A bipartisan group of more than 100 House lawmakers wrote to a top Trump administration trade official Thursday to argue the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement has benefited U.S. agriculture exports and warn against weakening the deal as part of a forthcoming review.
“Any changes to the agreement should be carefully examined to ensure U.S. agriculture is not negatively impacted,” the lawmakers, led by Reps. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., and Jimmy Panetta, D-Calif., wrote in a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer Thursday night – first reported by Agri-Pulse.
Smith chairs the Ways and Means Committee’s trade subcommittee. House Ag Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig, D-Minn., and Reps. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., Jim Costa, D-Calif., Don Bacon, R-Neb., Brad Finstad, R-Minn., Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, Tracey Mann, R-Kan., Dan Newhouse, R-Wash., Austin Scott, R-Ga., Shontel Brown, D-Ohio., and Wisconsin GOP Rep. Derrick Van Orden are among the letter’s signatories.
Around 80 of the 113 signatories were Republicans.
Representatives from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico are slated to meet next summer to review the free trade agreement and decide whether to extend the pact beyond its 2036 expiration date. During a recent public comment period, more than 100 ag commodity groups backed a full 16-year renewal of the deal and cautioned against overhauling the agreement in a way that would hurt cross-border ag trade.
“This agreement provides vast benefits to our constituents, including farmers, ranchers, producers, growers, grain handlers, exporters, and the broader rural economy,” the lawmakers’ letter reads.
It’s easy to be “in the know” about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse news! Simply click here
The House coalition points out that around a third of U.S. ag exports are sold to buyers in Mexico and Canada. Exports to both countries have increased by $10.7 billion and $7.6 billion since USMCA’s adoption, respectively, they note.
The signatories, however, say they would endorse administration efforts to ensure partners fully live up to the agreement – singling out Canada’s administration of its dairy tariff-rate quotas as an issue that warrants particular attention.
Dairy groups and U.S. officials have long complained that Canada’s system for allocating tariff rate quotas leaves the quotas unfilled. Processors receive the bulk of quotas, not retailers, restaurants, and food service providers that would have greater need for imports.
The U.S. has challenged Canada’s management of its dairy TRQ system under the agreement’s dispute mechanism, arguing it violates Canada’s obligations under the deal. But in 2023 a USMCA dispute settlement panel ruled in Canada’s favor.
Dairy groups have urged the administration to use the forthcoming review to secure a lasting resolution to the issue.
But the lawmakers point out that the dairy issue is one of the “few remaining barriers impacting U.S. agriculture” and does not detract from the deal’s value.
“USMCA was truly a landmark agreement for American agriculture when it entered into force, and its positive impact on U.S. agriculture has yet to reach its maximum benefit,” the signatories charge. “At a time when economic challenges threaten the livelihood of family farms, producers need the certainty provided under USMCA more than ever.”
In a statement published Friday, Smith highlighted his efforts to push for language to promote U.S. biotech crops and boost market access for U.S. dairy during the initial USMCA negotiations.
"It is vital we ensure those provisions remain in place," he said.
For more news, go to Agri-Pulse.com.
