This letter originally ran in the Wall Street Journal in response to this:
Regarding Kelly Erickson's June 19 letter: The sugar growers are trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the public yet again. The reference to a "no-cost" sugar policy comes from the fact that there is no line item in the federal budget for the program. This is partially true, but the Congressional Budget Office predicts taxpayer costs rising in the years ahead because of the sugar-to-ethanol program. To be crystal clear, the U.S. sugar program costs every consumer more money than would otherwise be the case in a free market—$3.5 billion a year, according to a study by Iowa State University economists.
Despite the claim of large candy companies expanding, federal statistics say 125,000 American workers lost their jobs in U.S. sugar-using industries between 1997 and 2010. A Commerce Department study stated a chief culprit in this job loss was the U.S.'s market-distorting sugar policy—three good manufacturing jobs are lost for every sugar job saved by the subsidy. I find it unconscionable that Congress is perpetuating an agricultural policy that costs American jobs. It is misguided policies, like the current sugar program, that benefit small special interests at the expense of hard-working Americans that need to end.
Rep. Robert J. Dold (R., Ill.)
The letter was originally posted here: