Food has been making headlines a lot lately, and the buzz centers around Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s work as secretary of Health and Human Services with his self-proclaimed mission to “Make America Healthy Again.”
Kennedy has identified a long list of artificial or manipulated ingredients that he believes are contributing to the fact that Americans are sick, so much so that only 25-30% of our young people are even eligible for military service. In the words of my insightful mother-in-law, “Our country is failing because it is ailing.”
Kennedy believes that we can turn this situation around by working with those who supply our food and convincing them to use more natural ingredients.
As part of this ongoing effort to improve the quality of our food, President Trump and Secretary Kennedy recently announced an agreement with Coca-Cola that would have their products switch from using high fructose corn syrup to using real cane sugar.
But wait — is sugar a health food?
Clearly it is not, but it is a more natural food that is definitely “the lesser of two evils” compared to high fructose corn syrup, which is more highly linked to health problems like excessive weight gain, insulin resistance and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
Trump and Kennedy both touted this agreement with Coca-Cola as a win. But is it really? What is necessary for them to secure a true victory here?
Drinking a Coke made with real sugar is a beneficial move for consumers in the sense that they would be drinking a less harmful soda. But this switch is likely to put more strain on consumers’ wallets.
In the current market, switching to real sugar would almost certainly lead to a price increase, because high fructose corn syrup is much cheaper than sugar for companies to use and allows them to sell their products to us at a cheaper price. That economic reality also gives no incentive to companies to make the switch to real sugar.
Is there a way that could actually incentivize companies and also create an economic win for consumers? To answer that, we must ask: What factors have contributed to the high cost of American sugar?
Lobbyists and tariffs.
In a simplified telling of history, two influential lobbying groups — corn and sugar — influenced American food production, driving a shift toward high fructose corn syrup. The sugar lobbyists were concerned with keeping foreign sugars out to bolster domestic production, so they advocated strong tariffs and quotas on imported sugars. Although each group was working according to their own interests, the sugar tariffs inadvertently drove corporations to use corn syrup. The sugar tariffs, however, remain.
But why corn? Corn has historically been a large recipient of government subsidies to help farmers produce it for cheaper, making it a very abundant crop. Because foreign sugars were limited and domestic sugar more expensive, high fructose corn syrup became an option for companies looking to cut costs and increase production. It was an obvious choice.
So, these groups got the price of sugar up and the production of corn up, thereby creating economic incentive for corporations to make the switch.
Why on earth would any company make the switch back to sugar now? These policies have led to an environment where U.S. sugar prices have averaged about 30% higher than the global average per pound all the way up to sometimes 100% more than the global average. The current difference is roughly about 50% higher than the global average.
It is obvious that, given the current trade policies around sugars and subsidies on corn syrups, companies would be crazy to switch because it would cut into their profit margin. Either they take a hit on their profit per bottle, or they raise prices and then get fewer customers buying their products as a result, again, lowering profits. No company would seriously look at this as a good idea, unless it’s from some deep principled viewpoint or it is the moral high ground they seek.
If Trump and RFK Jr. seek to make this deal with Coca-Cola and other similar deals actually happen, and for it to be a “win” for both consumers and corporations, trade barriers on imported sugars must go. The current trade barriers make the prices of natural sweeteners artificially high in favor of ultra-processed subsidized sweeteners that negatively impact our health.
By dropping these tariffs, not only would our waistlines get healthier, but it would also prevent our economy from getting out of shape. It is important for economic policy to support good health, because as the great Roman poet Virgil said, “Our greatest wealth is health.”
It is obvious that Trump and RFK Jr. would both like to see the switch from high fructose corn syrup to sugar become more widespread. Therefore, they must create incentives for companies to do so. They are excited about the deal with Coca-Cola, but Coke is the most purchased soda in America, so increasing its price would be felt in most American households.
By dropping the trade barriers, sugar prices would conceivably come down and more companies, like Coca-Cola, would have an opportunity to make changes and use real sugars again.
Sugar is not healthy, but an affordable move away from corn syrup is likely a step in the right direction.
Make Sugar Great Again?