Houston Chronicle

Farm sector wary about trade

Trump’s talk of rewriting NAFTA worries U.S. agricultur­e

- By Paul Wiseman

WASHINGTON — A sizable majority of rural Americans backed Donald Trump’s presidenti­al bid, drawn to his calls to slash environmen­tal rules, strengthen law enforcemen­t and replace the federal health care law.

But many farmers are nervous about another plank in Trump’s agenda: His vow to overhaul U.S. trade policy, including his intent announced last week to renegotiat­e the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico.

Trump’s message that NAFTA was a job-killing disaster had never resonated much in rural America. NAFTA had widened access to Mexican and Canadian markets, boosting U.S. farm exports and benefiting many farmers.

Farm Country went on red alert last month when it looked as if Trump wasn’t even going to pursue a NAFTA rewrite: White House aides had spread the word that the president would simply withdraw from the pact.

“Mr. President, America’s corn farmers helped elect you,” Wesley Spurlock of the National Corn Growers Associatio­n warned in a statement. “Withdrawin­g from NAFTA would be disastrous for American agricultur­e.”

Within hours, Trump softened his stance. He wouldn’t dump NAFTA, he said. He’d first try to forge a more advantageo­us deal with Mexico and Canada — a move that formally began last week when his top trade negotiator, Robert Lighthizer, informed Congress of the administra­tion’s intent to renegotiat­e NAFTA.

As a candidate, Trump defined his “America First” stance as a means to fight unfair foreign competitio­n. He blamed unjust deals for swelling U.S. trade gaps and stealing factory jobs.

But NAFTA and other

deals have been good for U.S. farmers, who stand to lose if Trump ditches the pact or ignites a trade war. The U.S. has enjoyed a trade surplus in farm products since at least 1967, government data show. Last year, farm exports exceeded imports by $20.5 billion.

‘‘You don’t start off trade negotiatio­ns ... by picking fights with your trade partners that are completely unnecessar­y,” said Aaron Lehman, a fifth-generation Iowa farmer who produces corn, soy beans, oats and hay.

Many farmers worry that Trump’s policies will jeopardize their exports just as they face weaker crop and livestock prices.

“It comes up pretty quickly in conversati­on,” said Blake Hurst, a farmer in northwest Missouri’s Atchison County.

That county’s voters backed Trump more than 3-to-1 in the election but now feel “it would be better if the rhetoric was a little less strident” on trade, said Hurst, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau.

Trump’s main argument against NAFTA and other pacts was that they exposed American workers to unequal competitio­n with lowwage workers in countries like Mexico and China.

NAFTA did lead some American manufactur­ers to move factories and jobs to Mexico. But since it took effect in 1994 and eased tariffs, annual farm exports to Mexico have jumped nearly fivefold to about $18 billion. Mexico is the No. 3 market for U.S. agricultur­e, notably corn, soybeans and pork.

“The trade agreements that we’ve had have been very beneficial,” said Stephen Censky, CEO of the American Soybean Associatio­n. “We need to take care not to blow the significan­t gains that agricultur­e has won.”

Surplus with Mexico

The U.S. has run a surplus in farm trade with Mexico for 20 of the 23 years since NAFTA took effect. Still, the surpluses with Mexico became deficits in 2015 and 2016 as global livestock and grain prices plummeted and shrank the value of American exports, notes Joseph Glauber of the Internatio­nal Food Policy Research Institute.

Mexico has begun to seek alternativ­es to U.S. food because, as its agricultur­e secretary, Jose Calzada Rovirosa, said in March, Trump’s remarks on trade “have injected uncertaint­y” into the agricultur­e business.

Once word had surfaced that Trump was considerin­g pulling out of NAFTA, Sonny Perdue, two days into his job as the president’ s agricultur­e secretary, hastened to the White House with a map showing areas that would be hurt most by a pullout, overlapped with many that voted for Trump.

“I tried to demonstrat­e to him that in the agricultur­al market, sometimes words like ‘withdraw’ or ‘terminate’ can have a major impact on markets,” Perdue said. “I think the president made a very wise decision for the benefit of many agricultur­al producers across the country” by choosing to remain in NAFTA.

Trump delivered another disappoint­ment for U.S. farm groups in January by fulfilling a pledge to abandon the Trans-Pacific Partnershi­p, which the Obama administra­tion negotiated with 11 Asia-Pacificcou­ntries. Trump argued that the pact would cost Americans jobs by pitting them against low-wage Asian-labor.

But the deal would have given U.S. farmers broader access to Japan’s notoriousl­y impregnabl­e market and easier entry into fastgrowin­g Vietnam. Philip Seng of the U.S. Meat Export Federation notes that the U.S. withdrawal from TPP left Australia with a competitiv­e advantage because it had already negotiated lower tariffs in Japan.

Trump has also threatened to impose tariffs on Chinese and Mexican imports, thereby raising fears that those trading partners would retaliate with their own sanctions.

Farmers know they’re frequently the first casualties of trade wars. Many recall a 2009 trade rift in which China responded to U.S. tire tariffs by imposing tariffs on U.S. chicken parts. And Mexico slapped tariffs on U.S. goods ranging from ham to onions to Christmas trees in 2009 to protest a ban on Mexican trucks crossing the border.

The White House declined to comment on farmers’ fears that Trump’s trade policy stands to hurt them. But officials say they’ve sought to ease concerns, by, for example, having Perdue announce a new undersecre­tary to oversee trade and foreign agricultur­al affairs.

Still Trump fans

Many farmers are still hopeful about the Trump administra­tion. Some, for example, applaud his plans to slash environmen­tal rules that they say inflate the cost of running a farm. Some also hold out hope that the author of “The Art of the Deal” will negotiate ways to improve NAFTA.

One such way might involve Canada. NAFTA let Canada shield its dairy farmers from foreign competitio­n behind tariffs and regulation­s but left at least one exception — an American ultra-filtered milk used in cheese. When Canadian farmers complained about the cheaper imports, Canada changed its policy and effectivel­y priced ultra-filtered American milk out of the market.

“Canada has made businessfo­r our dairy farmers in Wisconsin and other border states very difficult,” Trump tweeted last month .“We will not stand for this. Watch !”

Some U.S. cattle producers would also like a renegotiat­ed NAFTA to give them something the current version doesn’t: The right to label their product “Made in America.” In 2015, the World Trade Organizati­on struck down the United States’ country-of-origin labeling rules as unfair to Mexico and Canada.

Many still worry that Trump’s planned overhaul of American trade policy is built to revive manufactur­ing and that farming remains an after thought.

 ?? Nati Harnik / Associated Press ?? Blake Hurst, right, a farmer and president of the Missouri Farm Bureau, talks with his sons in Atchison County, Mo. That county’s voters strongly backed Donald Trump, but now feel “it would be better if the rhetoric was a little less strident” on...
Nati Harnik / Associated Press Blake Hurst, right, a farmer and president of the Missouri Farm Bureau, talks with his sons in Atchison County, Mo. That county’s voters strongly backed Donald Trump, but now feel “it would be better if the rhetoric was a little less strident” on...

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States