In Support of Sugar Freedom

Floor Speech

Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I rise to express support for the Pitts-Davis-Goodlatte-Blumenauer amendment to the agriculture bill. Our amendment to H.R. 1947, the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act of 2013, will not repeal the sugar program; it only seeks to reform it. We have farm programs for wheat, corn, cotton, and many other crops. These programs give direct assistance to farmers and allow market prices to be set by supply and demand. Farmers receive help, but not at the expense of workers and consumers.

The sugar program is different. It helps sugar producers by hurting other people, and that's just not right. There are other ways sugar farmers who may need help could receive assistance without embracing an outdated system of strict government controls that cost consumers $3.5 billion per year in higher prices and over 112,000 lost jobs in the sugar-using industries in the last decade.

During fiscal year 2011, the wholesale price for U.S.-refined beet sugar averaged 55.8 cents per pound. This is considerably higher than the average recorded cost during the 5-year period covered by the 2002 farm bill provisions for FY 2003 through FY 2007, which was 27.6 cents per pound. Last month, the average price for U.S.-refined beet sugar was 26.3 cents per pound, whereas the average world-refined sugar price was 21.9 cents per pound. Historically, our sugar program keeps our markets higher regardless of demand and/or supply compared to world prices for sugar.

The U.S. manufacturers who use sugar as an ingredient to produce processed foods and drinks are having to always pay more domestically than manufacturers overseas. This is the exact reason why candy companies are moving to countries like Canada, Mexico, and other offshore places.

We need an industry that is subject to capital market forces without government intrusion, that places quotas on the amount of sugar that can be grown in the United States, and restricts access to foreign-grown sugar.

The current sugar program benefits 4,714 sugar farmers in the United States, while threatening the jobs of 600,000 workers in sugar-using industries and, thus, imposing a hidden tax on every American consumer. The Pitts-Davis-Goodlatte-Blumenauer amendment would lower the price-support loan rate in accordance to historic levels and reduce taxpayers' liability for keeping prices high, save taxpayers money, allow more sugar imports, and provide the U.S. Department of Agriculture more flexibility to modify domestic marketing allotments.

Making changes to the sugar program will help level the playing field and provide sugar-based manufacturers much-needed resources to keep people employed and modernize their production facilities.

Let's not help the few at the expense of the many. Vote ``yes'' for the Pitts-Davis-Goodlatte-Blumenauer amendment.

Source