THE STUART NEWS today 10/20/13 End to sugar assistance on horizon? The deadline came almost as quietly as it went. Gov. Rick Scott and water managers didn’t even feign interest in buying the expanse of U.S. Sugar Corp.’s land between Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades. Another loss for Floridians and the environment, right? Not if you ask Nathaniel Reed. He believes there’s a way we can score a better deal — for taxpayers, for the Everglades, for the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries, for South Florida’s water supply. “My feeling is the sugar subsidy is going to end,” said Reed, an environmental advocate from Jupiter Island who isn’t afraid to rock the boat within his Republican Party. When that happens, the value of sugar cane fields in the Everglades Agricultural Area will decline, he believes. Then, the state’s recently expired option to buy 153,000 acres of U.S. Sugar’s land for $7,400 a pop won’t look like much of a deal anyway. Reed sees waning support for federal sugar protections (which aren’t technically subsidies, but a web of quotas and price supports in the Farm Bill). “There is a real desire, especially among the House appropriators, to dramatically reduce the number of subsidies and their value,” he said. “It’s not just tea party-ites.” See SAMPLES, 5A EVE SAMPLES COLUMNIST Article Continued Below See SAMPLES on Page A05 SAMPLES from 1A Reed knows a thing or two about Washington politics. He was assistant secretary of the interior for Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. Hes vice chairman of the politically deft Everglades Foundation. While the foundation itself hasnt taken a stand against the antiquated sugar program, Reed is straightforward about his own views. He called the sugar protections a ridiculous expense. When Reed and I spoke by phone earlier this month, I happened to be in Washington, D.C., covering U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphys congressional meeting about polluted releases of Lake Okeechobee water into the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee rivers. To stop the discharges, land south of Lake O is needed to recreate a flow way to the Everglades. While I was in Washington, I interviewed others who believe the Depression-era sugar program has outlived its use - but for reasons that have nothing to do with Floridas environment. Opponents range from free-market advocates to government-spending watchdogs and candy makers. They have organized as the Coalition for Sugar Reform, and they are becoming more difficult to ignore. They are brazen about their disdain for the program. Because we recognize this for corporate welfare in its most naked form, we are for complete repeal of sugar subsidies, said William Christian, director of public affairs for the nonprofit Citizens Against Government Waste, which belongs to the sugar reform coalition. His group supported a sugar amendment that was defeated in the House and Senate earlier this year. Though it drew hundreds of supporting votes, every congressman and senator representing the Treasure Coast helped kill the reforms by opposing it. It would have helped restore some sanity to the sugar market, Christian said . The existing sugar program will continue if the Farm Bill is finalized in its current form. It does four things for sugar farmers: Restricts domestic sugar production; restricts imports of sugar; sets minimum domestic prices for sugar that are generally more than the world market; and requires the federal government to buy surplus sugar and sell it to ethanol producers at a potential loss. The system is reminiscent of the central planning model used in the former Soviet Union, said Fran Smith, board member and adjunct fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which advocates for free-market principles and opposes the existing sugar program. With any product, central planning does not work, Smith told me. You have to have a market based (system): If demand drops, then producers dont produce as much. This doesnt allow any of that. Thats why we end up with surplus sugar. As a result, consumers and manufacturers pay a hidden tax. Smith is hopeful that Congress ultimately will embrace a more free-market model. But the sugar industry donates millions of dollars to politicians around the country. It has an army of lobbyists working for it, too (though U.S. Sugar and the other big sugar cane grower in our state, Florida Crystals, did not respond to my requests for comment on this column). The sugar supports cost consumers and sugarconsuming businesses $3.5 billion a year, according to the Coalition for Sugar Reform. The costs of it are dispersed among so many people, and the benefits are concentrated, Smith said. Its that very classic example. If rising discontent is any indication, its an example destined for the history books. Eve Samples is a columnist for Scripps Treasure Coast Newspapers. This column reflects her opinion. Contact her at 772-221-4217 or eve.samples@scripps.
Posted on: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 08:57:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015