Pawlenty's Tough Ethanol Talk Could be Good for Primary Process

May 24, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (8)

Former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty may be the craziest candidate to run for president in some time. Or, he may just be the bravest.

On the day of his official announcement that he is seeking the GOP nomination for president, Pawlenty went to Iowa and uttered the words many candidates may have wanted to say over the years, but suppressed in the interests of placating first-caucuses voters: [Check out political cartoons about the 2012 GOP field.]

We need to phase out subsidies across all sources of energy and all industries, including ethanol. We simply can't afford them anymore. Some people will be upset by what I'm saying. Conventional wisdom says you can't talk about ethanol in Iowa or Social Security in Florida or financial reform on Wall Street. But someone has to say it. Someone has to finally stand up and level with the American people. Someone has to lead--I will.

This is a counter-intuitive approach. Will he go next to Nevada, railing against the gambling industry? And then to New Hampshire, where he could refuse to rule out tax increases? Then, he could go to South Carolina and argue for strict gun control.

Yet, maybe such talk--irrespective of the merits of the stances themselves--is just what the primary process needs. One of the reasons the rest of the country gets irritated with New Hampshire and Iowa’s insistence on hosting the first-in-the-nation primary and caucuses, respectively, is that the setup gives amplified attention to demands from those states’ voters. That would be ethanol in Iowa, and the no-new-taxes pledge in New Hampshire. The early states’ voters have a right to their issues, but they don’t have the right to make them litmus tests for a successful national campaign.

In critical ways, New Hampshire and Iowa make excellent venues for early presidential contests. Voters in both states take the roles very, very seriously. It’s like jury duty; voters feel obligated to actually show up and listen to the candidates, even those the political cognoscenti has decided in advance aren’t going anywhere. And the media markets are smaller and cheaper; one simply can’t buy an election in New Hampshire. There just isn’t enough TV time to purchase. Money matters, but candidates still have to show up and talk to locals if they want votes.

[See a slide show of 10 issues driving Obama's re-election campaign.]

The Internet has changed the dynamic substantially; in the past, a candidate pretty much had to win or at least place well in the early contests to convince donors to send the checks necessary to get them to the next state. Now, a candidate can raise pots of money, very quickly, online, giving an extended chance to an expanded slate of contenders. Iowa and New Hampshire do an admirable job of vetting presidential candidates. But Pawlenty may take away a bit of their power.

Tags:
Tim Pawlenty,
gun control and gun rights,
2012 presidential election,
energy policy and climate change,
Republican Party

Reader Comments Read all comments (8)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

"Do away with the subsidies"

"On ethanol" - them's fightin' words

Coming from the Prez wannabes

Amongst Iowa's voting herds.

In Iowa where corn is king,

Speaking "ethanol" perks all ears.

A high corn price is the prime thing.

Talking cheaper feeds into fears.

Candidates are supposed to lie.

To get the votes, say the right stuff.

Kernals of fibs, voters will buy.

The truth is simply too damn tough.

"Desubsidize the ethanol,"

In Iowa - an obscene call.

Ima Ryma of IL 4:12AM May 25, 2011

the people have spoken,this race in n.y.26 , an overly red district,this is just the first of many g.o.p. domino.s that will fall do to the fact that the republicans hitched their wagon to the paul ryan budget plan.

as to oil subsides,the republican have been the mistress of the energy industry since there was an energy industry.

to be fair people from both sides of the isle have received contributions from these groups.

bruce b of NV 1:55AM May 25, 2011

"Why Paul Ryan’s Medicare Is So Much Better Than Obama’s"

Posted on May 7, 2011 by Barbara

Peter Ferrara

"Obama said regarding the Ryan budget plan, “No I don’t think it is particularly courageous. Because…nothing is easier than solving a problem on the backs of people who are poor or people who are powerless or don’t have a lobbyist or don’t have clout.”

"How does obamacare cut cost, but help "people who are poor or people who are powerless or don’t have a lobbyist or don’t have clout.”

"cuts in payments to doctors and hospitals under Medicare as provided in current law due to Obamacare and President Obama’s Medicare reimbursement policies is $15 trillion!"

"These Medicare cuts were the foundation for CBO finding that Obamacare would actually reduce the deficit, despite adopting or expanding three entitlement programs.

"Medicare’s Chief Actuary reports that even before these cuts already two-thirds of hospitals were losing money on Medicare patients."

"The unworkable, draconian effect of these Medicare cuts is why the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued a disclaimer..."

Unlike Ryan’s careful Medicare reforms, these draconian, unworkable, Obamacare cuts to Medicare apply to seniors already retired today. Ryan exempts from any change all seniors retired today and everyone over age 55. On these grounds alone, Ryan’s Medicare is better for today’s seniors than Medicare under Obamacare.

That will involve an additional $500 billion in Medicare cuts for today’s seniors by 2023, “and an additional one trillion dollars in the decade after that,” in Obama’s own words.

"Obama proposed to give even more power to the unelected, unaccountable, Washington bureaucrats on his Commission to cut Medicare further, by undemocratic automatic sequester that bypasses Congress entirely."

"Seniors would do far better each choosing their own health insurers themselves in a competitive marketplace, which is the system that has generated the highest standard of living in the world in America for all goods and services."

"Even President Obama was forced to admit before the Facebook audience that the Ryan Medicare plan “will control costs, except if you get sick and the policy that you bought doesn’t cover what you’ve got….If you’re somebody who’s older and has a pre-existing condition, insurance companies won’t take you.” But that’s not how the private insurance companies under Medicare Advantage work. Nor is that true of the private Medigap plans, whose sellers include AARP, central players in Obama’s own political machine."

http://blogs.forbes.com/peterferrara/2011/04/28/paul-ryan-medicare-better-than-obamas/

http://www.912superseniors.org/2011/05/why-paul-ryans-medicare-is-so-much-better-than-obamas/

Bill Hedges of MO 12:13AM May 25, 2011

Susan Milligan

Susan Milligan

Susan Milligan is a political and foreign affairs writer and contributed to a biography of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, "Last Lion: The Fall and Rise of Ted Kennedy." Follow her on Twitter @MilliganSusan.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

JFK's Virtuoso Turn at the Bully Pulpit

Kennedy presented a radical idea: Peaceful coexistence.

Mary Kate Cary

Calling Terrorism What It Is

Refusing to call terrorism by its name helps no one.

Latest Videos

advertisement