Ted Cruz: Speaking Truth To Power In Iowa

STANDING UP FOR TAXPAYERS AGAINST “KING CORN”

|| By FITSNEWS ||  One of the very first litmus tests any “Republican” presidential candidate should be made to pass before pro-free market voters give him or her serious consideration is the issue of ethanol subsidies.

It’s an ideological and a political issue … one which provides a clear indication of whether candidates are serious about their commitment to taxpayers and consumers (or more interested in pandering to political interests).

Let’s look first at the issue: As this website has repeatedly argued, ethanol subsidization is a failed government experiment which has led directly to higher food prices and rampant environmental damage.

But don’t take our word for it … even the liberal legacy media agrees.

“The ethanol era has proven far more damaging to the environment than politicians promised and much worse than the government admits today,” a 2013 Associated Press investigation determined. “As farmers rushed to find new places to plant corn, they wiped out millions of acres of conservation land, destroyed habitat and polluted water supplies.”

The report concluded “the consequences are so severe that environmentalists and many scientists have now rejected corn-based ethanol as bad environmental policy.”

Ironic … considering the mandated subsidies emanate from the eco-radicals over at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Ethanol subsidization is also terrible economic policy … yet another botched bureaucratic attempt to manipulate the market in pursuit of politically correct fuzzy science.  There is no compelling reason to support the policy … especially if you live in Iowa, which is where much of the aforementioned environmental damage is taking place.

But Iowa is owned by “King Corn,” and its “Republican” voters (bless their hearts) play a pivotal role in the selection of the GOP presidential nominee every four years.  And it’s generally acknowledged that opposing ethanol subsidies in Iowa is political suicide.

Which is why last week – despite unambiguous evidence of the failure of the policy – GOP presidential candidates Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Lindsey Graham, Mike Huckabee, Rick Perry, Rick Santorum and Scott Walker all refused to call for the elimination of the subsidies at an Iowa candidate forum.

Walker even had the audacity to say he supported this failed policy because “right now we don’t have a free and open marketplace.”

He’s right.  But that’s because government keeps subsidizing ethanol and other energy sources – while waging war against others.

Seriously … in what universe does endorsing further government intervention (which has had demonstrably adverse effects) constitute support for a “free and open marketplace?”

We look forward to Walker explaining that logic when he visits early voting “Republicans” in New Hampshire and South Carolina … who are paying the price for ethanol subsidies at their grocery stores.

Anyway … the only GOP candidate who passed this litmus test?  U.S. Senator Ted Cruz.

“I recognize that this is a gathering of a lot of folks where the answer you’d like me to give is ‘I’m for the (subsidies), darnit;’ that’d be the easy thing to do,” Cruz said. “But I’ll tell you, people are pretty fed up, I think, with politicians who run around and tell one group one thing, tell another group another thing, and then they go to Washington and they don’t do anything that they said they would do. And I think that’s a big part of the reason we have the problems we have in Washington, is there have been career politicians in both parties that aren’t listening to the American people and aren’t doing what they said they would do.”

Amen to that … and props to Cruz for being the only candidate to stand on principle (while standing in the belly of the beast).

For those of you keeping score at home, Cruz has introduced legislation which would repeal the subsidies over the next five years – arguing government “should pursue an all-of-the-above energy policy and that Washington shouldn’t be picking winners and losers.”

Again, Amen to that …

Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama were both wrong to champion this policy … and the current crop of “Republican” candidates are wrong to call for its perpetuation.  The “Republican-controlled” Congress should immediately pass Cruz’s bill … while “Republican” voters should support a candidate for the White House committed to signing it.

Otherwise, all that “free market” talk is just that … talk.

UPDATE: Looks like former New York governor George Pataki also got the ethanol question right.  

***