Is the sugar industry's sweet seduction waning? With artificial products like Splenda stealing attention and the prevalence of obesity plaguing America's health, many believe the sugar industry is headed for a decline.

It seems the world is finding it hard to dismiss that sugar is vastly becoming the poster child for an assortment of evils; its industry is being branded as a spoiler both nationally and internationally. For instance, the sugar industry was blamed for:

• Thwarting the chance for passage of the Bush administration's top trade priority, Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA).

• Weakening the American food industries that rely on sugar.

• Fighting global diet guidelines that aimed to improve children's health and curb obesity.

Sugar Industry at Fault

With hardball tactics and the lavishness of some of its tycoons, indeed, the sugar industry's powerful lobby has been a legend in Washington.

Thus, with CAFTA at a standstill in Congress, the Bush administration has pinpointed sugar as the top instigator -- despite the fact sugar is the single largest agricultural donor to political campaigns.

Why would the sugar industry want to prevent the passage of CAFTA, an economic pact with Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua, which would eliminate most tariffs for American goods into those countries and preserve the duty-free status of most goods coming from those countries? Because it wants to largely protect an outdated quota system used in the United States to protect farmers that inflate sugar costs by some $2 billion a year.

In turn, high domestic sugar costs have forced companies like the local Ferrara Pan Candy Company to move their manufacturing abroad. All it would take for the sugar lobby to stop the fight: The end of taxpayer subsidies to farmers who grow corn, wheat, cotton, rice and soybeans to the tune of $19 billion annually.

What's more, it's hard to look past the sugar industry's role in the obesity epidemic, as it successfully lobbied to downplay references to sugar in the new dietary guidelines, as well as aided in eliminating any reference to sugar in the 2005 food pyramid recommendations.

Can the Sugar Industry Stand the Heat Headed its Way?

The sugar industry's spokesman explained how the industry is "a little confused about being singled out" by agribusiness for hurting trade and by the Bush administration claiming the industry is hurting democracy and the country's strategic interests.

But then again, the blame may be fueled by the fact that sugar's conventional influence over the union of money and politics is slipping. For example:

• The sugar lobby gave $3.2 million during the 2004 elections, a drop from $3.4 million in 2000.

• The latest contributions by the sugar lobby were a mere 6 percent of the $54.5 million given by agribusiness as a whole.

In yet another strike against the sugar industry: In 2004 the World Trade Organization said the European Union's sugar subsidy program harmed developing countries and violated global law. Thus, while the European program differs from the American quota system, the move put the sugar industry on notice that its days of sweet-talking the global market were over.

And the European food companies led by Nestle and Unilever, and the grocery association, share the same feelings ... everyone has had enough.

New York Times June 2, 2005 (Registration Required)