Thread: Forum editorial: Side deals for CAFTA not enough

http://www.in-forum.com/articles/index. ... on=Opinion

Forum editorial: Side deals for CAFTA not enough
The Forum
Published Tuesday, July 19, 2005
If the Central American Free Trade Agreement is approved, the political fallout for one Minnesota senator will not be sweet.

Sen. Norm Coleman, R-Minn., put his credibility on the line with sugar producers from Minnesota (and North Dakota). He voted for CAFTA when it narrowly passed the Senate, despite unflagging opposition from sugar growers and the sugar processing industry in his state. Passage in the U.S. House of Representatives is less certain.

Coleman justified his support for the controversial trade pact by insisting he secured deals for domestic sugar which are tied to the Farm Bill. He said a sugar-to-ethanol provision protects sugar producers from imports and dumping on world markets by foreign countries.

(See the senator's commentary in Sunday's Forum, page A19.)

The Red River Valley sugar industry is not buying it. One producer put it this way last week: The senator does not know more about sugar than those of us who have been in the business for a long time.

That may be. But the senator is in a cross fire. The Bush administration wants the agreement, and Coleman certainly is a member of the Bush fan club. Minnesota's economy is more than the sugar industry; the state's industrial and processing sectors like trade agreements like CAFTA. One major state farm organization, the Farmers Union, opposes CAFTA. The other, the Farm Bureau, has taken a neutral stand, which, in effect, abandons its sugar-producing members.

And it has not been lost on growers that one of their major nemeses, the Sweetener Users Association, seems to like Coleman's initiatives. The organization's assessment and ultimate goals were summed up in an evaluation by the SUA's econonmist consultant: "This does not look at all bad…" said Thomas Earley. "While I sometimes wish that CAFTA would go down in flames so that everyone will blame the sugar producers, leading to a prompt downfall of the (sugar) program, there is an argument that if one is just patient, this house of cards will still eventually collapse."

Further complicating Coleman's political life is the fact that most sugar growers are (or have been until now) reliable Republicans. Their political contributions - individually and through their industry - can be significant to a campaign.

The sugar industry wants stability in the sugar program. CAFTA, Coleman's side agreement and a discredited scheme by USDA to pay foreign countries for a commitment to not dump sugar on the U.S. market, suggest chronic instability. Sugar growers fear that opening the import door even a sliver is the beginning of the end of the U.S. sugar industry. They don't want to risk their livelihoods. Red River Valley supporters of the industry don't want to see one of the region's most important economic engines sputter and stall.

We don't doubt Sen. Coleman is sincere about his plan to protect sugar. But what we think is not important. Sugar growers don't want CAFTA, period. And regarding Coleman's role in the trade pact, their mood has never been as sour.

Forum editorials represent the opinion of Forum

management and the newspaper's Editorial Board.

Coleman justified his support for the controversial trade pact by insisting he secured deals for domestic sugar which are tied to the Farm Bill. He said a sugar-to-ethanol provision protects sugar producers from imports and dumping on world markets by foreign countries.

(See the senator's commentary in Sunday's Forum, page A19.)

The Red River Valley sugar industry is not buying it.

Coleman pootied. He lied; he betrayed; and he got caught!!

Keep the pressure on Farmers....defeat this CAFTA CON and then remove from office all these SOBs and SOBettes who did not "heed", eh!! But, of course!!

Listen Up Globbie Pay Boys and Pay Girls....Americans hate liars, cheaters, thieves and Traitors more than they hate anything else in the world.

Betray US and Get Caught? You best pack your bags, head south and I wouldn't stop if I were you until I hit Peru!!