As of late February, the antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) suspension agreements continue to be challenged by two independent cane refiners, the Imperial Sugar Company (Savannah, Ga.) and AmCane (Taylor, Mich.), on the basis that the agreements did not completely eliminate the dumping injury. They also requested that the AD/CVD investigations continue.
The four options that exist under these two requests are: 1) the refiners’ arguments are rejected and the suspension agreements remain in place; 2) some further accommodation is made to the refiners, causing them to drop their challenge; 3) it is determined that the suspension agreements do not eliminate the harm, and high duties are put in place, effectively shutting off imports from Mexico; or 4) it is determined that the domestic industry will not be harmed in the future, and both the suspension agreements and the duties are rejected—we would return to unrestricted trade with Mexico. While nothing is certain in the legal world, governments and industries on both sides of the border are proceeding on the basis that the likely outcome is that the suspension agreements remain in place.
The suspension agreements limit the amount of sugar that may be imported so as not to oversupply the U.S. market, and they stipulate the minimum price at which the sugar may enter the U.S. to make sure our beet and cane growers do not forfeit sugar to the government. Under the suspension agreements, the USDA has officially projected that U.S. sugar policy will operate at no cost for the next 10 years (assuming the suspension agreements are renewed for a second five-year period).
There is a broad array of important issues between the U.S. and Mexico (immigration, drugs, trade, water, political and social stability, etc.), and both governments want a stable and predictable mechanism in place to stabilize the sugar trade and avoid further escalation of political, economic and trade friction on this issue. This is a very complicated issue and process, but rest assured that your industry leaders are monitoring it daily and your legal team is working very hard on your behalf. Stay tuned.
Sugar Reform Act
The Sugar Reform Act of 2015 was reintroduced in the Senate on Feb. 12 by 17 senators, and the same bill was also introduced in the House. The intent of the bills is to make the following changes in the current sugar policy: 1) Reduce the beet and cane loan rate to the pre-2008 levels; 2) Minimize any blocked stocks under the domestic marketing allotments and give the secretary of agriculture the authority to suspend or modify such provisions in the interests of consumers, workers in the food industry and businesses; 3) Directs the secretary of agriculture to manage the tariff rate quota (TRQ) on imports to have ending stocks at approximately 15.5 percent (This is to make sure the market is oversupplied and prices are depressed); 4) Allow countries that do not or cannot fill their tariff rate quota to the U.S. market to transfer it to another sugar exporting country (This would take the control of the re-allocation of TRQ out of the hands of the U.S. Government and give it to foreign exporters); and 5) Repeal the Feedstock Flexibility Program, assuring that any forfeited sugar would overhang the market and depress prices for multiple years.
Biotech Food Labeling
Retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and 13 Senate cosponsors, and Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and 22 House cosponsors re-introduced their “Genetically Modified Food Right-To-Know Act.”
The bills would require labels on any foods that are or contain ingredients derived from a biotech plant. Boxer has pursued the labeling effort for the past 15 years, and the strategic intent now is to add the language as an amendment to some other piece of legislation that is moving through the Senate. A competing bill, driven by a 40+ member agriculture and grocery industry coalition, was still in the drafting stage but is expected to be introduced this spring. There will be a fierce battle between the two competing bills over the course of 2015. This issue is of great importance to our industry and we have been engaged in it from the beginning.
Speaking out
Laura Rutherford is a name you are going to hear a lot more of in the years ahead.
Laura and her husband, Roy, are growers for American Crystal and live near Grafton, N.D., just 40 miles south of the Canadian border. A mother of three young boys, a marathon runner and a ninth-generation farmer (1760s), she wanted to help the sugar industry speak out on the benefits of biotechnology. In less than a year, she has transformed into a tremendous spokesperson on this issue for our industry. She gave her biotech presentation at our ASGA annual convention and received a standing ovation; two weeks later, she testified before the North Dakota Senate Agriculture Committee in support of a resolution for national uniformity for labeling foods containing biotech ingredients.
She will be blogging and connecting to people across the country and around the world on biotech in sugarbeets. She will be an addition to the spectacular work that Duane Grant (Rupert, Idaho) has done on biotech for our industry over the past 20 years.
Here is my challenge to every grower cooperative; you need a Laura Rutherford in your group. A woman’s voice on biotech is very powerful, and they can be a global player through the internet without leaving home. Any woman who has the communication skills and the passion to work on this issue can be trained and ready to go in a very short time. Step up and make it happen.
Cuba
The Freedom to Export to Cuba Act of 2015 was introduced in the Senate by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Mike Enzi (R-Wyo.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). It would repeal various laws restricting trade with Cuba. We anticipate similar legislation in the House.
2015 Fly-ins
Beet and cane growers made their annual visits to hundreds of congressional offices in February and March to educate staff on the many issues our industry is facing and to ask for their support in opposing any attacks on our sugar policy.
The 2014 Farm Bill is a commitment with the nation’s farmers so that business plans can be made for the future. Attempting to change the rules between farm bills opens a Pandora’s box of problems for a wide variety of policy issues.