279.
Memorandum of a Conversation, Washington, July 22, 1955[1]
SUBJECT
Sugar Legislation
PARTICIPANTS
Dr. Gabriel Hauge, Economic Assistant to the
President
Mr. True D. Morse, Under Secretary of Agriculture
Mr. Lawrence Myers, Chief, Sugar Branch, Department
of Agriculture
ARA‑Mr. Holland
H‑Miss Kirlin[2]
IRD‑Mr. Nichols
TAD‑Mr. Weiss[3]
AR‑Mr. Cale
Mr. Holland stated that he had asked that the group
meet in order to consider what the Administration's position should be
regarding the sugar bill recommended by the House Agriculture Committee.[4] Mr.
Holland indicated that it was the State Department's view that the proposed
division of their share of the market between Cuba and the full duty countries
was too hard on Cuba. He also called attention to the very arbitrary way in
which the quotas of the principal full duty countries had been determined. It
was agreed that Mr. Holland, on the basis of data to be provided by Mr. Myers
and Mr. Cale, would recommend the position that the Administration should ask
support regarding the distribution among foreign countries of the foreign share
of increases in consumption.
Mr. Morse stated that Agriculture would have to
oppose the 90 per cent parity provision in Section 20 of the bill. He also
stated that he was of the opinion that the State Department would wish to
recommend deletion of the punitive provisions contained in Section 8 of the
bill. There was general agreement that the provision in Section 8 which would
penalize countries which export sugar to the United States if they reduce their
importation of United States agricultural products materially below the level
reached during a representative base period should be removed. There was also
agreement that the Executive branch should oppose the provision in Section 8
which requires accession to the International Sugar Agreement by January 1,
1957, if countries which export sugar to the United States market are to
benefit by increased quotas under the Sugar Act.
There was considerable discussion of the provision
in Section 8 which provides that the quota of a country may be reduced if it is
not filled as a result of shipment to other markets in which prices may
temporarily be higher than in the United States. Dr. Hauge, Mr. Holland, Mr.
Nichols and the Agriculture representatives indicated that they considered the
provision to be reasonable. Mr. Weiss, on the other hand, argued that the
provision would violate the general principle of operating quotas in such a way
as to interfere as little as possible with normal competitive processes. He
also stated that he was of the opinion that the provision would violate our
commitments under GATT. It was the consensus that the Executive branch should
favor deletion of Article 8 in its entirety on the ground that the Act should
not contain punitive provisions of the type in question. It was understood,
however, that no last ditch fight would be made to obtain deletion of the
provision under which foreign countries might be penalized for failure to fill
their quotas in order to obtain a higher price elsewhere.
Mr. Morse indicated that the Department of
Agriculture was of the opinion that the Administration should seek to obtain
restoration of the provision which would divide[6] increases in consumption on
a 55‑45 basis between domestic and foreign producers. Mr. Cale stated
that he had been informed, second hand, that representatives of the domestic
industry would not oppose the 50‑50 provision recommended by the House
Agriculture Committee. He also pointed out that it would be easier to work out
a satisfactory distribution of the foreign share if the 50‑50 division
between domestic and foreign were made. Dr. Hauge apparently agreed with Mr.
Morse that an effort should be made to obtain restoration of the 55‑45
division previously recommended by the Executive branch.
[1] Source: Department of State, Central Files,
811.235/7‑2255. Limited Official Use. Drafted by Cale.
[2] Florence Kirlin, Acting Deputy Assistant
Secretary of State for Congressional Relations.
[3] Leonard Weiss, Assistant Chief of the Trade
Agreements and Treaties Division, Bureau of Economic Affairs.
[4] On July 21 the House Committee on Agriculture
approved an amended sugar bill (H.R. 7030) which provided for market quotas
above 8,350,000 tons to be evenly divided between domestic and foreign
producers in 1956, with 48 percent of the latter going to Cuba and the
remaining 2 percent to other foreign countries. In 1957, the foreign suppliers
would receive a statutory quota of 175,000 tons and an additional 45,000 tons
each year thereafter out of consumption increases. Cuba would supply the
balance, if any, between the annual increment of 45,000 tons to the full duty
countries and the foreign share of increases in consumption.
[6] Cale crossed out the word "develop"
and wrote "divide" above it.