| WASHINGTON - America's sugar farmers expressed gratitude today at House
action on an amendment to the Farm Bill that helps ensure U.S. sugar
policy will operate at no cost to the taxpayers, as it had under mandate
by Congress in the 1980s and most of the 1990s.
Sugar provisions in the Farm Bill reinstate the Secretary of
Agriculture's ability to balance sugar supply with demand during times of
surplus, thus avoiding forfeitures on Commodity Credit Corporation-backed
loans that could result in government costs.
During the debate on the Farm Bill today, the House soundly defeated an
amendment that would have devastated the domestic sugar industry, with its
farmers already reeling from prices at a 20-year-low. The amendment,
offered by Reps. Dan Miller (R-FL) and George Miller (D-CA), was defeated
by a vote of 239 to 177, a 62-vote margin of victory for sugar farmers.
Among other things the amendment would have effectively reduced the
price-floor for sugar from 18 cents to 15 cents a pound, driving even more
American sugar farmers out of business. A total of 17 sugar mills and
plants have closed in the United States since 1996.
The Miller-Miller anti-sugar-farmer amendment also would have caused
sugar policy to become a cost to the government, as lower prices would
force processors to forfeit sugar that was under Commodity Credit
Corporation loans.
Ray VanDriessche, a sugarbeet farmer from Bay City, Michigan, and
president of the American Sugarbeet Growers Association, said, "The
thousands of hard-working sugar farmers in the United States applaud
action by the House rejecting this anti-sugar-farmer amendment. This shows
once again that members of Congress recognize the value of maintaining a
stable supply of this vital ingredient in the food chain. Our sweetener
industry generates 372,000 jobs in 42 states and adds $22.1 billion
annually to the U.S. economy."
He went on to say, "The vote shows, too, that Congress was not
fooled by the real opponents of U.S. sugar policy-the giant, multinational
food companies, candy manufacturers, grocers and others who want to fatten
their bottom-line profit at the expense of America's efficient sugar
farmers."
Jackie Theriot, a sugarcane grower and sugar mill operator from St.
Martinville, Louisiana, and chairman of the American Sugar Cane League,
said, "Even while American sugar farmers have suffered from prices at
historic lows, none of these savings have been passed on to consumers by
the giant commercial sugar users. Grocery stores, which have been buying
sugar at prices down 25 percent since 1996, have increased the price they
are charging consumers."
Alan Kennett, who heads family-owned Gay & Robinson, Inc. in
Hawaii, where the domestic sugar industry has been hardest hit over the
past decade, said, "The sugar provisions in the House's Farm Bill
give us a chance of maintaining a viable industry in Hawaii, where so much
of the social and economic structure of the state is dependent on this
commodity. And the provisions of the bill are designed to enable us to
operate U.S. sugar policy at no cost to the government. We believe this is
vital to the continuation of U.S. sugar policy, and thus the livelihood of
our people."
Basically, the sugar provisions of the House Farm Bill:
- Reinstate authority to the Secretary of Agriculture to impose
domestic marketing allotments in order to balance the markets, avoid
forfeitures, and comply with import commitments under the WTO and the
NAFTA.
- Reauthorize non-recourse loan program through 2011 at 18 cents per
pound for raw cane sugar and 22.9 cents per pound for refined beet
sugar, which is essentially the same level since 1985.
- Direct the Secretary of Agriculture to operate the policy, to the
maximum extent practicable, at no cost to the U.S. Treasury by
avoiding sugar loan forfeitures.
|