Washington Insider - Tuesday

By DTN's Washington Insider

Here's a quick monitor of Washington farm and trade policy issues from DTN's well-placed observer.

TPP Negotiators Pin Hopes on Outcome of U.S.-Japan Talks

A side trade agreement between Japan and the United States remains a key element to be resolved before the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership can become a reality. Ministers representing the 12 TPP nations are scheduled to meet in Sydney, Australia, from Oct. 25 through 28, but unless the United States and Japan are able to come to an agreement on bilateral trade in agricultural and automotive products, the prospects for moving the larger TPP along will remain poor.

Japan's TPP minister Akira Amari and U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman met late last month to discuss the sticking points between their two nations, but those talks ended in failure, dimming prospects for an early TPP deal among the 12 countries.

Last week, Australian Trade Minister Andrew Robb said participants at the Sydney meeting "will work to progress negotiations with an eye to concluding the basic elements of the agreement before the end of the year." Since the 12 TPP countries have been trying to reach a broad agreement by the end of November, Robb's statement marks an effective extension of the deadline, a bow to the reality of the difficulties that remain to be overcome in the coming months.

***

Mexico, U.S. May be on Verge of Resolving Trade Dispute Over Sugar, Sweeteners

Reuters has reported that the United States and Mexico may be on the verge of agreeing to a fixed amount of Mexican sugar that would be allowed to be imported each year. A so-called "managed trade agreement" would allow Mexico to ship between 1.1 million and 1.3 million tons of sugar each year. (In 2012-13 and 2013-14, U.S. customers imported 2.12 million and 2.14 million tons of sugar, respectively, from Mexico, according to USDA data.)

Separately, Mexican Economy Minister Ildefonso Guajardo told the press that Mexico wants a negotiated settlement in the sugar trade dispute and will take the case to the World Trade Organization if an agreement is not reached.

Guajardo added that said Mexico was aiming for an agreement before the cane harvest begins there, which typically is in late November-early December, and before the U.S. Department of Commerce decides on antidumping duties on Oct. 24. Those duties would be in addition to countervailing duties the department imposed as of Sept. 1.

Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, Mexico is free to export unlimited amounts of sugar to the United States. However, U.S. growers have made it clear that they will fight to keep that from happening. An agreement that manages trade between the two NAFTA countries may not be in the spirit of free trade, but it does hold out the possibility of achieving a truce between the sweetener industries in both countries and infusing a bit more predictability to cross-border trade.

***

Washington Insider: More Dietary Politics

Traditionally, the federal government has issued new dietary guidelines every five years to update its current advice for healthy eating. Recently, these have been along the lines of exhorting consumers to eat more whole grains and less saturated fat, sugar and sodium. Now, however, there are indications that the 2015 update may tell Americans to pay attention to how their food is grown, not just what's in it.

The guidelines are actually the work of a ponderous federal system, based on a Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, a 14-member panel formally appointed by the Department of Health and Human Services and USDA. The process and the guidelines themselves were intended to form the basis for federal food and nutrition programs like subsidized school lunches, but also to provide science-based diet advice to all Americans.

Last July, however, the latest committee draft emerged that suggests, once again, that Americans reduce their consumption of meat and dairy and eat more plant-based foods. In addition, it shocked observers by citing studies claiming that lowering meat consumption would cut greenhouse gas emissions and reduce the contribution the United States makes to climate change. Final guidelines are due to be issued in late 2015.

The new focus goes well beyond earlier versions that encouraged consumption of leaner meat and less fat but not necessarily to eat less meat altogether. "A dietary pattern that is higher in plant-based food and lower in animal-based foods is more health-promoting and is associated with lesser environmental impacts — energy, land, and water use — than the current average American diet," Miriam Nelson, a Tufts University nutrition professor who chairs the advisory panel's subcommittee on food sustainability and safety, asserted at a public meeting in September. Press reports indicate that other members of the advisory panel declined to be interviewed.

As you can imagine, the panel's embrace of "sustainability" has drawn fierce opposition from conservatives and others. The House Appropriations Committee instructed Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, who is responsible for approving the final guidelines along with Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Mathews Burwell, to make sure the committee doesn't "pursue an environmental agenda."

Capital Research Center, a conservative think tank focused on environmental issues, recently issued a five-page report titled "Meet the 'green' radicals who want to plan your menu." It looks like Vilsack will have his work cut out for him.

Of course, opposition is coming from the meat industry, as well. "We agree that more plant foods should be consumed, but not at the expense of nutrient-dense protein," Betsy Booren, vice president for scientific affairs at the American Meat Institute, told the press.

Marion Nestle, a New York University nutrition professor and critic of the food industry's influence on policy, applauded the advisory panel for making the connection between environmental protection and healthy eating. "We don't have an agricultural policy linked to health policy," says Nestle, who served on the dietary guidelines panel in 1995. "We should."

Critics have argued for some time that the committee has become a highly political body and now at least some are suggesting that these ventures include not only political but toxic waters. In fact, the long-standing food-conservation-ag coalition that is thought necessary to support expensive farm bills and nutrition programs appears to becoming so negative that the current food and ag structure may well face efforts to find a more supportive home in other committees and agencies — a step that would certainly change the nation's food and ag culture.

This Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee that Secretary Vilsack is charged with reining in is certainly being pushed toward positions that advocates will have considerable difficulty justifying on the basis of science and possibly could place the overall Dietary Guideline effort at risk in the near future.

And, while the Dietary Guidelines may be somewhat far afield from the reading matter most producers pay attention to, the "sustainability" issue is important at several levels and should be followed closely, Washington Insider believes.

---

Want to keep up with events in Washington and elsewhere throughout the day? See DTN Top Stories, our frequently updated summary of news developments of interest to producers. You can find DTN Top Stories in DTN Ag News, which is on the Main Menu on classic DTN products, on the News Menu on Farm Dayta, and on the News and Analysis Menu of DTN's newest Professional and Producer products. DTN Top Stories is also on the home page and news home page of online.dtn.com.

If you have questions for DTN Washington Insider, please email edit@telventdtn.com

(CC)

Copyright 2014 DTN/The Progressive Farmer. All rights reserved.