With trade deals being cancelled by President Trump and threats of tariffs on U.S. products, associations fear the loss of export markets
SAN ANTONIO, Texas — U.S. farm groups want the federal government to double what it spends on promoting crops in export markets.
Ron Moore, president of the American Soybean Association, said the United States is spending less than one-quarter of the US$1 billion the European Union spends on market promotion.
The group wants to see a doubling in funding to $469 million for the Market Access Program and Foreign Market Development Program in the next four-year farm bill.
By comparison, Agriculture Canada is planning to spend $32 million on trade and market expansion in 2017-18.
Read Also
Lethbridge Polytechnic receives major donation
Multimillion-dollar donation by Hranac family aids Lethbridge Polytechnic’s research in integrated food production systems, irrigation science and post-harvest technology in Alberta
The National Corn Growers Association and the National Association of Wheat Growers share the same stance as the soybean growers on the market development issue.
Brett Blankenship, past-president of NAWG, said the industry needs that commitment to trade promotion, given that newly elected U.S. President Donald Trump has been scuttling trade deals and angering key export markets with talk of slapping tariffs on their products.
It is not happenstance that all three grower groups are on the same page on market promotion.
They have been meeting to find common ground on a number of issues that they want to see addressed in the 2018 farm bill.
“We want to make sure we speak clearly, forcefully and in a unified manner,” Moore said at the recent Commodity Classic farm conference in San Antonio.
“In the previous farm bill it took a little bit longer than expected because we weren’t speaking in a unified manner.”
In fact, it took about a year longer than expected to implement the 2014 bill, which created a lot of uncertainty for American farmers. Among other things, the farm bill sets out farm safety net programs for the next four years.
Trump wants the new farm bill done on time, and he wants a strong bill for farmers. Mike Conaway, chair of the U.S. House of Representatives agriculture committee, couldn’t agree more.
“I am committed, driven quite frankly, to get the farm bill done on time,” he said.
That means he wants it completed by the fourth quarter of 2017 or the first quarter of 2018.
The committee is asking for the same funding as the 2014 bill. Conaway said an increase in funding is highly unlikely given the U.S. is approaching $20 trillion in debt and Trump has a lot of spending priorities.
However, he thinks a strong farm safety net will be an easier sell to Congress in an era of sub-$4 per bushel corn prices than it was last time around when they were $7.
The other thing the farm community has going for it is that spending on the 2014 bill was originally projected to be $23 billion less than the 2008 bill.
“We’re spending $100 billion less on the farm bill than we’re supposed to have,” he said.
That is primarily because of a $92 billion reduction in spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which accounts for 80 percent of farm bill dollars.
Commodity program costs were $16 billion higher in the 2014 bill than the 2008 bill, but crop insurance costs were $10 billion lower because of falling commodity prices.
Moore said crop insurance is already under attack in Washington, but that is a non-starter for farm groups.
“We will vigorously defend the federal crop (insurance) program.”
Maintaining crop insurance is a top priority for corn and wheat growers as well.
“We’re entering out fourth year of corn prices below the cost of production,” said NCGA president Wesley Spurlock. “Although most farmers remain solvent, many are facing higher debt-to-asset ratios and eroding equity.”
Blankenship said it is another area of unity for farm groups.
“The growers are drawing a line in the sand around crop insurance as their key safety net,” he said.
