Agricultural Trade Protectionism Protects No One [Opinion]
July 2, 2018 The gentleman at the other end of the line was hard to understand, partly because he was talking about something I was only passingly familiar with, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and partly because he was speaking with a strong Southern accent and using a lot of words I cannot repeat here.
The year was 1998, and it was my first week on the job as Western Editor for Meister Media Worldwide (MMW), concentrating on fruits — naturally — and vegetables. NAFTA had been in effect for four years. Tariffs were being eliminated progressively, and all duties and quantitative restrictions, with the exception of some dairy products traded with Canada, were eventually eliminated.
As a Californian, I had heard nothing but positive things about NAFTA. Even in talking with a few growers, I heard nothing negative. But the gentleman who called that day — who I’m guessing got my California office number by accident — made it clear Florida tomato growers weren’t at all happy with NAFTA. It made me realize how critical trade is in all agricultural crops.
Prior to joining MMW, like most Americans, I viewed global agricultural trade in terms of wheat and soybeans. I had no idea of the impact on specialty crops — which I still find to be an odd term. What could possibly be more mainstream than apples?
Speaking of apples, NAFTA was the chief topic at last year’s U.S. Apple Association’s (USApple) Outlook and Marketing Conference, where officials with USApple and American Farm Bureau, as well as the trade offices of Mexico and Canada, extolled NAFTA’s virtues. And by the way, that Florida tomato grower who swore about the agreement 20 years earlier might be interested to learn the representative from Mexico did acknowledge his plight.
In short, Florida tomato growers find it difficult to compete with their Mexican counterparts, mainly because wages are so much lower, so they had asked for a seasonality exception. Karen Antebi, Trade and NAFTA Office in the Ministry of the Economy of Mexico, noted that some U.S. growers wanted a seasonality exception, but she said giving certain growers preferential treatment will not work.
There doesn’t seem to be too much doubt American apple growers, as well as growers of most fruits, have benefited from NAFTA. For example, the 1994 and 2016 apple crops were a similar size, but after adjusting the 1994 crop for inflation, growers received 33% more money from the 2016 crop.
Antebi also noted that post-NAFTA, Mexico buys one in four apples exported by the U.S. If you’re an apple grower who doesn’t export, and you know nearly all apples exported to Mexico are grown in Washington — partly because Mexicans still like ‘Red Delicious,’ and a lot are still produced in Washington — you might be thinking it doesn’t apply to you.
Jeff Colombini, an apple grower in Lodi, CA, addressed that very topic recently at a free trade rally here in the Golden State: “Trade is critical to the health and future of the entire apple industry,” he said. “If the apples meant for export don’t find homes overseas, they come here to California and they go to the East Coast. This leads to supply issues and impacts everyone’s bottom line.”
The upshot is there is a lot of talk these days about trade. Let history be your guide: Protectionism protects no one. You need to make sure the people you support for public office fully support free global trade.
Subscribe Today For
