NAFTA issue not as simple as it may seem

William Mulholland, Las Vegas

Saturday, Feb. 16, 2008 | 2:03 a.m.

Regarding Eduardo Porter’s Thursday column, “NAFTA will be good for Mexican farmers”:

This column confused me, and I am sure others were confused. Mr. Porter stated that NAFTA will result in lower sugar prices, benefiting consumers north and south of the border, and undermine the current sugar price support system.

However, as a consumer, I have noted for quite a long time that sugar is no longer being used as an ingredient in almost all canned products we buy at the grocery store. Instead, the sweetener and preservative used overwhelmingly is high fructose corn syrup, not sugar.

Grain products, including corn formerly used as food, are now being processed for ethanol and other biofuels. Mr. Porter ignored this issue. Consequently, food prices are skyrocketing. In Mexico, this has led to revolts against the much higher price for tortillas, a food staple with corn as its primary ingredient.

In fact, aid agencies have noted that the increased use of grain products for the production of ethanol will greatly increase death rates from malnutrition in undeveloped and dependent countries worldwide.

In the convoluted and confusing world of politics, it is difficult to see the “big picture.” Yet in our worldwide economy it is easy to see that the NAFTA/sugar issue is but a very small piece of the picture, overshadowed by massive issues including the grain-for-ethanol boondoggle.

How are we helped if sugar prices decline by a few cents but the costs for everything else go up? Mr. Porter’s column appears to be simple propaganda pushing NAFTA.