PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11562)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Nov 7, 2001
Sugar Program Reform Act - Amends the Agricultural Market Transition Act with respect to the sugar program to: (1) reduce sugarcane loan rates through crop year 2004; (2) revise the sugar beet loan rate; (3) eliminate nonrecourse loans; and (4) eliminate sugar price supports after crop year 2002.Amends the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to repeal sugar and crystalline fructose marketing quota and allotment provisions.Amends the Food Security Act of 1985, beginning after the 2000-2001 quota year, to direct the President to use all available authority to ensure that U.S. market raw sugar shall be available at not more than the higher of the world sugar price or the U.S. loan rate.
People & committees
Sen. Santorum, Rick [R-PA] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. (text of measure as introduced: CR S11562)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11561-11562)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze S.1652 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.
Examine S.1652 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.
Examine S.1652 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.
Examine S.1652 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.