Brother, Can You Spare 18 Cents? Imagine this scene: The U.S. Congress is about to pass a bill that will offer cheap loans to American oil companies. The government will loan them $150 for every barrel of oil they produce, with the oil itself serving as collateral. This guarantees that oil will always sell for at least $150 per barrel, because the companies can surrender their oil to Uncle Sam at that price instead of selling it for less. Meanwhile, a system of tariffs will prevent foreign companies from selling oil at prices that can compete with $150 per barrel. Sounds like a bad idea, doesn’t it? This would force taxpayers to put billions at risk for a program that makes their gasoline more expensive. It would also drive up prices for other goods and services that contain or require the use of oil or gasoline. Oil companies would be the only beneficiaries — at our expense, they would be rolling in dough. So if this is a bad idea for oil, why is it a good idea for sugar? This is precisely the program currently in place, and Congress is poised to reauthorize it before it expires March 15. Why? A November report in the Washington Post gives a clue: In less than a year, “nine sugar farm or refinery groups have made more than 900 separate contributions totaling nearly $1.5 million to candidates, parties and political funds.” Under the rival House and Senate versions of the farm bill, the sugar loans will either remain the same or increase by half a penny per pound. (Current loans: 18 cents per pound for processed sugar cane and 23 cents for sugar beets, double the average world-market price over the last seven years.)....