« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Gov. Perry at the Iowa Republican Presidential Forum on Manufacturing.

Perry plans to end federal ethanol subsidies, by the way.

Texas governor and Republican Presidential candidate Rick Perry participated in a Presidential manufacturing forum today in Pella, Iowa (hosted by the Vermeer Corporation): and it’s pretty interesting viewing.

(The entire forum (and transcript) can be seen here.)

Governor Perry answered questions from both the moderators and the audience: if I had to sum up fifteen minutes of informed, fairly specific commentary in one sentence it would be “The single largest problem that the USA is facing in terms of job and economic growth is our own regulatory climate.” Perry was obviously relaxed and confident throughout the proceedings, which leads me to wonder whether a large part of his past public appearance issues have been due to lingering pain from his recent back surgery. Certainly he was knowledgeable and engaging throughout this particular event.

There’s one particular passage that people might find of interest:

[Iowa governor Terry] Branstad: What we would like to know — the wind energy tax credit is going to expire, it has expired three times previously. Senator Grassley has been a real champion of this. We would like to see it extended for four years. Would you support extending that? And also would you support retaining the renewable energy standard which has helped us reduce our dependency on foreign oil?

Perry: I happen to believe the federal government needs to be completely out of the energy business picking winners and losers and let me share with you why. In exchange to get rid of all of those regulations that are out there and whether you’re in the oil and gas business and the tax credits that they get, whether you’re in the ethanol business and the renewable fuel standard or whether you’re in the wind side, from Washington, D.C. I do not think it is the federal government’s business to be picking winners and losers and frankly on any of our energy sources. I mean, these two solar debacles that we’ve seen are pretty good examples of that. But if a state wants to, which is what we did, Terry, we put into place in the state of Texas an incentive for renewables and the wind energy came in and took great advantage of that, that’s the reason we became the number one wind energy producing state in the country. I think if states want to compete against each other by putting those types of standards, those types of incentives in place that is a correct and a proper way for the state. But at the federal level I do not believe that the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. ought to be picking winners and losers in the energy industry or for that matter in any other industry.

Bolding mine: and bolded to note that, contra Newt Gingrich, Gov. Perry is in fact calling oil subsidies ‘picking winners and losers;’ that his program will end those subsidies on a federal level; and that he’ll do the same for ethanol subsidies, too. And – oddly enough! – upon hearing that Iowa voters did not rush the stage to burn him at the stake.

Speaking as a former Pawlenty supporter, it was nice to see.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

PS: I should note, by the way, that we should probably not read too much into the fact that both Herman Cain and Mitt Romney skipped this particular forum (Romney is fundraising among businessmen in NYC, while Cain… well, he was originally supposed to be networking with Dizzy City power brokers). It is a little more interesting that neither will be at Friday’s Des Moines Ronald Reagan Dinner, though.

COMMENTS

  • romansdaughter

    He was awesome and knows what he is talking about. Thanks for the post.

  • avagreen

    He’s my man!
    The man I know is taking front and center.
    Thank you for posting this.

    And, yes, it is strange that neither of other two gentlemen skipped this forum and will be absent for the Ronald Regan Dinner in Des Moines.

    Takes a good campaigner to know when/where to speak.

  • redmymind

    This is the REAL Rick Perry! Inspiring, engaging, substantive, “unhandled,” yet disciplined on his message!

  • carolina

    The only way we will ever shrink the fed govt back to where they belong is to allow the states to take the best approach for themselves. This would actually provide some market competition for ideas and approaches.
    Some small states may whine, but they can always team with a neighboring state if they need to.

  • intensity

    …are brilliant. The federal government’s role in state issues should indeed be minimal.

    The fustrating thing is, although Perry has a perfect platform, he may not get the nomination because of Cain and Romney.

    I have faith. I really believe the cream will rise to the top at the end and Perry will secure the nomination.

    Let’s support him, fellow conservatives!!!!

  • miconservative

    Very refreshing to see a political leader who says NO to federal ethanol subsidies to Iowa and show them how that is in their best interests. This guy gets it on the economy. also loved the line about how he will be hated by the corporate tax loop hole lobbyists in Washington. He is exactly what this country needs. He is an optimistic leader and we will never question where he stands. A little bit different than some others in this race.

  • bzip

    Thanks Moe for bringing this front and center. Back to the real issues.

    Perry has laid out some fanatic plans and has a wonderful vision. Give him a chance for our country depends upon it.

    I don’t care what anyone says, Perry knows what he is doing and can do it.

    Thank you Perry for coming alive. Thank you because I know you are the person to take this country back to the times of freedom again.

  • btpull

    “It is little secret that Texas has always been financially supportive of the energy industry, and Perry’s administration has been no different. In fact, he has helped usher plenty more incentives into place.”

    http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/m/Blogs?oid=oid%3A1269082

    Perry’s new position that the government should not pick winners and losers seems to be one of political convenience.

  • miconservative

    you would hear that the FEDERAL government needs to get out of the tax credit business and allow states to compete against each other. The federal government represents all of us and the states represents more narrow interests. What part of the 10th Amendment don’t you understand??

  • goformitt

    I don’t think he can win in Iowa with an anti-ethanol subsidy position. Ethanol has driven the price of corn to prices that are making many farmers / corporations wealthy – that ripples through refineries, farm machinery / implement sales, farm chemical sales, small and large town economies. In other words, it is a big deal here. And the state doesn’t have the money to replace federal subsidies. If Perry were to withdraw the laws mandating ethanol use, then remove the subsidies we would see another farm crisis here. Land has been selling for unheard of prices and attracting wealthy investors from around the country. Without subsidies land values would drop to half and we would have an avalanche of bankruptcies. Corporations would probably step in and buy much of the land up which translates directly to small towns drying up even faster than they are now.

    I’m not saying I agree with ethanol subsidies, just trying to explain why Perry can’t get traction in Iowa with an anti-ethanol subsidy platform.

    He also can’t win in NH, which together really slows him down out of the gate.

    And now, with the woman who accused Cain asking to be free to speak about the harassment charge, its beginning to look like Romney has it wrapped up.

    I still think Ron Paul is going to make an Independent run though.

  • joayn

    these kinds of subsidies over 5 years, not immediately. I think that’s what I read. Anybody?

  • miconservative

    whether it is Rick Perry or someone else. Remember we have a $1.5 trillion deficit. Perhaps you do not immediately take away the ethanol mandate but simply phase it out over time to prevent the farm crisis you speak of. The rest of us across the country can simply not afford to support your farm bubble in Iowa. And the people in Iowa need to recognize that as well. Hopefully they believe they can compete against the rest of us on equal footing.

  • btpull

    It is about economic freedom and letting free markets and competition work. A true conservative is opposed to government intervention at any level – Federal, State, or Local.

  • goformitt

    Rice and cotton too – hugely subsidized as well. Very important commodities to some states. Remember we actually pay something like $125 million every year to Colombian cotton farmers so they don’t formally complain to the WTO.

    And while Texas may be able to afford wind subsidies, Iowa can’t – and Iowa is actually ahead of Texas in per capita energy production from wind. Wind has become an important industry here. Turbine manufacturing, etc

    Again, I’m not necessarily arguing for ethanol – or any other ag subsidy or payment, just saying there is a huge political price to pay for that position.

  • snowshooze

    Remember, the cost of corn went UP due to ethanol, NOT down .
    Not so many Iowans actually have much in the ethanol game.
    And.. they can still sell all their product.
    By and large…it is a non-issue. In Iowa.
    Archer Daniels Midland might have a gripe…but I don’t know how much they would kick either.

  • izoneguy

    Corn will be more valuable as food.

    Drilling for oil & gas at the levels we should be
    drilling at will crater the price of ethanol.

    Ethanol was a bad idea and it’s time has come & gone.

  • miconservative

    in something not based on market forces but because of federal subsidies? Not very good business plan and doomed to failure. I agree we need to support a strong agricultural sector of the economy, but we are broke! And the market works so much better than government. The fact that you say there is a huge political price and yet Perry has the guts to stand for the right thing is admirable, that is leadership. Romney on the other hand will say whatever he thinks will help him get elected regardless of being right or wrong, liberal or conservative. If Iowa wants wind then keep your renewable portfolio standard high and force your energy producers to use it and have your citizens prepare for higher energy prices. I in Michigan am not interested in subsidizing your wind sector.

  • joayn

    nt

  • goformitt

    Hardly. It is a huge issue. The amount of money pouring into Iowa due to the high commodity prices has kept our economy afloat and unemployment down. Agriculture has been one of the few bright spots in an otherwise depressed economy.

    Removing ag subsidies – from North Dakota beets to Arkansas rice to Mississippi cotton – would throw rural America into a depression.

    IA State U ag economists have calculated that farm land is valued at more than twice what it would be without subsidies. Suddenly removing half the wealth of farmers means the banks would all start recalling their loans and rampant bankruptcies would drive not only farmers, but many towns and counties into bankruptcy

    And just so you know – no one eats Iowa corn except through corn sweeteners. Its not edible by people.

  • skorrent1

    In different venues. Time his responses! He doesn’t have a hostile “moderator” ready to count down from 60 seconds and ring a stupid bell or hollar at him. Moreover, he gets a series of related questions so he can develop his thoughts. He can be very persuasive. Let him talk for 5 or 10 minutes, and then pull out your sound bites or bumper stickers if you have to. I suggest: “Cut regulations.” and “Don’t pick winners and losers.”

  • skorrent1

    In states? We have 50 competitors. If Massachusetts wants to give” free” medical care to everyone, or Texas wants to build windmills that stand dead still on hot summer days, the other 48 states can learn from their experience.

  • goformitt

    Are not particularly interested in bailing out your car manufacturers :-) Or your massive welfare state!

  • miconservative

    Create a nice bubble that when it bursts crushes the economy. Stupid policy that cannot be sustained. Government creating bubbles is just plain wrong and certainly not conservative. So we need to bake in all of the Obama government subsidies? That is why we need a balanced budget amendment.

  • miconservative

    who is ending all corporate welfare and establishing a tax code that is fair for all. Ending the practice of picking winners and losers. Putting conservative principles into practice and it is working. He also just rolled back welfare and is making other tough calls.

    As for the car manufacturers it is the federal government that has imposed stupid fuel efficiency standards that distorted market forces and hurt productivity. You also see that the one car company that didn’t take bailout is doing the best in the market place. Not for auto bailout either. We also have farmers here. What we need to support the farmers is expanded crop insurance efforts, not subsidies that distort the market.

  • sunshinek67

    locked up victory for Mitt Romney. Not sure how you came to that conclusion that Perry can’t win NH. Remember last time a Senator from Arizona thousands of miles away from NH delivered Romney a straight beat down. Shameful, Romney is one of their own, contributes to their tax base, neighbors and even THEY didn’t help him out for the nomination.

    As a matter of fact, most of these instate polls have a huge majority of voters that are undecided. Mitt Romney’s 25% avg poll
    numbers always run second to the 75% ABR splintered conservative vote. Once those lower tier no money candidates start dropping out it’s going to be Romney and Perry. Keep in mind, Perry has millions & so does his SuperPac~

  • gekster

    Or calling for any massive wellfare states.
    So tell me how Obama and the Dems doing the car and wellfare thing,
    and you saying that they are ‘ours’ going to help the flipper.

  • miconservative

    That the American people are getting the loans to the auto industry repaid and the subsidies just get added to the debt each year.

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

    nt

  • citizenkh

    Here is how he did not turn them off.
    1. Ethanol is only being produced because of the EPA mandate regarding fuel oxygenator for ozone pollution. That question never came up.
    2. Other then a few anomalies, the vast majority of ethanol plants are majority local farmer owned in order to obtain state tax credits from 20 to 30 cents per gallon depending on the state where it is located, regardless of what company name is on the sign.
    3. He mentioned the co-product of grain dry milled ethanol, DDGS for animal feed. These are the solids which remain after fermentation and are used as a high protein feed in pig farms and cattle feedlots.

    So, he obviously showed that he knew something about ethanol and promoted the right of these ethanol states to subsidize that industry.

    In addition, he was engaging with the crowd as if he were sitting in their living room and turned often to the crowd to include everyone. This is Perry’s really strong retail politics manner, to include the entire crowd.

    I cannot wait to see him in the general election filling stadiums (as he has done in Texas) with rallies, and working the entire crowd.

  • Menlo

    I don’t consider GMO to be legitimate “corn,” and neither do a lot of other people. That rules out most of what’s grown in this country.

    While I don’t eat corn itself, the corn-based ingredients I use for cooking come from Austria. It’s triple the price, but it’s worth it.

  • acat

    Because, you know, most of the corn we eat either on the cob as sweet corn or as the stuff they turn into cereal and cake batter and whatnot is highly gene-selected.

    It’s a far cry from even the maize the colonists would have encountered… and most of those changes were made through breeding and .. call it unnatural selection well before gene splicing was anything more than science fiction.

    Just curious where you draw the line.

    Mew

  • Menlo

    It involves synthetic restructuring and combining of genes that could never possibly occur naturally through conventional breeding. Results are unpredictable in the long-term.

  • avgjo

    nt.

  • don12345

    How do you know which Perry will be going against Obama?

    If we get the wrong Perry debating against Obama, then Obama will win by a landslide.

    Cain should drop out so Perry can get more debating time to hopefully get ready for prime time. Cain has lied repeatedly to us and the American people. The allegations against him, he slowly backtracked and now does not deny. Cain please drop out because we can’t let Obama win. Hopefully, Perry can stop taking those painkillers so we have a shot. Last weekend was awful, he looked high in NH. These guys keep looking like characters in a Star Wars bar.

  • bzip

    This is why this type of debate format is wonderful. It gives the candidates time to answer with substance. They can really talk about the issues and how they would like to approach the problem instead of a three ring circus with the idea being attack, and attack.

    What can we do to get this format at all the other upcoming debates? Does anyone know how to go about getting this done?

  • bzip

    Perry did not look high or drunk if you watch the entire speech I don’t see how anyone could suggest he was high or drunk. Rick Perry was being passionate. In a formal setting he is like he is in this Iowa forum, in a relax format he is like he is in the NH speech and certainly not high.

  • beach91

    media drum-beat that he was drunk or on drugs or whatever. Watch the whole video yourself and then make an observation based on your view and not on what someone else is telling you. There is even a diary talking about this very issue. At this point you are only contributing media talking points.

    The ‘wrong’ Perry?? Please define that from your own observation and not someone else’s viewpoint. He seems pretty consistent lately and has only won 3 times in a row in Texas as governor.

    Last weekend wasn’t awful in my own thinking as I think for myself. Please tell what was awful about it from your own thoughts.

  • dvdmsr

    People have some interest in regulating the market place or in the actions of others, and through their representatives they can and should be able to collectively impose reasonable regulations over such things where their rights and interests may conflict. My first rule of what is reasonable is that we maximize the influence that individuals have over that rule making authority, and that the people who don’t like it have a choice to live somewhere else.

    This is best done by leaving the bulk of this rule-making to the state and local governments where we the people are all much bigger fish. We then aren’t putting all our eggs in one (national) basket, and so if we screw up, not only is the rest of the country spared the worst of our mistake, but the overly regulated (those that don’t like it) can flee to other jurisdictions within the country where the business climate or general situation is better for them.

    IMO, this scenario of competition between the states offers the best hope for balancing the cost and benefits of regulations not only for the people of a particular state, but to the whole country. This is the shear genius of federalism, and it has been sadly lost to some degree due to the success of statists (whether Republican or Democrat) who have sought to impose a narrow unitary vision upon all the people in this country, and who have been very successful at doing this by making every inherently state and local issue a national issue.

    Perry understand this more than any of the other candidate, and it is why he is still my first choice.

  • dvdmsr

    due to the sucess of statists (whether Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, etc.) who have…

  • bzip

    New ad by Perry running in Iowa and other states. Appears to fit nicely with his discussion at the forum:

    http://youtu.be/xB8NudYGNsk

  • izoneguy

    Document Found That Touched Off the Mortgage Meltdown

    [In 1994] the federal government declared war on an enemy ? the racist lender ? who officials claimed was to blame for differences in homeownership rate, and launched what would prove the costliest social crusade in U.S. history.

    At President Clinton’s direction, no fewer than 10 federal agencies issued a chilling ultimatum to banks and mortgage lenders to ease credit for lower-income minorities or face investigations for lending discrimination and suffer the related adverse publicity. They also were threatened with denial of access to the all-important secondary mortgage market and stiff fines, along with other penalties.

    The threat was codified in a 20-page “Policy Statement on Discrimination in Lending” and entered into the Federal Register on April 15, 1994, by the Interagency Task Force on Fair Lending. Clinton set up the little-known body to coordinate an unprecedented crackdown on alleged bank redlining.

    Barack Obama can blame George W. Bush, Herman Cain, Rick Perry, and Carmen Electra for the housing crisis. But the real culprits were the social engineers, criminals and cronies in the Clinton administration.

  • georges

    Dr. Paul will not make an independent run, because he will be the Republican nominee. And as fanciful as that may sound, it is an inevitability. None of these other guys, Perry included, have the credibility and conservative record, leadership, and determination to see We the People through the sort of economic collapse that’s upon us.

    Circumstance will bring America to Dr. Ron Paul.

  • georges

    Dr. Paul will not make an independent run, because he will be the Republican nominee. And as fanciful as that may sound, it is an inevitability. None of these other guys, Perry included, have the credibility and conservative record, leadership, and determination to see We the People through the sort of economic collapse that’s upon us.

    Circumstance will bring America to Dr. Ron Paul.

  • politicalgal1

    According to reports from people actually at the NH event AND from political reporters covering the event, Perry received a standing ovation after the event.

    Amazing how a creative video editor can piece together clips and give it a different persona.

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    ….ummm…..AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Thanks, I really needed that today.

  • bzip

    Hate to break the news to ya, but Ron Paul should be lock up in a rubber room.

  • Aaron Gardner

    nt

  • politicalgal1

    in Iowa. On the flip side, you have the Iowa beef, pork, and poultry industries experiencing the rising price of corn as a higher cost of doing business.

    Talk to Iowans who refuse to use ethanol blend when fueling at the pump because it gets lower miles per gallon.

    When the price of oil comes down, the high cost of ethanol will not be able to compete in blended fuels.

    Really would have been interesting to have Romney there and see how he would have responded to the question. My guess is that he would have pandered – yet again.

  • tngal

    so you’re point is?

    He’s as passionate about his candidate as you are about yours (Perry). And me about mine (Cain).

    Running to the teacher everytime you find someone who is not aligned with your candidate doesn’t improve your image. Ron Paul is allowed at the debates and polls well in some states.

    Offer up ways on how your candidate and his differ and then make logical argument of some type. “Rubber Room” is not a mature comment that furthers good dialogue in the political realm. Remember, if Paul does not win the primary, his people will need to go somewhere. Are you drawing them to your candidate? Pushing them to another? Or merely sending them home to not take part?

  • mkozikowski

    AND No FLOP.

    Perry is on track and has been.
    He believes what he says and says what he believes.

    He is truly the only candidate that stands with Conservatives.

  • Aaron Gardner

    I suggest you leave this one alone and not try to score points against bzip on this one.

  • goformitt

    If you refuse to eat any GMO food, or animals fed GMO grains, you will either eat very little, or pay 5 times as much as everybody else for food.

    So far, there are no side effects to GMO plants found in the lab or the field. Matter of fact, it’s immediate impact is a drastic improvement in the environment due to decreased pesticide use.

    I would be willing to bet – unless your utterly fanatical about your eating habits – that you currently consume lots of GMOs

  • goformitt

    I guess I haven’t been around long enough to ignore that line under the post box, “Be respectful”. I don’t agree with a lot of what Paul says, but it is very clear that the current crop of mainstream candidates sound a lot more like Paul then they did a few years ago. While everybody else is trying to nuance a position, or even 180 degree flip-flops (I know, I know), Paul has been 100% consistent.

    Just trying to be objective – he seems to have influenced main stream politicians to a very significant degree.

  • Aaron Gardner

    nt.

  • politicalgal1

    with him? Unlikely. If you think Congress has a bad reputation now, imagine a Republic House and Senate and a President Paul. The MSM can REALLY have a heyday with getting nothing done. And, if we have a veto proof House and Senate vetoing Paul’s proposals, that should make for great headlines.

  • streiff

    unless you desire to be “goneformitt.”

  • goformitt

    I don’t think I do overestimate the popularity of ethanol. It has nothing to do with who uses it at the pump, it is the understanding that it brings hundreds of millions to the rural parts of the state and is probably the single most important aspect of the rural economy right now (along with corn/bean subsidies, direct payments, ethanol mandates).

    And, as I said, its not just Iowa and not just corn. Pulling back on crop subsidies will have a huge negative impact on rural America. You’ll see scenes right out of the Great Depression if you were to remove crop subsidies, direct payments and other forms of “ag welfare”.

    To give you an idea of how much political clout the ag industry has – Sen Grassley R-IA has been trying to limit direct payments (This is the hundreds of millions farmers get for NOT growing a crop) to farmers making less than $250,000 per year – and he can’t get it done!

    In other words, you can be a corporate farmer making a quarter million in annual income and you STILL get thousands of ag welfare from the gov’t every year. An these direct payments are a Reagan era legacy – so both parties are in on it.

    Finally, most livestock farmers hedge their bets with their corn/bean operation. So they don’t suffer much when feed costs go up. Matter of fact, the pig operations are making lots of money these days – look at hog prices over the past 3 years.

    Ron Paul may have the guts to change the farm subsidy system wholesale, but no other candidate will have the guts to. Believe me – it may get caressed around the edges, but no wholesale alterations will be made.

  • acat

    Curious how you’re avoiding “frankenfood” when it’s not plainly labeled, and when there’s no established guidelines for the “non-GMO” labels some brands tout.

    Mew

  • Menlo

    Corn and soybeans, and the products derived from them, are the only significant culprits in the food supply. I do not eat the processed foods that most Americans do, and for anything containing corn or soy (which is not much), I would only trust organic or find an alternative food.

  • Menlo

    Monsanto has not crept its way into too many foods yet.

    Your response is the standard line for those who financially benefit from the current policy and lack of regulation. I haven’t done much research on pesticide use but have heard some arguments that it has worsened or increased resistance. The “side effects” can be less evident and take time to show up. You are not going to see something that quickly because evolution takes time. The “studies” available are akin to a Planned Parenthood or APA study showing the “safety” of abortion.

    I am indeed very fanatical about my eating habits.

  • 1bunny

    there is a blog I was looking at today when I dropped in on rickperryreport. A Smart Girl Politics blogger has rounded up a bunch of videos of Perry and it shows he has been consistent through the years (long before running for president) so he does not change to suit the meme candidates running for president pull on the voters.

    http://smartgirlpolitics.ning.com/profiles/blogs/its-not-rhetoric

  • politicalgal1

    market for ethanol by mandating its use in renewable fuel standards. If a product is good and has a market demand, the federal government should not have to create the market for the product.

  • snowshooze

    If it cost’s $600 a ton to grow beets and deliver them, you best be getting $900 for the stuff, or better.
    If you lose your $300 a ton subsidy, you best be picking up the difference in the sale, and if you can’t do that you better start eating them.
    So we will see the cost go up in the store…BUT… we will not be paying the subsidy with tax dollars. If you don’t like beets, don’t buy them, and the beet Farmer, get’s nothing from you.
    But.. with the subsidy, if you don’t buy beets.. it doesn’t matter.
    You are still buying.

  • snowshooze

    In fact, Monsanto sued a farmer for growing the product where it had encroached upon his fields by itself.
    And they beat him.
    Additionally, as the genetics have crossed over, a court case was made and won that non-GMO corn is essentially history.
    If you don’t buy round-up, the stuff will not even produce.
    Guess who makes Round-Up.

  • snowshooze

    And I am not the least bit surprised about the EPA mandate.
    I wish they would mandate MY products though… I feel left out.

  • Menlo

    That’s why the corn-based products labeled “organic” originate from Austria.

    I’ve heard about those injustices, though I’m not fully aware of all the details. It’s not surprising; I have already stated numerous times I have not the slightest bit of respect whatsoever for the nation’s judicial system or judges.

  • BA Cyclone

    I like your comment:

    Monsanto has not crept its way into too many foods yet.

    Roundup Ready? Soybeans were commercialized in 1996, followed by alfalfa, corn, cotton, spring canola, sugarbeets and winter canola.

    So yeah, if you include 1 degree of separation, you pretty much would have to import ALL your food from Mars to avoid this level of science. Good luck with that.

  • Menlo

    I do not eat those products or derivatives of them, although I have bought organic maltodextrin imported from Austria.