Open Letter To Mark Levin About Ethanol, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz

By Marc J. Rauch
Exec. Vice President/Co-Publisher
THE AUTO CHANNEL

Hi Mark -

I'm the co-founder and co-owner of The Auto Channel, the Internet's largest automotive information resource and a small broadcast television network. I am a real free-market, balls-to-the-wall capitalist, entrepreneur, and American patriot. I have owned my own businesses since my late teens, and I'm now in my mid-60's.

I was listening to your radio show this afternoon, as I often do when in my car in the afternoons. I heard your comments regarding ethanol, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz.

Your position on ethanol is incorrect; not a little incorrect, completely incorrect.

If you are against subsidies then you should be howling mad at the oil industry. They receive many, many times more subsidies than the ethanol industry and this has been going on for over 100 years.

You say that ethanol subsidies should be removed and that if ethanol is so good then let it stand on its own. But the truth is that all subsidies to the oil industry should be removed and then let's see how it can stand on its own. If all oil subsidies were removed gasoline would probably cost $15 or more per gallon.

In addition, our country's enslavement to petroleum oil has been responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of American servicemen. To date, not one American soldier, sailor or airman has been killed defending the production and distribution of domestic ethanol fuel.

You say that ethanol negatively affects the food market and prices. This is false. The originator of this theory was The World Bank in a report they published about 10 years ago. The World Bank has since officially retracted that report on at least two occasions. It is the cost of petroleum oil and its finished fuels that have caused food prices to rise.

You also stated that ethanol damages engines. This is a gross over-statement. Ethanol cleans internal combustion engines; it prolongs the life of internal combustion engines. Ethanol allows gasoline to be safely used in internal combustion engines. If ethanol was not blended with gasoline for use in automobiles some other antiknock agent would have to be used. The choices are tetra-ethyl lead, MTBE, or a cocktail of so-called aromatics. We already know that lead is poisonous, and after 6 decades of being forced to use it, it was finally banned in most instances. MTBEs are also poisonous and banned. The concoction of aromatics used in ethanol-free gasoline is as poisonous as tetra-ethyl lead, and ethanol-free gasoline is more expensive than gasoline blended with ethanol. If no anti-knock agent is used in an automobile engine it would literally knock itself apart.

You complain that the ethanol blended gasolines are not free-market, but this is false because ethanol-free gasoline is available. The 6 decades of being forced to use ethanol-free gasoline was not a free-market. Ethanol is a true free-market because anyone, anywhere can produce it out of a wide variety of materials.

It is impossible to be a patriotic American and not support the ethanol industry in favor of the oil industry. I would rather have my fuel money go to American farmers than to foreign dictators.

The above is the short reply to the points you raised today. If you'd like the long reply with additional information and references you can read my 60-page report on the Truth About Ethanol by CLICKING HERE.

I hope you'll take the time to learn the truth. The problem with someone like yourself taking such a dogmatically incorrect position is that it casts a great pale over everything else you argue for - if you are wrong about ethanol, how many other issues might you be wrong about.

I was surprised to hear of Trump's support for ethanol, but very delighted because I do support him for president. I don't know how much he really knows about the subject, but he is on the correct side.

I'm available to answer questions or debate any part of this issue at any time.

Regards.