Cape Gazette: US House candidate Scott Gesty on eliminating ethanol mandates

This is only one of the reasons that John Carney has been a failure in Congress, detailed by Scott's letter, published today in the Cape Gazette:

Much of Delaware's economy depends on her poultry growers, and their livelihood is directly tied to fuel and feed costs.

Recently, the Department of Agriculture predicted the worst corn harvest in nearly 20 years as a result of Midwestern droughts. Our Democratic congressional delegation asked the Environmental Protection Agency for a temporary waiver of mandates that a certain percentage of America's corn crop be reserved for ethanol production.

While I support such a waiver as an emergency measure, the reality is that the United States needs to end the failed experiment in using corn ethanol as a biofuel and stop distorting market forces to the disadvantage of our own citizens, and especially Delaware's poultry industry.

Government-mandated ethanol drives up the price of food and feed by artificially removing a high percentage of our corn crop from the market. There has been no discernible benefit in terms of better gas mileage or reduced environmental impact. In fact, the large amounts of water needed to process corn into ethanol are creating negative environmental impacts of their own.

The United States has already ended ethanol subsidies, and now we need to end ethanol mandates. If ethanol is a commercially viable fuel, the industry will survive. But it should not be allowed to survive at the expense of our region's farmers and poultry producers, who are currently being forced to underwrite a social program under the guise of environmental protection.

If elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, one of my top priorities will be the introduction of legislation to end all ethanol mandates. This will result in lower prices at the grocery store and lower feed prices for our poultry producers, while the nation pursues other, more realistic strategies for energy independence.

Scott Gesty

Libertarian candidate for U.S. House of Representatives

Comments

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog