Seniors on fixed incomes struggling to pay their bills and keep food on the table deserve more than distortions and half-truths.

Presidential campaigns by their very nature take odd twists and turns, from questions pertaining to fantasy football, to what woman to put on U.S. currency, to fixating on poll numbers to determine which candidates will sit at the ‘kid’s table’ during televised debates. It’s a head-shaking spectacle Americans can consistently rely on every four years.

Now in an almost arbitrary bow to further ridiculousness, a movement is underfoot to attack Senator Marco Rubio on trade, specifically, his unwillingness to unilaterally disarm America in the ongoing campaign to end sugar subsidies. Last week the Wall Street Journal published a salvo at Rubio characterizing his position on the domestic sugar industry as hand-baked in the ovens of establishment politics and crony capitalism.

While 60 Plus as an organization remains neutral regarding the current field of presidential contenders, we feel compelled to address both the misinformation and fatuous criticism being heaped on Senator Rubio, as we are reluctant to allow the daily one-upsmanship of presidential politics to warp and mislead on such a critical policy issue.

In pulling Rubio into the debate on U.S. sugar subsidies, his critics fail to acknowledge that in fact he supports the elimination of USDA loans for sugar refiners, the correct position for those who support free-trade and open markets. The Journal, for example, failed to mention that Rubio’s stance is consistent with the Zero-for-Zero legislation sponsored by Florida Congressman Ted Yoho, which would not only eliminate U.S. subsidies, but require the elimination of all world wide subsidies which distort market prices.

Currently China, Brazil, India, Thailand and Mexico are handing out billions in subsidies to their domestic sugar producers to help them flood the market with cheap sugar, an aggressive and predatory trade practice which ought to be condemned, and which cannot ignored. What is really being threatened is America’s position with the World Trade Organization (WTO) and our ability to negotiate fair and meaningful trade practices across a broad spectrum of commodities that include agriculture, manufacturing, energy and minerals. Sugar just so happens to serve as one of many pawns in this ongoing battle.

60 Plus, Senator Rubio, dozens of other free-trade Senators and Congressman, and even the American Sugar Alliance support Zero-for-Zero precisely because it ends U.S. sugar subsidies, and demands a level playing field to facilitate free and fair trade, which is the real objective, and which is most beneficial to those who matter most – the U.S. consumer.

Prices of staples such as dairy, meat and produce are up double digits in the past six years, well above the rate of inflation and well above the cost of living increases awarded America’s over 30 million senior citizens living on fixed incomes. As a seniors group that monitors trends impacting the elderly, we know the impact of food prices on seniors who struggle to get by every single day.

Unilateral disarmament in the face of a heavily subsidized and indispensible product such as sugar is not going to help consumers or seniors in the short or long run. Nations committed to a trade war in the name of propping up domestic industries are not interested in free trade or in market forces determining fair market value; they are interested only in dominance, and in squeezing consumers for as much money as possible, an absolutely unallowable proposition.

The best solution proposed to date for both leveling the field and standing-up for America’s trade position in global markets is the Zero-for-Zero legislation, which can be achieved through a firm stance at the negotiating table and implemented as dozens of other such deals have been achieved in the past. Scoring cheap political points in the heat of a presidential campaign with distortions and half-truths is not the answer, and helps no-one, least of all the seniors and working families struggling each day to keep food on the table.