Trump Challenges Reagan's Legacy: Urges Coca-Cola to Abandon HFCS

In a significant move that harks back to the 1980s, President Trump is now urging the iconic brand, Coca-Cola, to ditch high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and revert to sugar. This marks a historical shift from policies implemented by President Reagan over three decades ago.

In the 1980s, President Reagan introduced import quotas to promote HFCS's mainstream adoption, particularly in popular products such as Coca-Cola. The move was seen as a means to support the Big Agriculture companies, primarily ADM, whose CEO had a personal relationship with President Reagan. The switch to HFCS was driven through U.S. trade policy. In the early 1980s, as ADM first developed HFCS, its cost was ten times that of sugar. Once Reagan's sugar quotas were introduced through the 1981 Farm Bill, sugar prices increased tenfold, making ADM's HFCS the cheaper sweetener.

This history has recently been captured in T.H. Harbinger's book, The Farm Program, available at https://www.insightsoninnovation.net/farmingandfood.

A direct result of Reagan's sweetener policy change was the infamous introduction of New Coke in 1985. And then the switch back to regular Coke, but now with HFCS as its sweetener.

Coca-Cola, for its part, has remained silent on Trump's proposal. The company has experimented with a return to sugar in some markets, most notably with its 'Coca-Cola Life' brand, which uses a blend of sugar and stevia. However, the overall shift away from HFCS would be a massive undertaking, involving not only changes in manufacturing processes but also potential repercussions in terms of cost and pricing. For some executives, it brings back memories of the New Coke marketing disaster.

In the grand scheme of American history, the sweeteners used in a soda might seem trivial. However, this issue raises broader concerns: health and nutrition, economic policy, and the influence of major corporations. The debate over HFCS and sugar is not just about what goes into a can of Coke. It's about the decisions made as a society and the values upheld.

In the book "The Farm Program," this interplay between agriculture and government policy, as well as its consequences, is richly detailed. "Of more benefit to ADM is the Agriculture Department's sugar program. The program operates like a mini-OPEC, setting prices, limiting production, and forcing Americans to spend $1.4 billion per year more on sugar. The irony is that ADM has no interest in sugar. Its concern is to keep sugar prices high to prevent Coke and all the other ADM customers that replaced cane sugar with corn sweeteners from switching back."

President Trump's push towards sugar is not only a departure from Reagan's policies but also a move amid ongoing debates about health and nutrition. Critics of HFCS argue that it contributes to obesity and other health problems, while proponents maintain it is no worse than sugar when consumed in moderation.

The move from Trump is a bold one, given the significant role that the corn industry plays in the U.S. economy. Like Reagan's move to support HFCS in the 1980s, it reflects the interplay of politics, business, and consumer preferences. Whether it leads to a healthier nation, a revitalized sugar industry, or merely a change in the taste of America's favorite soda remains to be seen. But one thing is clear: the story of Coca-Cola's sweetener is a fascinating chapter in the nation's history. An in-depth reminder is available in T H. Harbinger's The Farm Program. https://www.insightsoninnovation.net/farmingandfood.

It remains to be seen how this will play out politically and economically, especially given the ongoing struggles of the American farming industry.