We'd love to know who you are
and what you think. Pleasefill out a
survey.
Sign up for
our free email newsletter. Delivered to your
inbox.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Ever wonder why you're so tired? Well, here's
one reason. Our wonderful government has bought-in to special interest
groups to assure that you eat sugar -- a lot of sugar. With diabetes now
becoming
prevalent in children, chronic degenerative conditions including
arthritis, diabetes, liver, kidney and heart disease will become a reality
much faster than we'd like to confront. Read what big money buys and do
something about this. You can start by avoiding sugar. If you need help
getting off sugar there are several
books you
should read.
This report contains no conclusion
because the next chapter in The Politics of Sugar has yet to be written.
As this study nears completion, debate in Washington is joined on what
many believe is the ultimate test of the political power of the sugar
industry: the reauthorization of the long-standing sugar price-support
program. Will the sugar industry lose its lucrative "sweet deal" of the
last 60 years? Will the forces of fiscal restraint and government reform
prevail? These questions move to the forefront of the congressional agenda
with the 1995 farm bill, and they invite us to explore a classic example
of money-dominated policy making.
Our story begins with the trail of political money in Washington -- the
millions of dollars given in myriad ways to finance political campaigns
and influence national policy-making. The trail continues to Florida,
where the federal government support program has enriched a few families
at the expense of all consumers while inflicting unprecedented
environmental damage. This study goes well beyond the simple examination
of the cost of sugar price supports, demonstrating that at the end of the
road, the public is holding the bag -- paying for everything from higher
sugar prices to the multimillion-dollar cleanup of the Everglades.
Over the past decade, the Center for Responsive Politics has documented
the ever-increasing flow of dollars from corporate interests and wealthy
individuals to the campaign coffers of members of Congress. As the cost of
elections has steadily increased, these contributors have become ever more
important to lawmakers -- incumbents and newcomers alike. None among them
is a more astute player in the game of "money politics" than the sugar
industry.
Since 1979, sugar-related interests (sugar cane, beet, and corn
sweeteners) have invested more than $11.9 million in the campaigns of
candidates for federal office and political parties. One estimate has
perhaps another $1.3 million invested in state lawmakers in Florida by
pro-sugar forces. Sugar interests have fielded battalions of lawyers,
lobbyists, public-relations specialists, and scientists in the nation's
capital and in Tallahassee to maintain the status quo.
The Politics
of Sugar examines what the money has bought:
Higher prices for consumers. Consumers pay through the nose: $1.4
billion more than they should pay each year, as a result of sugar
prices that are among the highest in the world.
Millions of dollars in benefits to sugar producers. A very few sugar
growers enjoy an aggregate annual windfall of more than a half a
billion dollars worth of benefits. Forty-two percent of the benefits
go to just 1 percent of sugar producers. One family's receipts are
particularly impressive: its various companies reportedly take in
some $65 million in annual benefits from the program.
Boom economics for corn sweetener companies. Artificially high sugar
prices have created a boom in the production of corn sweeteners,
whose manufacturers have made extraordinarily high profits merely by
undercutting the price of sugar by a few cents.
Special consideration for sugar producers in
trade agreements. Protectionist side deals in
NAFTA and
GATT help
maintain all of this.
Environmental damage to the delicate ecosystem of the Florida
Everglades. Polluted runoff from sugar cane farms contributes to the
destruction of this unique wetland area.
The long-standing federal program that
supports the price of sugar at higher-than-world-market levels operates at
"no net cost" to the government. Sugar producers receive their benefits
from the program in the form of higher U.S. sugar prices, achieved by
government manipulation of the market.
The "no net cost" proposition hides the fact that the cleanup of the
Everglades (necessitated by sugar industry pollution) will cost the public
an estimated $400 million to $700 million.
A bruising battle to maintain this price support program is now
inevitable. "[The sugar program] has been on the ropes for several years,"
acknowledges Richard Baker (R-La.) who represents a big sugar-producing
state and is a new member of the House Agriculture Committee. "In the
pecking order [of endangered farm policies], I'd say sugar is probably on
the first line of concern."
As our national leaders tinker at the fringes of campaign finance reform
-- or shy away from it all together -- it is crucial to understand the
central truth that dominates the way we govern ourselves: that too often,
the public pays a vast hidden cost for the private financing of election
campaigns. The sugar industry's history of lavish campaign contributions
and the payoff on their investment is the story this study tells.
Ellen S. Miller
Executive Director
Center for Responsive Politics
May 1995
Information on this
site is provided for informational purposes and is not meant to substitute
for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical
professional. You should not use the information contained herein for
diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, or prescribing any
medication. You should read carefully all product packaging. If you have
or suspect that you have a medical problem, promptly contact your health
care provider. Individual articles are based upon the opinions of the respective author, who retains copyright as marked. Copyright and disclaimer 2000-2004, BecomeHealthyNow.com, Inc. All rights reserved.
View our privacy statement
here.
Top
