During the 2012 elections, a number of questions were raised concerning Speaker Gingrich's actions concerning legislation after he left office. There were three areas of policy that Congressman Gingrich was both active legislatively and in taking money from customers at his company. These areas included housing programs and money taken from Freddie Mac, the passage of Medicare Part D and other programs while taking money from pharmaceutical companies and other health care companies, and the support of ethanol subsidy programs and taking money from ethanol energy lobbying groups.
Shortly after leaving office, Congressman Gingrich created the Gingrich Group. From 1999 to 2002, Congressman Gingrich and his group were paid a retainer from Freddie Mac between $25,000 to $30,000 a month. From 2006 to 2008, the group was again paid a total of $600,000 by Freddie Mac, bringing the total paid by the entity to Congressman Gingrich's group to between $1.6 and $1.8 million dollars. Sources at Freddie Mac who were familiar with the work of Congressman Gingrich and his group have stated that Gingrich was to "build bridges" to capital hill Republicans.
Congressman Gingrich's involvement with Freddie Mac became a point of contention during the 2012 elections when opponents called his work for the group lobbying and noted Freddie Mac's role in the housing crisis. News reports also discovered that Gingrich's chief contact with the group was their head lobbyist.
On November 10, 2011 Congressman Gingrich was asked about Fannie and Freddie in a GOP debate. He stated that at no point did he do any lobbying. He also stated that he only gave advice to Freddie Mac as a historian, and that when they told him they were making loans to people with no record of paying it back, he told them that the practice was insane and would cause a bubble.
Days after that debate, Congressman Gingrich's presidential campaign put out a page on their website called a "Fact Sheet" related to the Freddie Mac issue. The page again asserts that Congressman Gingrich has done no lobbying at any point in his career. It also states that while Congressman Gingrich is generally supportive of government sponsored entities, he supports breaking up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congressman Gingrich also appeared on the Greta van Susteran show and discussed the matter. He repeated the same assertions that he never lobbied for anyone. He also stated that his group was determining exactly how much they had received from Freddie Mac. He stated that they never worked with Fannie Mae, and no documentation has been discovered to dispute this assertion.
In two debates in December of 2011, Congressman Gingrich was questioned by Congressman Ron Paul and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann about his history with Freddie Mac. In responding to accusations that he used his influence in Washington DC to help Freddie Mac expand its influence, Congressman Gingrich stated that the two representatives were both mistaken and had histories of making inaccurate and false statements.
Congressman Gingrich's 2012 campaign website has initiated a response page to a number of issues raised by oppponents. In addressing the Freddie Mac issue, the page states that every contract that Congressman Gingrich signed had a provision that he would not lobby on behalf of the company hiring his services. He also states that he has never changed his viewpoint because of money that he received. The site also states that Congressman Gingrich is in support of expanding home ownership, but doing so in a manner that promotes saving and investing.
In 2003, the Gingrich Group founded the Center for Health Transformation, which is currently using the website GingrichGroup.com. That same year, the center met with a number of Congressmen in an effort to convince them to pass the Medicare Drug Prescription program known as Medicare Part D. Three Congressman have recently stated that Congressman Gingrich met with them in an effort to convince them to pass the legislation. They stated that while Congressman Gingrich may not have met the technical definition of a lobbyist, his and the group's actions would qualify as lobbying to most people. Numerous other aides were also quoted as stating that Congressman Gingrich moved votes on the Medicare Part D legislation.
As stated of their website, the function of the Center for Health Transformation is to develop solutions for health care problems ranging from information coordination to overall health care. The website touts the ability of the group to develop solutions and then present those solutions in favorable manners to the proper people. News reports have stated that the group functions by charging its members fees, and then presenting the products of those members as solutions.
According to Bloomberg companies paid fees to join the Gingrich Group ranging from $20,000 to $200,000, and gain various levels of staff attention, access to white papers and time with Gingrich. The center’s site lists three levels, from “premium” to “charter” memberships. Those paying more than $100,000 a year, could get Gingrich to speak to a private event, according to two people familiar with the arrangements.
Customers of the Center for Health Transformation and the Gingrich Group included drugmaker Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), health insurer Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, the nation's largest insurer - WellPoint Inc. (WLP), U.K. drugmaker AstraZeneca Plc (AZN), Pfizer Inc. (PFE), and the drug industry's trade group the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).
In a GOP debate in January of 2012, Speaker Gingrich was asked about his support for Medicare Part D and his actions to get the legislation passed. He responded in the same manner as he had before - that he was only acting as a citizen activist and that he supported the legislation. He also stated that he had hired experts to instruct him and other members of the group exactly what they could and could not do to avoid being classified as a lobbyist. He asserted that he did this for the express purpose of avoiding the label of "lobbyist" when he sought future office.
Between 2009 and 2011, Growth Energy, an ethanol industry lobbying group formed in late-2008 by a group of producers of the corn-based fuel, paid Gingrich $575,000 for advice. Congressman Gingrich has a portion of his 2012 campaign website dedicated to his support for ethanol subsidies.
Contracts with Freddie
Speaker Gingrich left Congress in 1999. Shortly after leaving office, he started the Gingrich Group and the company was employed by the government sponsored entity Freddie Mac. For five months from 1999 to 2002, Congressman Gingrich was paid a monthly retainer of $25,000 to $30,000. Congressman Gingrich entered into a second contract with Freddie Mac in 2006. This contract was a 2 year retainer that totaled $600,000. This brought the total amount of money that Congressman Gingrich was paid to somewhere between $1.6 and $1.8 million.
In November of 2011, Bloomberg reported that two former company executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac who were familiar with his work in 2006 were stating that Gingrich was asked to build bridges to Capitol Hill Republicans and develop an argument on behalf of the company’s public-private structure that would resonate with conservatives who were seeking to dismantle the entities.
Those sources at Fannie and Freddie say that Speaker Gingrich was expected to provide written material that could be circulated among free-market conservatives in Congress and in outside organizations, said two former company executives familiar with Gingrich’s role at the firm. He didn’t produce a white paper or any other document the firm could use on its behalf, they said.
Multiple sources have indicated that Congressman Gingrich's primary contact at Freddie Mac was Mitchell Delk, Freddie Mac’s chief lobbyist.
Michigan Debate
On November 10, 2011 Congressman Gingrich participated in the "Your Money, Your Vote" debate in Michigan. He was asked about his work for Freddie Mac, but the question is limited to the $300,000 that his group was paid in 2006. Congressman Gingrich responds that he was a historian for the group and that he did no lobbying.
HARWOOD: Since -- since you mentioned Fannie and Freddie, Speaker Gingrich, 30 seconds to you, your firm was paid $300,000 by Freddie Mac in 2006. What did you do for that money?
GINGRICH: Were you asking me?
HARWOOD: Yes.
GINGRICH: I offer them advice on precisely what they didn't do. (LAUGHTER) Look -- look, this is not -- this is not...
HARWOOD: Were you not trying to help Freddie Mac fend off the effort by the Bush administration... (CROSSTALK)
GINGRICH: No. No, I do -- I have never...
HARWOOD: ... and the -- to curb Freddie Mac.
GINGRICH: I have -- I assume I get a second question. I have never done any lobbying. Every contract was written during the period when I was out of the office, specifically said I would do no lobbying, and I offered advice.
And my advice as a historian, when they walked in and said to me, "We are now making loans to people who have no credit history and have no record of paying back anything, but that's what the government wants us to do," as I said to them at the time, this is a bubble. This is insane. This is impossible.
GINGRICH: It turned out, unfortunately, I was right and the people who were doing exactly what Congresswoman Bachmann talked about were wrong. And I think it's a good case for breaking up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and getting much smaller institutions back into the private sector to be competitive and to be responsible for their behavior.
Fact Sheet
On November 16, 2011 Congressman Gingrich appeared on Face the Nation and discussed his work with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. He also dedicated a page on his campaign website to listing facts about his relationship with the entity.
Atlanta, GA - ln response to a Bloomberg News story today about Freddie Mac's hiring of the consulting firm, The Gingrich Group, over the course of an eight year period, Newt 2012 released the following fact sheet:
Newt Gingrich welcomes scrutiny of his record in public office and as a small businessman. Gingrich believes that properly vetting the potential next president is absolutely necessary in a free society and that a properly vetted nominee for the Republican Party will better be able to defeat President Obama and lead our country in rebuilding the America we love.
Gingrich has never lobbied for Freddie Mac, or any client, nor has anyone in any of the organizations he founded after leaving office as part of their work with them. Gingrich made a decision after resigning that he would never be a lobbyist so that nobody would ever question the genuine nature of his advice and perspectives. This prohibition against lobbying was made very clear to all Gingrich Group clients and strict internal protocols were developed to prevent lobbying. Today’s Bloomberg article confirms that Gingrich and his firm did no lobbying for Freddie Mac.
Nor did Gingrich, as part of his contract, advocate against pending legislation affecting Freddie Mac, as Gingrich was accused of doing by the moderator at the CNBC debate in Michigan. This, too, was confirmed by the Bloomberg News article this morning.
Freddie Mac was a small part of the client and revenue base of The Gingrich Group and Gingrich’s various small businesses. The Gingrich Group offered strategic advice to a wide variety of clients about a wide variety of issues, including IBM, Microsoft, The US Chamber of Commerce and more. Gingrich Group fees were comparable to that of many consulting firms.
Gingrich is broadly favorable of the concept of Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSE) but believes the financial crisis shows that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be broken up and their smaller successors be moved off of government guarantees and into the free market.
Gingrich also is in favor of efforts to increase home ownership in America but as a conservative believes it has to be within a context of learning how to budget and save in a responsible way, the opposite of the lending practices that led to the financial crisis.
Greta Appearance
In late November of 2011, Congressman Gingrich appeared on the Greta van Susteran show and discussed his involvement with Freddie and Fannie. He stated that he opposed any efforts in getting housing for people who cannot afford it. He stated that he gave historic strategic advice.
ABC Iowa Debate
On December 10, 2011 Congressman Gingrich participated in a GOP presidential debate in Iowa. In that debate, he was asked about his work with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac by both Congressman Ron Paul and Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.
NEWT GINGRICH: Well, first of all, as you say in your own, normally in your own speeches, the housing bubble came from the Federal Reserve inflating the money supply. Now, that's the core of the housing bubble and I happen to be with you on auditing the Fed and on fund-- and frankly on firing Bernanke. Second, I was never a spokesman for any agency, I never did any lobbying for any agency. I offered strategic advice. I was in the private sector. And I was doing things (LAUGHTER) in the private sector.
RON PAUL: Oh come-- okay, okay. (LAUGHTER) (APPLAUSE)
(OVERTALK)
RON PAUL: --private sector. (LAUGH)
NEWT GINGRICH: And-- and when you're in the private sector, and you have a company and you offer advice like McKinsey does, like a bunch of other companies do, you're allowed to charge money for it.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: All right--
NEWT GINGRICH: Ca-- ca-- it's called free enterprise.
RON PAUL: It's the tax payer's money though, we had to bail these people out--
NEWT GINGRICH: Well I was-- I'm not for bailing them out, in fact, I'm for breaking them up.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me bring Congresswoman Bachmann in on this, because you make similar accusations against Speaker Gingrich. You called him a "poster boy of crony capitalism." Did he answer your concerns?
Center for Health Transformation
In 2003, the Gingrich Group founded the Center for Health Transformation. That same year, the company took on a number of customers who paid a fee to be a part of the group. News reports have placed that fee from $20,000 to $200,000. As a member of the group, the products of those companies were then presented to representatives in Congress as solutions to health care problems. In it's first year, the Center began to support the Medicare part D health care law, which covered prescription drugs.
The Boston Globe has reported that three Congressman who were in office at the time have stated that Speaker Gingrich spoke to them in 2003 in support of the Medicare Part D program. They stated that although Congressman Gingrich's actions may not have risen to the technical definition of lobbying, it would qualify as lobbying to most people. These representatives include former New Hampshire Representative Jeb Bradley, former Representative Butch Otter of Idaho, and US Representative Jeff Flake of Arizona.
Flake and Otter told the Iowa newspaper that proponents of the bill brought in Gingrich, who told them, “If you can’t pass this bill, you don’t deserve to govern as Republicans.”
Responding to the story in December of 2011, Congressman Gingrich stated that he did what was allowed as a citizen activist and that he was not a lobbyist.
I’m allowed to say as a citizen, ‘I’d like to see this passed,’ That’s not lobbying. I wasn’t paid by anybody to say that.
In November of 2011, Bloomberg reported that companies could pay membership fees of $20,000 to $200,000, and gain various levels of staff attention, access to white papers and time with Gingrich. The center’s site lists three levels, from “premium” to “charter” memberships. Those paying more than $100,000 a year, could get Gingrich to speak to a private event, according to two people familiar with the arrangements.
Bloomberg cites an August 26 press release to state that member companies included drugmaker Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), and health insurer Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.
The article also states that WellPoint Inc. (WLP), the nation’s largest insurer by revenue, was a member of the center for five years. A spokeswoman responded in an e-mail to Bloomberg by stating that joining the group was “a way to network with various stakeholders on the best emerging ideas for improving the delivery of health care.”
The U.K. drugmaker AstraZeneca Plc (AZN) also was a member of the center.
Bloomberg also cites unnamed sources to state that Pfizer Inc. (PFE), the world’s largest drugmaker, had consulting contracts with Gingrich. They also claim that the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the industry’s trade group, was also a client. PhRMA stated that Gingrich's firm “was retained by the PhRMA general counsel’s office at one time to provide advice on a positioning project.”
The Center for Health Transformation maintains a website that discusses a number of facets of the company. Two of these facets are the approach of the company and its strategy. Those pages are reproduced below. The indicate that the strategy of the company is to create health care solutions and then to get those solutions in front of the correct people to get them enacted as law at a state or federal level.
Our Unique Approach
The Center for Health Transformation is a high-impact collaboration of private and public sector leaders committed to creating a 21st Century Intelligent Health System that saves lives and saves money for all Americans.
The Center is based on the following premise: Small changes or reactionary fixes to separate pieces of the current system have not and will not work. We need a system-wide transformation. Unlike other alliances, the Center unites stakeholders across the spectrum (providers, employers, vendors, trade associations, disease groups, think tanks) and government leaders at both the state and federal level to drive transformation according to a shared vision and key principles.
The Center’s unique impact is a function of 8 strategic strengths:
Transformational leadership - CHT is devoted to large-scale transformation. The Center’s unique leadership model and focus on building and training a large network of leaders are key elements to creating a critical mass of activity and impact to make transformation not just possible but inevitable.
A vision of a better future – Transformation requires a big vision of a better future that resonates with the public. We have developed a vision and vision principles based on moral and economic issues that have proven to resonate with the public and with leaders across the spectrum.
A strategic plan – Using our unique planning model, we have defined key strategies and high-leverage, big-impact projects to drive transformation and have shared that plan widely, resulting in the creation of broad coalitions working together to implement our strategies.
Proven solutions – We constantly identify, help create and share proven transformational policies and solutions, a key element in getting others to believe in our vision and to help accelerate its adoption.
A network of allies– Our unparalleled network includes top leaders in the federal government, 36 states in our state project, key corporations, top hospitals, disease advocacy groups, professional and industry associations, and leading research institutions. By uniting them toward a common vision and helping develop their role as leaders, we are having an impact unlike any other health collaboration.
A message and the ability to get it out – CHT offers remarkable speakers delivering our message, Washington’s top pollsters helping define the right language, and the media visibility needed to communicate the urgency and drive the demand for transformation beyond that of any other health transformation advocacy group.
Coalition building capabilities - We build coalitions to transform entire areas, including focusing at the geographic level to create community based models. We then build bridges to help connect, expand, and replicate these islands of excellence.
Constant learning that allows us to identify key leverage points and opportunities, combined with the power, speed, strategic skill and agility needed to impact them –Transforming government and educating the private sector, CHT is now applying those same operational strengths to transform health adoption.
Our Strategies
Create information-rich health savings accounts to both incentivize and empower the individual.
Create secure electronic health records with expert systems to maximize accuracy, minimize errors, reduce inefficiencies and improve care.
Develop a new system of health justice.
Create a buyers’ market for pharmaceuticals by building a transparent system for individuals, doctors, and pharmacists of price and efficacy information about prescription drugs and medically appropriate over-the-counter drugs. The system would have an open formulary with an “after-pay” rather than a co-pay (a “Travelocity” for drug purchasing).
Create a system and culture of rapid adoption of solutions that result in better outcomes at lower cost for both the public and private sector.
Establish an intellectually credible, accurate system for capturing the cost and benefits of better solutions, better technologies and better outcomes in order to create a technically correct model of return on investment for solutions resulting in better outcomes at lower cost.
Develop a real-time continuous research database and discover-develop-deliver ability (turning cancer into a chronic disease by 2015 and eliminating preventable complications from diabetes by 2015).
Knit together these electronic systems into a virtual public health network for health protection against natural outbreaks and a bioshield against deliberate biological attack.
By implementing the first eight strategies, turn health and healthcare from a problem into an opportunity, making it the leading creator of high-value jobs and foreign exchange earning in American society (including as a first step the creation of an undersecretary of commerce for health).
Fox News Iowa Debate
On December 15, 2011 Speaker Gingrich participated in a Fox News debate in Sioux City. He was again asked about his work with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and again stated that he did no lobbying work for the group and was never a lobbyist of any kind.
MODERATOR: Well, let me pick up with that with you, Congresswoman Bachmann, because you accused Speaker Gingrich of peddling his influence with congressional Republicans to help the companies that paid him tens of millions of dollars since he’s left office. Given his denial over time and again tonight that he’s — denies ever having lobbied, what is your evidence, hard evidence that he engaged in influence-peddling?
BACHMANN: Well, it’s the fact that — that we know that he cashed paychecks from Freddie Mac. That’s the best evidence that you can have, over $1.6 million. And, frankly, I am shocked listening to the former speaker of the House, because he’s defending the continuing practice of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.
There’s a big difference between a credit union and Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And they were the epicenter of the mortgage financial meltdown. I was trying to see these two entities put into bankruptcy, because they, frankly, need to go away, when the speaker had his hand out and he was taking $1.6 million to influence senior Republicans to keep the scam going in Washington, D.C. That’s absolutely wrong. We can’t have as our nominee for the Republican Party someone who continues to stand for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. They need to be shut down, not built up. [applause]
MODERATOR: Speaker Gingrich?
GINGRICH: Well, the easiest answer is, that’s just not true. What she just said is factually not true. I never lobbied under any circumstance. I never went in and suggested in any way that we do this.
In fact, I tried to help defeat the housing act when the Democrats were in charge of the House. And if you go back and talk to former Congressman Rick Lazio, he’ll tell you, when we were passing housing reform while I was speaker, I never at any time tried to slow down the reform effort. In fact, I helped him pass the reform bill. And I think some of those people ought to have facts before they make wild allegations.
BACHMANN: Let me — let me…
MODERATOR: Yes, go ahead. Congresswoman?
BACHMANN: Well, after the debates that we had last week, PolitiFact came out and said that everything that I said was true. And the evidence is that Speaker Gingrich took $1.6 million. You don’t need to be within the technical definition of being a lobbyist to still be influence-peddling with senior Republicans in Washington, D.C., to get them to do your bidding.
And the bidding was to keep this grandiose scam of Freddie Mac going. That’s — that is something that our nominee can’t stand for. We have to shut down these government enterprises. And we’ve got to end them. And I think that’s shocking that he’s saying that.
GINGRICH: And let me just say two things…
MODERATOR: Speaker Gingrich, quickly. [applause]
GINGRICH: OK, I want to say two things. First, my policy is to break up both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It is not anything like what she just described.
Second, I want to state unequivocally, for every person watching tonight, I have never once changed my positions because of any kind of payment. Because I — the truth is, I was a national figure who was doing just fine, doing a whole variety of things, including writing best-selling books, making speeches. And the fact is, I only chose to work with people whose values I shared and having people have a chance to buy a house is a value I believe still is important in America.
Answering the Attacks
On his 2012 campaign website, Congressman Gingrich addressess the issues of lobbying and his relationship with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in a section dedicted to answering the attacks. He asserts again that he was never a lobbyist and that his group merely offered advice on issues for the organization.
Lobbying – Newt has never engaged in lobbying, period. Newt made a decision after resigning that he would never be a lobbyist so that nobody would ever question the genuine nature of his advice and perspectives.
Relationship with Freddie Mac
Recent reporting from Bloomberg News on the Gingrich Group’s consulting services for Freddie Mac confirms that Gingrich and his firm were not paid to lobby and that Gingrich never acted as an advocate to stop any legislation or regulation affecting Freddie Mac.
After leaving public office, Newt Gingrich founded a number of very successful small businesses. One of these small businesses, a consulting firm called The Gingrich Group, offered strategic advice on a wide variety of topics to a very wide range of clients. One of these clients was Freddie Mac. At no time did Gingrich lobby for Freddie Mac, or for any client, and neither did anyone in Gingrich’s firm. This prohibition against lobbying was made clear to all Gingrich Group clients. Nor did Gingrich ever advocate against pending legislation affecting Freddie Mac, as some articles have incorrectly alleged. In fact, recent reporting from Bloomberg News on the Gingrich Group’s consulting services for Freddie Mac confirms that Gingrich and his firm were not paid to lobby and that Gingrich never acted as an advocate to stop any legislation or regulation affecting Freddie Mac.
Furthermore, as the New York Times documents, Newt urged House Republicans to vote against the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Newt is in favor of efforts to increase home ownership in America but as a conservative believes they must be within a context of learning how to budget and save in a responsible way, the opposite of the lending practices that led to the financial crisis. You can watch a video from March 2008 of Newt warning about the danger of politicized decision making in the housing crisis here.
As part of Newt’s Jobs and Prosperity Plan, Newt advocates breaking up Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and moving their smaller successors off of government guarantees and into the free market.
Florida Debate
On January 23, 2012 Speaker Gingrich participated in the GOP presidentil debate in Florida. He was again asked about his work with Freddie Mac and numerous attack ads that his opponents were running against him. In that debate, he stated that he hired experts to ensure that his company did not cross the line into lobbying.
GINGRICH: If you read the contract of my Center for Health Transformation for consulting work, it is not lobbying. There is no lobbying and I was never paid for lobbying. The fact is that Rick Lazio and JC Watts have confirmed I was never a lobbyist. People need to vote no and not give Freddie Mac any money. There is a point in this process where things get unncecessarily nasty and that’s sad. I have never ever gone and done any lobbying. We brought in an expert on lobbying law and he will testify that we never crossed the line into lobbying because I do not want this defamatory charge to be made.
ROMNEY: You were paid $300,000 as a historian. That adds up to $1.6 million over 6 years. They don’t pay historians for that. You were hired by the CEO. You also spoke publicly in favor of these GSE– government sponsored entities — you could have spoken out aggressively but insetad you were being paid by Freddi Mac, you made a million when Florida lost millions.
GINGRICH: Your income from Bain was not Bain’s income. You can’t cite my company’s income as mine. That’s what my company was paid, not me. In the early years, before Jim Johnson and others at Freddie Mac changed the model some good was done.
ROMNEY: I don’t know things but I presume it was 100% owned by you.
GINGRICH: What’s the gross revenue of Bain while you worked there? Did Bain do any work with the government?
ROMNEY: We have Congressmen who came and said that you lobbied them.
GINGRICH: Hold on friend, you just jumped a long area here. No, let me be very clear. I understand your technique because you use this consistently. It’s not going to work because the American public sees through you. The US government was not prepared to give people anything like insulin, but they would pay for kidney dialysis. I am proud to have advocated for Medicare Part D because it gives people choices. It is not correct Mitt to describe public advocay and citizenship as lobbying — that is my right as a citizen.
ROMNEY: If your entities are getting paid by health companies and you then meet with Republican Congressmen you have a conflict. You spent now 15 years in Washington on K Street and this is a problem and you had a record of great disgrace as the speaker.
Ethanol Subsidies
Bloomberg reported in November of 2011 that Growth Energy, an ethanol industry lobbying group formed in late-2008 by a group of producers of the corn-based fuel, paid Gingrich $575,000 between 2009 and 2011 for advice. Growth Energy said in a statement that it reached out to Gingrich because of his support for ethanol subsidies.
Growth Energy reached out to Speaker Gingrich and hired him because we know of his record in Congress in support of ethanol. He’s smart, engaging, and his time as a leader here is helpful to folks who are puzzling through how this town works.
Congressman Gingrich's 2012 campaign website maintains a "Get the Facts" page that discusses the Congressman's support for ethanol subsidies.
Ethanol
Newt supports an “all of the above” approach to achieving American energy independence by the aggressive development of American energy resources, including American oil, natural gas, coal, and biofuels like ethanol.
Newt’s position towards supporting American farmers, American energy, and American security has been consistent for over 25 years. He supported ethanol development since 1984 with Ronald Reagan, and supported it over objections of other Republicans as Speaker.
Newt’s American Energy Plan, part of his 21st Century Contract with America, will reverse Barack Obama’s assault on American energy. Every day, the Obama Administration continues to prevent unleashing new sources of American energy that will create thousands of new American jobs, make energy more affordable, and reduce our dependence on unfriendly nations.
Meanwhile, Obama tells foreign countries that we want to be one of their best customers for oil and natural gas.
Newt prefers that energy development happens here in America. If the choice is for the next job to be created in Iran or in Iowa, Newt prefers Iowa. If the next dollar is to go to Saudi Arabia or to South Dakota, Newt prefers South Dakota. Ethanol has been a 25-year success story of greater and greater productivity, which has kept money here at home, enriched rural communities, and made Americans safer by lowering our dependence on overseas sources of fuel.
