« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Tim Pawlenty comes out against farm subsidies. In Iowa.

By: Moe Lane (Diary)  |  May 23rd, 2011 at 02:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

In his official speech kicking off his campaign:

I’m here today to tell Iowans the truth, too.

America is facing a crushing debt crisis the likes of which we’ve never seen before.  We need to cut spending, and we need to cut it…big time. The hard truth is that there are no longer any sacred programs.

The truth about federal energy subsidies, including federal subsidies for ethanol, is that they have to be phased out.  We need to do it gradually.  We need to do it fairly.  But we need to do it.

Now, I’m not some out-of-touch politician.  I served two terms as Governor of an ag state.  I fully understand and respect the critical role farming plays in our economy and our society.  I’ve strongly supported ethanol in various ways over the years, and I still believe in the promise of renewable fuels – both for our economy and our national security.

But even in Minnesota, when faced with fiscal challenges, we reduced ethanol subsidies.  That’s where we are now in Washington, but on a much, much larger scale.

It’s not only ethanol.  We need to change our approach to subsidies in all industries.

It can’t be done overnight.  The industry has made large investments, and it wouldn’t be fair to pull the rug out from under it immediately.  But we must face the truth that if we want to invite more competition, more investment, and more innovation into an industry – we need to get government out.  We also need the government out of the business of handing out favors and special deals.  The free market, not freebies from politicians, should decide a company’s success.  So, as part of a larger reform, we need to phase out subsidies across all sources of energy and all industries, including ethanol.  We simply can’t afford them anymore.

As I have been reminded privately, in 2008 John McCain likewise came out against ethanol… and paid the price for it in Iowa and Indiana.  And it might make Pawlenty pay the same price in 2012; but the truth is, we really can’t afford ethanol subsidies anymore.  Either economically, or  – increasingly – in terms of world security*.  So the sooner we have more candidates feeling comfortable in telling early primary states that their particular sacred cows aren’t actually all that sacred, the better off we’re all going to be…

Moe Lane (crosspost)

*No, seriously, world security.  Decrease the amount of food available (and raising food prices means that there’s less food available for the poor), and you get geopolitical instability as surely as night follows day.

Tags: , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • Change Jar Conservative

    In case you were wondering who was going to go after Daniels’ “truth telling” followers, I think we can safely say it was Pawlenty.

    Will this kill him in Iowa or is the country really ready for change?

  • Hooah_Mac

    So that will help him in Iowa, and although agriculture is a sacred cow in Iowa and much of the Midwest, social conservatism is very big too. I also think that given our financial crises, less people who aren’t directly affected by these subsidies will consider them sacred.

    Without a Huckabee, Pawlenty should do well in Iowa. I am guessing that Bachmann could pull some of the SoCon votes there, but unless she proves herself a truly viable candidate, it won’t be a large amount.

    The mood has changed, and although being prolife is required to get SoCon support, many are looking at the financial stuff more closely too. At one time, the bigger deal you made about social issues the better you did with all the social conservatives. I don’t think that is as much the case as it once was.

  • http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

    or brilliant.

    Guess we’ll find out.

  • d_lamar

    I disagree that it should be done slowly. The country is going bankrupt. We’ve run out of time to cut back government spending slowly.

    Second, ethanol is a negative energy source. It takes more energy to plant the corn, grow it, harvest it, and convert it to ethanol, than it produces. It makes no sense to continue growing food for fuel.

    Third, it is not efficient as a fuel source. It causes problems in small motors that do not have computerized timing, such as lawn mowers, motorcycles, airplanes, and boats. In automobiles and trucks, it reduces fuel economy.

    Fourth, the use of corn to produce ethanol has resulted in a shortage of corn used food. Thus the shortage has caused the price of corn to increase, and causing everything that contains corn to increase. Many foods are more expensive than they should be, including the feed for hogs and cattle, making them more costly.

    For all these reasons, other than subsidizing farmers and ethanol conversion plants, there is absolutely no reason to be adding it to gasoline.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister
  • jeffreywturner

    given that it was recently forced upon the state by judges (as usual), and 3 of those judges were just ousted, primarily due to that issue.

    Accordingly, I see that issue making a difference to caucus-goers, however in the general election when the masses are participating, money is going to trump all other issues as it always does, and I doubt that most of those folks will want to stop the gravy train that has been delivering our money to them for years now.

  • swami7774

    I give him props for speaking the truth to a crowd that will be hurt economically by the truth.
    I just hope the number of Americans willing to listen to the truth outnumbers those who can’t see beyond their next government handout.

  • zornorph

    More and more, I am becoming very happy with my pick of Pawlenty as the candidate who I support. I mean, when the biggest knock against you is that you are dull…Al Gore was dull as well, but were it not for some well-meaning lady in Palm Beach County worrying about the bad eyesight of seniors, he’d have been president.

  • cordpt

    When it comes to farm subsidies, you can phase them out gradually or no cuts whatsoever will happen. This is as much part of the truth as the need to cut them as quick as possible. Key word, possible.

    Once again, your post is worth reading.

    My applause to Tim Pawlenty.

  • paramedichess

    In his opening video, Pawlenty promised that he would tell America the truth, even when it meant making hard decisions (nicely contrasted to our rainbows and unicorns President) and today, in Iowa, he did. Chris Christy stood up in NJ and laid everything on the table, and got beat up for it. It was the right thing to do. Today Tim Pawlenty showed that he is not afraid to tell the hard truth too, even when it means getting beat up by his own party members. This is what we need in a president.

  • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

    You can read the text yourself here:
    http://www.nationalreview.com/primary-event/267883/pawlenty-s-katrina-trinko

    Props for bringing up the ethanol subsidy, but “phasing it out” really means voting to extend the subsidy. Doing nothing will eliminate the subsidy because like the Bush tax cuts it has to be either extended or made permanent. I am in favor of letting the ethanol subsidy expire, which is should have done on Dec 31, 2010. It drives up the cost of food and is an energy sink-hole, unless we have $6 a gallon gasoline.

  • Duke

    by telling them, as one of his first acts as President, he’ll disestablish the EPA?

    Talk about getting the farmers revved-up – as well as most of the rest of America! He’d get my vote, my contribution and a good deal of shoe leather.

  • theillinoisguy

    And let’s be honest, with the price of corn, it’s not like we need to subsidize ethanol to bump corn prices. America is probably more than ready for TPaw. He is the best of the bunch right now, and just needs to get the momentum to best Romney in fundraising. He?ll be the next president after the excitement of taking out bin Laden wears off. We DO still have an economy to worry about.
    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/8083871/how_tim_pawlenty_could_win_the_gop.html?cat=9

  • acat

    with license plates made by several of our former Governors…

    Mew

  • snowshooze

    I honestly know next to nothing about him.
    But his opener was great. Previously, I had only hopes for Cain, also a fine man.
    So I am very pleased and welcome another good contender.
    Obama doesn’t stand a chance against either one.
    Our only concern after lining up our prospects is the threat of a split vote, but hopefully, both Cain and Pawlenty can come head to head with Obama.
    I am content to watch this play out for now. I wonder if any more will join.

  • http://www.thehayride.com MacAoidh

    …for the following reason…

    “Why? Because regardless of how popular ethanol subsidies might be for corn farmers there, and the public perception among the majority is that those farmers need ethanol subsidies, it’s anything but suicide to attack those subsidies.

    “Because you don’t need to get a majority of the vote in Iowa to win the caucus. You need 20-25 percent in a large field of candidates and you win.

    “Everybody else in the race will either dodge the question or they’ll do like Newt Gingrich and whore themselves out to the ethanol lobby in search of a constituency they can build.

    “But ranchers and hog farmers in Iowa don’t like ethanol subsidies; ethanol subsidies make animal feed outrageously expensive since those guys use corn to feed their livestock. And there are easily enough people who aren’t beholden to those subsidies to acquire a constituency of, say, 20-25 percent. So if you’re the one candidate willing to take a strong position against subsidies, which is probably the most important presidential campaign issue in Iowa, that quarter of the population really doesn’t have anywhere to go but to you.”

    http://thehayride.com/2011/05/gotta-give-pawlenty-a-look/

  • http://www.thehayride.com MacAoidh

    …which would include farm subsidies, would it not?

  • toothpick

    What a terrific way to begin the campaign. Telling the truth even when it’s unpleasant or uncomfortable for some. Especially when it’s unpleasant or uncomfortable. It could turn out to be a very smart move politically – it will get the Tea Party types (like me) much more favorably disposed to him.

  • swvapatriot

    Want ethanol subsidies, we’ll borrow more money.

    Want cotton & sugar subsidies, we’ll borrow more money.

    Want food stamps, we’ll borrow more money.

    Don’t touch my Medicare, we’ll borrow more money.

    Leave my Social Security alone, we’ll borrow more money.

    Leave my State benefits alone, we’ll borrow more money.

    We need more money for education administrators, we’ll borrow more money.

    We need renewable green energy sources, we’ll boeeow more money.

    ad infinitem

    Does everyone get the picture? This cannot go on!

  • earlgrey

    when G. Costanza decided he was going to do the opposite of what his instincts told him to do.

  • YnotNOW

    Pawlenty looks “ballsy” because he is willing to stand up to the Ethanol and Ag lobby in the capital of subsidies (aka Iowa).

    I would prefer if he added the principled stand that subsidies distort markets and make them economically inefficient – but try selling that line in a sound bite. “Can’t afford it” will do.

    Then he has the gravitas to stand up to other special interests, too.

  • YnotNOW

    Pawlenty looks “ballsy” because he is willing to stand up to the Ethanol and Ag lobby in the capital of subsidies (aka Iowa).

    I would prefer if he added the principled stand that subsidies distort markets and make them economically inefficient – but try selling that line in a sound bite. “Can’t afford it” will do.

    Then he has the gravitas to stand up to other special interests, too.

  • YnotNOW

    Because it takes huge political will just to propose a gradual phase out – could you imagine the screaming if it were done faster? And NT is right that it is not moral to pull the rug out from under the industry that Government set up to rely on subsidy – a transition period is only reasonable.

  • YnotNOW

    Because it takes huge political will just to propose a gradual phase out – could you imagine the screaming if it were done faster? And NT is right that it is not moral to pull the rug out from under the industry that Government set up to rely on subsidy – a transition period is only reasonable.

  • jomo2009

    that Pawlenty is going to go to Florida and tell the seniors down there that we need to reform Social Security and Medicare as quickly as possible. And also go to New York and tell Wall Street that the bailouts of financial institutions are at an end. If true, this could allow him to break from the pack and challenge Romney right to the convention if need be.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    I have been hating farm subsidies for decades.

  • rememberthealamo

    If one of the points to supporting TPaw is that he can get us MN’s electoral votes instead of them going blue for Obama, has there been any polling that gives hope to that view? Any polling showing Obama vs. TPaw in MN or any other traditional blue state?

  • jeffsech

    Swami said, “…I just hope the number of Americans willing to listen to the truth outnumbers those who can?t see beyond their next government handout.”

    Just so. There’s no moral difference between the UAW holding the rest of American consumers hostage and the farmers of the midwest doing the same. I’m sick to death of the pandering to special interest groups. Pawlenty must go after ethanol–he’s running for national office, not governor of Iowa.

  • aesthete
  • paramedichess

    Minnesota only has nine electoral votes. It would be nice if Pawlenty swung those to the R category, but what really matters is whether the ticket (I like Pawlenty/Rubio) can win a majority of FL, OH, VA, NM, NV, CO and NC. If we can swing those relatively conservative states, Obama can have MN.

  • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

    What Pawlenty said was: “So, as part of a larger reform, we need to phase out subsidies across all sources of energy and all industries, including ethanol. ” The words are carefully chosen and nuanced. Clearly he means phasing out subsidies both for “green energy” like ethanol, but also for big oil and gas”. But “all industries” can be construed to mean all farms, only agribusinesses or no agricultural subsidies. He also provides no time-line, just “phase out”. I’m not being critical, just realistic. He’s not Paul Ryan and he’s certainly not Paul Rand. I’m not even sure he’s Mitch Daniels at this point.

  • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

    by choosing a candidate who puts more states in play. A candidate would have to run the table if limited to your map.

  • layedbackguy2

    I agree with everything Moe Lane, T-Paw, and most of the comments just posted have to say.

    …this Left-Winger needs a shot of bourbon, quick!

  • http://www.redstate.com/jcrestonm jcrestonm

    I agree. We need someone who can expand the electoral map. Tpaw and Rubio or maybe Jeb Bush could do it.

  • http://www.redstate.com/jcrestonm jcrestonm

    Pawlenty 1
    Cain, Romney -1
    Gingrich -2
    Everyone else 0

    Pawlenty is looking better and better. Cain declines having a foreign policy while Romney won’t apologize for Romneycare

  • http://electionsanalysis.blog.com paint_it_red

    Talking about standing against special interests is cheap, but taking a stand during primary season against ethanol subsidies in Iowa is character proving. He also talked about the need to be honest about Social Security to seniors in Florida.

    He called Obama out on race baiting and corrupt deal-making, and he struck a tone of bipartisanship that the fufu folks without real political conviction in the center just love.

    Its still early, but if I voted today, it’d be Pawlenty.

  • concap
  • victrola

    I’m already on the T-Paw bandwagon, but I’m still impressed, this is real political courage. The fact that he won’t whore himself out to whichever political audience is in front of him speaks volumes.

    I have zero doubt some in our camp would prefer a figure that has NO record, that just spouts off bumper sticker slogans, but the knocks against Pawlenty’s conservative credential are pretty obscure.

    I also think it’s smart politics, of course there’s a large subset in Iowa that wants to continue the gravy train of farm subsidies, but I tend to think the overwhelming majority of conservative Republican participants would be against it ideologically, and Pawlenty only needs a plurality. It also will boost his campaign nationwide as a straight talker.

  • Blue_State_Refugee

    Until today, I had no favorite candidate….only candidates I know I did not want to win because they were not principled conservatives or did not possess a vertabral column. That’s changed with Pawlenty, and now I’m all in. He’s actually apologized to an extent for his past transgressions (cap and trade). Finally, someone who tells us what we need to hear, not what we want to hear.

    It’s going to be interesting to see how much weight Iowa plays into Pawlenty’s run. I think we may have wait until South Carolina to see how conservative Republicans will rank him.

  • GregInFla

    Chicago Tribune reports record-high corn prices have farmers wondering to lock in now or wait for even higher prices.

  • rememberthealamo

    Perry/Rubio sounds better. Perry has a better conservative record, is better on the stump, better in debates against Obama, and can win Iowa – farmers, conservatives, and Christians

  • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

    In case you haven’t heard, neither Perry nor Rubio is running and Rubio has even ruled out Veep. A governor from Texas (or former governor from Taxachusetts for that matter) does nothing to open up the electoral college map. The Midwest is where all of the potential action is–Republicans carried contests in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa in the 2010. Obama carried all of these states. So we need a Midwest ticket.

  • Adjoran

    . . . the ethanol.

  • Adjoran

    There won’t be the nod-and-wink tolerance for pandering to ethanol in Iowa this time around, not with corn supplies driving up food costs for everyone and unrest in unstable parts of the world, and fuel costs sky-high too.

    Go to Iowa and praise ethanol subsidies and you’ll be out by SC. We won’t stand for it anymore.

  • http://www.gmsplace.com/ civil truth

    …for Pawlenty, if you’re talking about possibly putting more purple states into play. Too early of course to know the eletoral map in 2012.

  • http://theheartlander.wordpress.com/ heartlander

    is that this tells us that he “gets it” that we truly are in a different political landscape now, thanks to the Tea Party. Americans are seriously worried about whether there will still be a country left for their grandchildren. We ARE willing to change the way we do things.

    Yes, indeed, Adjoran, “We won’t stand for it anymore.”

    The fact that Pawlenty gives us credit for that tells me that he’s not only bold and honest, but perceptive/savvy/smart. I like someone who respects our intelligence enough not to pander!

  • nickel

    Good for Governor Pawlenty. It takes some real guts to tell it like it is to the farm lobby and this is the first step toward getting some real support among the Tea Party and the other financial conservatives in the party. Congratulations for a good stand on real principals.

  • nickel

    Good for Governor Pawlenty. It takes some real guts to tell it like it is to the farm lobby and this is the first step toward getting some real support among the Tea Party and the other financial conservatives in the party. Congratulations for a good stand on real principals.

  • jlsankot

    I am really tired of the common belief that ethanol is the cause of higher food prices. The midwest has increased corn production greatly due to better planting practices and improved seed corn. Therefore, there is NO SHORTAGE of corn to use for food OR ethanol.

    Now….stop and think about how your food gets to the store. By transport, right? Truck, van, train, plane, etc. These vehicles obviously need fuel to make the transport of food to the store. What is the gas price in your neighborhood or your town? Mine is pretty darn high. Why? Ask Obama—he’s the one who put the drilling moratorium in place and won’t allow any exploration, drilling, etc to happen. Do you suppose that has an effect on the price of your cereal?

    If you think back, cereal prices went up as soon as someone (mistakenly) pointed out that ethanol will increase the price of food. My bet is that the cereal companies decided they had an opportunity to make more money (without taking the blame) and, lo and behold, cereal prices went up. Other foodstuffs with corn followed.

    My point is, the price of corn foodstuffs is more directly related to the price of fuel than corn being used for ethanol.

  • kaptkane

    for the stupidity to stop.
    Ethanol and the accompanying subsidies are just more political bs. Ethanol does not increase fuel mileage, it actually decreases it so the net effect seems to be that we still burn the same amount of fossil fuel per mile and we are destroying our food supply chain (think livestock feed etc) at the same time.

  • jlsankot

    pick a VP who is strong in foreign policy, so don’t dismiss him yet.

  • jlsankot

    “I would like to debunk a common belief”

  • cam1

    trying to make a hit with the conservative base, he has!

  • Duke

    The items you cite above will certainly make a dent in the deficit, and are all good suggestions, but unfortunately we’re a good piece beyond that. We can’t continue to discuss making dents in our borrowing and spending, we’ve got to start talking about cutting – major cutting!

    While we continue to put salve on the wound causing the arterial bleeding we entirely miss the cancer that’s causing the disease. It’s not so much the money spent that’s the problem, it’s the people who are spending the money that are the power behind the spurts of national lifeblood that will simply pick up and continue as soon as we transfuse more money into the body politic. We need a candidate for President, as well as a Congress (both houses, with a 2/3 majority in the Senate), who is willing to eliminate any and all agencies and departments of the federal government where a duplicate effort exists in the individual states. This includes cabiinet offices not specifically delineated in the Constitution.

    If we don’t do this I fear we are addressing a dead man.

  • ihateliberals

    subsidies for ethanol in corn country. the truth of the matter is that as Pawlenty stated it ids time to get government out of the private markets and allow them to seek their own levels. The free markets worked for so many years to get us the prosperity that made this country great and like anything successful Liberals and Progressive Liberals can’t stand success especialy if they weren’t involved. wheni ws young in school and I heard about the Government paying farms to not grow something I thought well how stupid is that. All i had to do to make money was to rent a piece of property and threaten to grow something that the government would pay me to not grow. I didn’t have to do anything but make my monthly rental payment. If something is going to be a success or failure it should do it own its own. There is no reason for the government to get involved. Right on Tim. I hope that these farms see the error of their ways and wean themselves from being blood suckers.

  • gunslingr45

    is right. It needs to end.
    One more thing to look at is, how is the weather going to affect prices on grains this year? I just drove to and from Pottstown PA and the fields are NOT planted in three states. It is almost June. This along with the price of fuel already and food is through the roof, whats it gonna be like in three months if this weather keeps up?
    I think I have my choice for 2012. And his name is common sense.

  • http://www.tooncesthecat.wordpress.com tooncesthecat

    Former 3 term governor of blue-purple state Michigan. Won re-election with 61% and 62% respectively. Since leaving office in 2002 has served as CEO of National Association of Manufacturers and currently as President of Business Roundtable. Won’t upstage Pawlenty, but reinforces jobs message and Washington outsider image. Good Midwestern team that will put Minnesota and Michigan with 27 electoral college votes in play. This election will be won or lost in the Midwest, Florida, Virginia and North Carolina.

  • gekster

    But I don’t think he has any politicle asperations anymore.

  • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908
  • gekster

    But a very good one at that.
    He was the other side of the coin from Granbit…..holm.

  • MF

    As much as we might want for it to go away, there is no way that anyone could get rid of the EPA. It sounds way too good and important to disband it. After all, without the EPA those evil businesses would turn everything into an Erin Brockovich site. /snark Same for Dept. of Education – completely useless, and in fact, more damaging than good comes from it, yet we pour money into it like water into an upside down funnel.

    It would be beyond political suicide for any politician to attemp to get rid of either of these two money pits.

  • The_Gadfly

    over hoping to get the votes of the only state that voted for Carter in Reagan’s landslide victory.

  • The_Gadfly

    but Pawlenty’s stock just went up a couple of notches.

  • pa4ed

    Mow Lane says, “*No, seriously, world security. Decrease the amount of food available (and raising food prices means that there?s less food available for the poor), and you get geopolitical instability as surely as night follows day.”
    Surely Mow knows that the federal government pays farmers NOT to grow crops. Does this not lead to food shortages?
    We need to stop subsidizing everything from farmers to drilling for oil to green initiatives. Let the free market determine it’s place in the economy.
    As Americans we will take care of the poor and needy without government telling us what we need and don’t need to do.

  • gekster

    The government does pay farmers “not” to grow crops,
    and then the same government pays farmers “to” grow crops.(ethanol)
    If this doesn’t explain how messed up our government is, then what will?

  • soljerblue

    in my estimation.

    Before that Iowa speech, I wasn’t especially pro T-Paw. That has changed. But he’s going to have to sing the same song wherever he goes, about all the sacred cows, in whatever part of the country. Still, I could think well of a Pawlenty-Cain ticket. A vetted governor and a straight-talking business guy would make a powerful team against an Obama-Biden proven disaster.

  • eboone

    http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/09/26_mccalluml_ethanol/

    Just another hypocrite politician changing his colors to win votes. Real conservatives here in Minnesota nicknamed him Governor Green for selling us out to the ethanol and wind power activists.