol
———

Iowa Economy
*************

6. Iowa leads the nation in ethanol production, creating nearly 30% of all ethanol.

7. The renewable fuels Industry (includes biodiesel) supports around 47,000 jobs in Iowa and accounts for $5 billion of Iowa’s GDP. Source: IRFA

To see the jobs in your community that were created because of the ethanol industry, click here.

FUELS AMERICA RELEASES NEW FOOTPRINT ANALYSIS
Renewable Fuel Drives Economic Growth
**************************************

The data are in: The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) is driving billions of dollars of economic activity across America. This is the result of years of investment by the biofuel sector to bring clean, low carbon renewable fuels to market. This activity creates a ripple effect as supplier firms and employees re-spend throughout the economy. The result is clear: $184.5B of economic output, 852,056 jobs, $46.2B in wages and $14.5B in taxes each year.

Explore the map below to learn more about your state and Congressional district.

http://www.fuelsamerica.org/pages/fuels_america_releases_new_footprint_anaylsis
===============================================

http://www.iowacorn.org/en/ethanol/

https://twitter.com/iowa_corn

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 9:00 AM

..isn’t it formally known as “cornholing”?

The War Planner on January 23, 2016 at 9:02 AM

#cornitseverything
******************

https://twitter.com/hashtag/cornitseverything?src=hash

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 9:02 AM

Yes, but it’s basically burning food. And the program doesn’t even accomplish what it set out to do. Never has, may never will.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 8:58 AM

I do not live in a big corn state. Loss of jobs and money does not affect me.

My point was that there are several big corn states and ethanol is big money and jobs in THOSE STATES.

Minnesota has 18,000 ethanol related jobs , JUst imagine if GM was going to close an 18,000 job car plant-what would be the uproar

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 9:05 AM

That might qualify as a revelation to the political class in Washington, but something tells me actual Iowans won’t be too surprised to hear that.”

Wait, the political class is out of touch with regular Americans? Sound the alarms!

rbj on January 23, 2016 at 9:07 AM

I’m a Trump supporter, and I can’t support him at all on this point. Not at all. I was hugely disappointed when I heard a recording of Trump reading a bunch of technical gobbledygook from an ethanol policy paper obviously written by someone else. It wasn’t written in anything close to Trump’s voice. (I mean, the guy speaks barstool, fer cryin’ out loud.)

Well, it showed how important winning Iowa is to him. But it sadly showed something else as well.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 8:55 AM

Ethanol isn’t on the national ballot this year.

fossten on January 23, 2016 at 9:08 AM

DemTards and GOP(e):

Hmmmm, Trumps Missing??
———————-

2016 presidential candidates on agricultural subsidies
******************************************************

https://ballotpedia.org/2016_presidential_candidates_on_agricultural_subsidies
========================

Trump Expresses Support for RFS, Biofuel Industry
Anna McConnell Updated: 01/20/2016 @ 10:34am
********************************************

http://www.agriculture.com/news/business/trump-expresses-suppt-f-rfs-biofuel_5-ar51987

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 9:09 AM

OT

A lot of clouds over the Atlantic, how’s Snowmageddon doing?

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:11 AM

OT

A lot of clouds over the Atlantic, how’s Snowmageddon doing?

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:11 AM

Still going strong Walter.

dougmva on January 23, 2016 at 9:14 AM

Doug

Thanks

United rerouted me from a direct flight to Newark from Israel to a Frankfurt, Dallas then Denver.

Took me three hours on the phone, up all night and now 20 of flying.

Not a happy camper. And I’m only about half eay through these flights.

Using flynet to post this.

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:21 AM

OT – meanwhile:
National Black Republican Association Endorses Trump

whatcat on January 23, 2016 at 9:24 AM

OT

A lot of clouds over the Atlantic, how’s Snowmageddon doing?

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:11 AM

Walter L. Newton: Still gruesome, heres the carnage from the
ISS:)
———————–

US East Coast blizzard, January 2016
3h
Photo: Snowstorm blanketing East Coast view from space – @StationCDRKelly
See original on twitter.com
============================

Scott Kelly [email protected] 3h3 hours ago Houston, TX

Massive #snowstorm blanketing #EastCoast clearly visible from @Space_Station! Stay safe! #blizzard2016 #YearInSpace

https://twitter.com/StationCDRKelly/status/690850325390049280
============================

https://twitter.com/StationCDRKelly

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 9:24 AM

Bernie For Glorious Leader

whatcat on January 23, 2016 at 9:27 AM

not surprised. ethanol was more to capture iowa crony establishment endorsements that votes. because few Iowans benefit directly from ethanol mandates.

Trump supports it because he defends US production in general while Cruz is really pandering to the Iowa establishment and his own conservative “beliefs”.

nathor on January 23, 2016 at 9:27 AM

OT for walter..

Was just watching Channel 9 news in Wash, DC and they showed a live cam shot of Reagan National Airport tower. It was barely and I mean barely visible.

dougmva on January 23, 2016 at 9:28 AM

Ethanol isn’t on the national ballot this year.

fossten on January 23, 2016 at 9:08 AM

That’s about as positive as I can be on it, too.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 9:30 AM

We are approaching the U.S. over Nova Scotia soon. I imagine the ride is going to get rather bumpy as we head toward Dallas, unless they skirt the route high north.

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:31 AM

My point was that there are several big corn states and ethanol is big money and jobs in THOSE STATES.

Minnesota has 18,000 ethanol related jobs , JUst imagine if GM was going to close an 18,000 job car plant-what would be the uproar

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 9:05 AM

All absolutely true. I still don’t like it.

It’s entirely artificial, a gross bastardization of markets. And ignored science is piled on top of that.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 9:32 AM

I suspect that the only groups that “care” about ethanol are primitivist deep-eco types who hate fossil fuels generally and privately-owned automobiles specifically (to them, fuels that wreck engines are a good thing for “Holy Mother Gaia”), and large industrial farming concerns like Archer Daniels Midland, which see ethanol subsidies as a way to stay out of the red.

If ethanol was actually useful, it wouldn’t need to be subsidized. But then, we have tobacco price supports constantly being renewed by a government that claims it wants people to stop using tobacco and would prefer everybody smoked pot instead.

Gee. Maybe pot price supports are next?

clear ether

eon

eon on January 23, 2016 at 9:32 AM

I wish they could just drop me out of the plane with a chute when we are near a state close to Colorado.

Is cosmo around?

Cos, I have a two-hour layover in Dallas
Want to drop into DFW for a drink?

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:36 AM

Trump stormed into a 6-way tie for second

DanMan on January 23, 2016 at 8:39 AM

Hmmm, perhaps you need to see newer polls:

1/21/16 Emerson Poll: Trump Leads Cruz By 10 Points In Iowa

1/21/16 CNN Poll: Trump leads Cruz By 11 points In Iowa

Garyinaz66 on January 23, 2016 at 9:37 AM

Could it be that ethanol subsidies affect the corporate farmer more than the ma and pa farmer?

“Corn gas” is about ten cents a gallon cheaper here in Indiana than is regular gas. I won’t use it, and many people I know won’t either. My gas mileage goes down significantly, enough so that the ten cent discount really isn’t a discount at all.

Douger on January 23, 2016 at 9:38 AM

Be back, need to use the head.

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:40 AM

Corn is at least a million votes, so while polls may show it as not the biggest priority for the general population, farmers are the most reliable vote. This constant speculation about the value of corn in Iowa, without taking into account reliability of farmers, and the lack of reliability in most polls (especially generic polls of everyone of voting age) shows an absolute lack in understanding of politics.

Until exit polls show a major drop in the importance of corn subsidy’s influence, politicians would be delusional to to ignore the that segment of the population. Which is why every politician bows down to king corn in Iowa.

The politics and industry surrounding Ethanol is vulgar, but the fact remains the amount of “free money” it provides a very reliable constituency, hence the votes they provide, is more obvious to politicians than a beautiful woman in a bikini.

Rode Werk on January 23, 2016 at 9:42 AM

canopfor on January 23, 2016

…as always!…thank you for the links beaver buster!

JugEarsButtHurt on January 23, 2016 at 9:45 AM

They don’t have to care about the corn. But they do care about the pandering.

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:53 AM

My point was that there are several big corn states and ethanol is big money and jobs in THOSE STATES.

Minnesota has 18,000 ethanol related jobs , JUst imagine if GM was going to close an 18,000 job car plant-what would be the uproar

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 9:05 AM

Same fvcked up logic can be applied to every alphabet department in DC. Hey, do you know how well-paying middle-class job each department provides?

Rix on January 23, 2016 at 9:53 AM

Looking out the window. I swear, all I’ve seen is clouds since leaving Tel Aviv.

Half the globe is covered in clouds.

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:56 AM

We are approaching the U.S. over Nova Scotia soon. I imagine the ride is going to get rather bumpy as we head toward Dallas, unless they skirt the route high north.

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:31 AM

scream out the window when you pass maine and I’ll wave hello.
the canadian pressure area holding the storm off us also keeping it around -4 to +5 F for a few nights.
so I won’t be outside waving for long

dmacleo on January 23, 2016 at 9:59 AM

The politics and industry surrounding Ethanol is vulgar, but the fact remains the amount of “free money” it provides a very reliable constituency, hence the votes they provide, is more obvious to politicians than a beautiful woman in a bikini.

Rode Werk on January 23, 2016 at 9:42 AM

[Democracy] can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s great civilizations has been two hundred years.

And here we are — on borrowed time.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 9:59 AM

Same fvcked up logic can be applied to every alphabet department in DC. Hey, do you know how well-paying middle-class job each department provides?

Rix on January 23, 2016 at 9:53 AM

I am against the RFS and think it should be repealed. However i am in a state that is not affected by corn production.

My posts on this issue have to do with the voting politics of it.

If you live in a ‘big corn’ state-it is an issue. MONEY is MONEY.

ever see what happens when a military base or post office is considered being closed. Suddenly it’s all about the ‘economic impact’. Not if the base or post office is actually needed.

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 10:06 AM

I am against the RFS and think it should be repealed. However i am in a state that is not affected by corn production.

Actually the King Corn question affects everyone, but not as directly as if you’re in a big corn producing state so I see your point.

Jazz Shaw on January 23, 2016 at 10:24 AM

Farmers make a lot of money by having those windmills on their property. All they need to do is keep an access road to them, and they can still use all their land around them. I really don’t know how important ethanol production is anymore.

publius75 on January 23, 2016 at 10:25 AM

Do Americans really care what Iowans feel about ethanol? None of this matters in a couple weeks.

tej on January 23, 2016 at 10:41 AM

Would it surprise anyone here that New Jersey is currently building a ‘corn ethanol’ plant in Bridgeton NJ.

Currently NJ sends’field corn’ to an ethanol plant in Maryland.

I’m sure the workers at the Maryland plant approve of Cruz wanting to eliminate their jobs.

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 10:43 AM

Would it surprise anyone here that New Jersey is currently building a ‘corn ethanol’ plant in Bridgeton NJ.

Currently NJ sends’field corn’ to an ethanol plant in Maryland.

I’m sure the workers at the Maryland plant approve of Cruz wanting to eliminate their jobs.

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 10:43 AM

No surprise at all. Central planners of an economy as large as the U.S. tinkering with something as fundamental as grain prices — I’ll bet the effects reach far and wide.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 10:57 AM

The polls show Iowa as a toss between the guy who won’t end subsidies to the tax on driving (ethanol), and the guy who wants the punishment to go huge.

Those are the polls I’m believing. Not this put up job from King Corn.

papertiger on January 23, 2016 at 10:59 AM

I’m sure the workers at the Maryland plant approve of Cruz wanting to eliminate their jobs.

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 10:43 AM

How much does it cost the taxpayer to support these jobs via subsidy? Where are the eco warriors complaining about how much water it takes to grow an acre of corn? Will we be asking for soil problems because we’re not rotating crops?

Douger on January 23, 2016 at 11:03 AM

How much does it cost the taxpayer to support these jobs via subsidy? Where are the eco warriors complaining about how much water it takes to grow an acre of corn? Will we be asking for soil problems because we’re not rotating crops?

Douger on January 23, 2016 at 11:03 AM

as i said-i am against the RFS and think it should be repealed-and agree with you.

My posts are about the’politics’ of this. If YOU knew that voting for CRuz would eliminate ‘YOUR JOB’ by the stroke of a pen-would YOU vote for him.

this is the choice facing many voters in ‘KING CORN’ state

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 11:11 AM

Jenna Johnson [email protected] 23m23 minutes ago

This morning I’m in Sioux Center, Iowa, for another Trump rally:

https://twitter.com/wpjenna/status/690924514834800640
======================================================

https://twitter.com/wpjenna

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 11:15 AM

If YOU knew that voting for CRuz would eliminate ‘YOUR JOB’ by the stroke of a pen-would YOU vote for him.

this is the choice facing many voters in ‘KING CORN’ state

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 11:11 AM

The ugly truth. Very ugly.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 11:18 AM

The bigger question is are we party of ideas? Or are we a job protectionist party? If we are the later we have become nothing more than Democrat-lite.

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:19 AM

The jobs from making windmills get more discussion in the local media.

Of course this might be because that tax credit is not as secure as the RFS has been.

agmartin on January 23, 2016 at 11:22 AM

YOU knew that voting for CRuz would eliminate ‘YOUR JOB’ by the stroke of a pen-would YOU vote for him.

this is the choice facing many voters in ‘KING CORN’ state

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 11:11 AM

Gerry, this may sound cold, but I don’t care about your job if it costs the rest of us money to support it when the free market won’t. What you are suggesting is that redistributionism trumps capitalism.

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:23 AM

canopfor on January 23, 2016

…as always!…thank you for the links beaver buster!

JugEarsButtHurt on January 23, 2016 at 9:45 AM

JugEarsButtHur: As always, anytime, I try:)

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 11:24 AM

Gerry, this may sound cold, but I don’t care about your job if it costs the rest of us money to support it when the free market won’t. What you are suggesting is that redistributionism trumps capitalism.

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:23 AM

Hey man. I live in massachusetts and am a retired pharmacist.

the RFS does not affect me.

I’m talking about the politics . What state do you live in btw

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 11:32 AM

YOU knew that voting for CRuz would eliminate ‘YOUR JOB’ by the stroke of a pen-would YOU vote for him.

this is the choice facing many voters in ‘KING CORN’ state

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 11:11 AM

Gerry, this may sound cold, but I don’t care about your job if it costs the rest of us money to support it when the free market won’t. What you are suggesting is that redistributionism trumps capitalism.

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:23 AM

I don’t think you caught what he was saying. It wasn’t about his job at all.

A more directed comment from you might have been something like:

Gerry, this may sound odd, but I don’t care about my job if it costs the rest of you all money to support it when the free market won’t.

Voters in a King Corn state like Iowa may not be so . . . agreeable.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 11:44 AM

Gerry, this may sound cold, but I don’t care about your job if it costs the rest of us money to support it when the free market won’t. What you are suggesting is that redistributionism trumps capitalism.

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:23 AM

I take the same view. But his point is that if your job was the one being eliminated, your view would likely be different.

Douger on January 23, 2016 at 11:49 AM

One of the funny things about ethanol. 10% ethanol in your gas results in about 10% poorer fuel economy in your vehicle. And in my former Flex-fuel vehicle (Dodge Grand Caravan) using E85 was a one time horrible experience.

Dasher on January 23, 2016 at 11:51 AM

LIVE STREAMING:
—————–

Saturday, January 23, 2016
LIVE Stream: Donald Trump Rally in Sioux Center, IA | Jan 23, 11:00 AM (CST)
*************

LIVE Stream: Donald Trump Rally in Sioux Center, IA at Dordt College (1-23-16)
RSBN 2
RSBN 2
=======

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBg-J2vNSHg
==========================

http://www.donaldtrump2016online.com/2016/01/live-stream-donald-trump-rally-in-sioux.html

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 11:51 AM

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 11:54 AM

Hey man. I live in massachusetts and am a retired pharmacist.

the RFS does not affect me.

I’m talking about the politics . What state do you live in btw

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 11:32 AM

Gerry fair enough that it wasn’t “your” job, and I understand there are politics involved. What I’m referring to is that the reason we are where we are as a country is we”vet voted jobs for years without worry of the consequence.

Remember there is a counter argument to be made in Texas, where there are 5 times (maybe more) than there are in Iowa. Why should we here in Texas be made to support an industry that costs us money in taxes, at the gas pump and in “jobs” because we are supporting an industry that couldn’t survive without our help?

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:58 AM

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:58 AM

When Cruz talks about eliminating the ‘ Oil depletion allowance’ i’ll believe him and you.

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 12:02 PM

Remember there is a counter argument to be made in Texas, where there are 5 times (maybe more) than there are in Iowa. Why should we here in Texas be made to support an industry that costs us money in taxes, at the gas pump and in “jobs” because we are supporting an industry that couldn’t survive without our help?

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 11:58 AM

Why should a voter in Iowa vote against his or her self interest?

Again, it’s ugly. But it’s reality. Are we arguing about reality?

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 12:04 PM

The politicians were never concerned about the little guys in Iowa with their RFS. It is a pure pander to the largest multimillion dollar farms in the state. They are afraid of the ones with $$$.

clement on January 23, 2016 at 12:05 PM

Why should a voter in Iowa vote against his or her self interest?

Again, it’s ugly. But it’s reality. Are we arguing about reality?

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 12:04 PM

This is what we get when the people get hooked on government.

Douger on January 23, 2016 at 12:10 PM

This is what we get when the people get hooked on government.

Douger on January 23, 2016 at 12:10 PM

Yep.

Lolo on January 23, 2016 at 12:12 PM

When Cruz talks about eliminating the ‘ Oil depletion allowance’ i’ll believe him and you.

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 12:02 PM

He has. Under his tax proposal there would be no deductions.

Tater Salad on January 23, 2016 at 12:21 PM

look what i found

Texas Corn ethanol-who knew

http://texascorn.org/what-we-do/ethanol/

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 12:24 PM

Tater Salad- cruz vat tax will never fly

and when he ‘directly wants to eliminate oil depletion allowance along with the RTS’ i’ll believe him

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/03/01/1654501/oil-subsidies-century/

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 12:29 PM

4 texas corn ethanol plants on this list

http://www.ethanolproducer.com/plants/listplants/US/All/Sugar-Starch

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 12:38 PM

Tater Salad.

I’m sure the workers in the Texas ethanol plants and growers of corn in Texas appreciate you voting for your convictions and voting out their jobs and money.

the difference between oil and ethanol.

Eliminating the RFS will eliminate ethanol.

Eliminating the oil dpletion allowance will not eliminate oil

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 12:43 PM

Eliminating the RFS will eliminate ethanol.

Eliminating the oil dpletion allowance will not eliminate oil

This is true. There’s a strong demand and market for oil. For ethanol, not so much.

Douger on January 23, 2016 at 12:49 PM

Moreover, the oil depletion allowance reflects the fact that production from any given well will decline over time.

tngmv on January 23, 2016 at 12:55 PM

Do Iowa voters really care about ethanol anymore?

What a stupid question! Ethanol is an essential component in whiskey, beer and wine. We all care about it.

Rix on January 23, 2016 at 1:43 PM

Since were on Iowa topic:
—————————

https://twitter.com/wpjenna

Jenna Johnson [email protected] 54m54 minutes ago

Donald Trump says he could sue Ted Cruz to challenge his eligibility: “Should I do it just for fun?” Then reflects: “It’s so nasty, though.”
==================

2016 US elections
6m
Donald Trump suggests he may file lawsuit over Ted Cruz’s eligibility for the White House – The Hill
Read more on thehill.com
========================

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump says he may file a lawsuit over rival Ted Cruz’s eligibility for the White House.

Trump hammered Cruz to a crowd of supporters in the Iowa town of Sioux Center, just nine days before the Hawkeye State’s first-in-the-nation caucuses.
(more…)
==========

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-primaries/266807-trump-floats-lawsuit-over-cruzs-birthplace

canopfor on January 23, 2016 at 2:04 PM

remember -eliminating th RFS eliminates all ethanol plants not just corn ones

http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/122.htm

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 2:19 PM

What a stupid question! Ethanol is an essential component in whiskey, beer and wine. We all care about it.

Rix on January 23, 2016 at 1:43 PM

Very astute. I demand the poll be reran, this time filtering out those insipid Iowan abolitionists groups, who are clearly skewing the data. The real poll should show support somewhere north of 95%, allowing for those few box wine enthusiasts.

Buckshot Bill on January 23, 2016 at 3:11 PM

not surprised, they have a new crop, wind mills, owned by Berkshire Hathaway

RonK on January 23, 2016 at 3:42 PM

This is a hard thing. Most people have no idea how severely an end to the RFS will affect things in the Midwest. Crop prices have been high for years now, and that has made for some very prosperous farmers, who’ve bought a lot of new equipment, and bid up prices for farmland 3 to 5 fold. Take away the ethanol mandate and farmland prices fall drastically, probably by far more than half. I know a farm auctioneer who is acutely aware of this issue, as you would expect. An end to RFS is like an apocalypse to the Midwestern farm economy.
Tell me, if a candidate proposed a policy that would cut YOUR net worth in half, would you vote for him? Even if the policy was, in principle, the correct one?
People who currently farm, or grew up on farms, or have relatives who farm or who work in one of the allied industries, constitute a majority of Iowans, I am sure. Any politician who opposes the ethanol mandate on principle is a brave soul and has my admiration.

Cornfed on January 23, 2016 at 3:51 PM

Cornfed on January 23, 2016 at 3:51 PM

But does he have your vote?

gerrym51 on January 23, 2016 at 4:03 PM

It’s like any industry, if you work in it, it’s important, if you don’t, who cares.

cimbri on January 23, 2016 at 7:13 PM

OT

A lot of clouds over the Atlantic, how’s Snowmageddon doing?

Walter L. Newton on January 23, 2016 at 9:11 AM

Snowing me in. There is about a foot of it piled up against my slider.

Count to 10 on January 23, 2016 at 8:27 PM

We (Central PA, Blair County) were supposed to get 3-7″.
We got 16″, actual measure on my front walk.
Global Warming can’t get here soon enough!

ReggieA on January 23, 2016 at 10:16 PM

from gerrym’s link about ethanol in Texas…

Ethanol blends give drivers a real and renewable fuel choice.

where’s the choice not to use it? I get that that farmers are subsidized, they also pass billions of dollars in welfare through the USDA under the guise of helping he poor. The USDA needs to be fully audited and indictments issued. The USDA paid hundreds of millions to blacks who never set foot on a farm through Pigford, Pigford 2 and so on.

So the folks on this thread are good with it all? no wonder Townhall panders so much. It’s to serve their audience.

DanMan on January 24, 2016 at 8:48 AM

This Iowan cares about it – about eliminating subsidies that is. It is WELFARE period. The government shouldn’t be picking winner sand losers in the market.
Of course it’s going to be a hard sell in Iowa to get rid of RFS, it’s like asking any other WELFARE recipient to oppose their own welfare. The plants provide jobs and and state revenue, but so would any plant that the taxpayers are paying for. If the government were to give Iowa millions of dollars for new Chimichanga making plants, they would provide jobs and revenue as well as boost construction (of Chimichanga plants). It doesn’t really matter what the industry is, if the government pumps tons of cash into it that benefits the state’s citizenry, most of the citizenry will be for it. The only ones against it will be the principled people, of which there is an ever dwindling supply.

Free Indeed on January 25, 2016 at 10:45 AM

Thank you Free Indeed. I suspect 90% of the jobs created by ethanol production are the type that Americans refuse to do. Which is to say we are subsidizing agriculture and ethanol production to drive wages low by opening borders and then become dependent on the low wages they subsist on.

The we subsidize our farmers to provide enough of their product to make us dependent on them for inferior energy based on keeping the plates spinning that have created fake demand for their product.

It’s a sham both parties are profiting from by buying votes and nothing more. Ted Cruz is the only candidate speaking against the current sham.

DanMan on January 25, 2016 at 11:02 AM