Lobbying efforts over CAFTA's sugar provisions muddle outlook.

The U.S. sugar industry and food manufacturers have spent millions in lobbying efforts over CAFTA. The sugar industry has made more than $22.8 million in political contributions since 1990, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a watchdog group. "Sugar is a small industry with a disproportionate amount of influence in Washington. Sugar's influence has been gained in large part through campaign contributions and lobbying," said Steven Weiss, a center spokesman. Senators who voted against the bill raised an average of $16,800 in individual and political action committee contributions from sugar cane and sugar beet growers since 1999, while senators who voted for the bill raised an average of $9,200 from the industry during the same period, the center said.

Food manufacturers, who largely oppose the sugar industry because its quota system elevates prices on a key ingredient in candy and other products, spent $24.8 million during the period. The manufacturers spent heavily on some of the same lawmakers as the sugar industry, including pro-CAFTA Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Mel Martinez (R-Fla.) and Pat Roberts (R-Kan.).

The food industry's strategy may be working as the pro-CAFTA legislators are making loud threats to the sugar sector. "Sugar's insistence upon receiving special treatment makes it very likely that the rest of agriculture, which overwhelmingly supports CAFTA, may opt not to participate in sugar's defense the next time that program faces a [World Trade Organization] challenge, budget reconciliation measure and the endless amendments to end sugar's support program during the next farm bill. Let that warning be heard," Roberts said.

The Senate voted 54-45 to approve CAFTA on June 30. The House is begging debate and opposition from not only sugar, but also labor and some manufacturing sectors make the vote too close to call.