BENGARLAND!com

First, the quote:

WTO: Mexico Violated Global Trade Rules

Associated Press GENEVA — The World Trade Organization ruled Monday that Mexico violated global trade rules in a soft-drink dispute with the United States. A WTO panel rejected a Mexican appeal, supporting U.S. claims that Mexico was in breach of international law in imposing a 20 percent tax on drinks that are sweetened with anything other than cane sugar grown in Mexico. “It is clear that Mexico must eliminate this tax and restore fairness for our U.S. corn growers and refiners,” said U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman. “This is a good result for our farmers and producers, who seek a level playing field.” Mexico was a top market for high-fructose corn syrup from the U.S. before the tax was imposed in 2002. The tax made it too expensive to use the corn sweetener in soft drinks, and today, the U.S. share of the market is about 6 percent of pretax levels, according to the U.S. trade representative’s office. The dispute over sugar and corn sweetener has cost U.S. corn refiners $944 million annually, according to the Washington-based Corn Refiners Association. “This tax clearly violates WTO rules, and this decision should end Mexico’s barriers to high fructose corn syrup,” said Iowa Senator Tom Harkin. “American corn farmers and processors have lost substantial business as a result of the Mexican tax. I urge the WTO to establish a quick timetable to allow free trade of high fructose corn syrup.” Mexico has insisted that its actions are in line with trade rules, saying that it will continue to adopt the measures it considers necessary to protect the interests of its sugar sector regardless of the previous WTO decision, unless it can reach an agreement with the United States. The WTO’s dispute settlement body will now formally ask Mexico to bring its measures into line with trade rules. The decision cannot be appealed. “We hope Mexico sees this decision as we do, as an opportunity to work together to quickly resolve all outstanding sweetener trade issues between us,” Portman added.

First of all, why does the US (and WTO) think that the multinational sugar water distributors have some inherent right to sweeten their drinks with HFCS from US corn farmers? Why is it “not fair” that Mexico is imposing a tax on sweeteners that don’t come from Mexico? Seems like economic sense to me. The United States does it all the time, on all kinds of products as a way of protecting domestic producers.

In fact, the only reason that HFCS is used so widely in the US is:

1) Gov’t subsidies make HFCS cheap, so you’re basically paying for it twice by providing Pepsi with a cheap sugar alternative through your taxes, and then again when you buy the 3 cents worth of liquid sugar shit for 60 cents.

2) Regular cheap imported sugar is taxed to make in not cost-competitive against HFCS.

3) The corn lobbying groups are powerful, and Iowa — which produces more corn than any other state — also holds a significant amount of federal weight due to its position in the presidential election cycle. So basically, they get what they want.

This is why, here in the states, your Coke contains HFCS and just about everywhere else in the world it contains a natural sugar derivative.

Secondly, why isn’t this being framed as a human health issue?

Lately, some people have been pushing for warning labels on soft drinks due to health concerns. Warning: This product contains high-fructose corn syrup which is known to cause obesity in lab rats?

Personally, I just try to not drink the stuff and avoid HFCS when I can.

And just for kicks here is a good article about the history of US sugar and the politics that go along with it. Very interesting, but I’ve lived in the US all my life, so these things don’t really surprise me anymore. Realistic? Yes. Jaded? Definitely.