Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 10, 1995
Sugar Competitiveness Act of 1995 - Amends the Agricultural Act of 1949 to replace current sugar price support provisions with recourse loans to sugarcane and sugar beet producers. Reduces sugarcane loan rates from 18 cents per pound to 12 cents per pound over three years. Prohibits sugar price supports. Provides for the conversion of any current nonrecourse loans that are extended into recourse loans. Extends and increases sugar marketing assessment provisions. Includes imported sugar within such provisions' scope. Provides for the regulation of imported raw sugarcane at prices not greater than the world sugar price or the raw sugarcane loan rate. Amends the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to terminate sugar marketing quota and allotment provisions.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1302 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1302 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1302 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1302 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.