[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9585-9586]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       IN SUPPORT OF SUGAR REFORM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis) for 5 minutes.
  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outdated system of strict government controls that cost consumers $3.5 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

[[Page 9586]]

reason why candy companies are moving to countries like Canada, Mexico, 
and other offshore places.

                              {time}  1020

  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.

                          ____________________