Farmers need advocate in White House
Harry S. Truman is remembered for his role in ending World War II and charting the postwar course of containing Communism. But the 33rd president has another, increasingly rare distinction.
Truman worked on his family’s farm in Missouri before pursuing a career path that ultimately took him to the White House. That makes him one of the few modern presidents with hands-on experience in agriculture.
Like most Americans these days, President Donald Trump might be able to recognize a farm when he flies over one. The country’s population long ago migrated from rural areas to cities and suburbs, but this hasn’t been a problem until now.
That’s because most presidents, even if they lacked a background in agriculture, possessed at least a kernel of common sense. They understood the benefits of a policy that did two things: It kept rural areas economically viable, and it kept food prices low for urban consumers.
Not anymore. Today, our trade policy seems to be designed by people who don’t spend much time on farms or in grocery stores. That’s bad news for anyone who farms for a living or has to buy food. Pretty much everybody.
Short of putting a soybean farmer or a beef producer in White House, the solution might involve actually listening to them. Here is what policymakers need to hear: It makes little sense to destroy the biggest market for soybeans and then prop up the currency of the nation that swoops in to take our place. A plan to import more beef is a short-term strategy that undercuts U.S. producers, distorts markets and illustrates the folly of tariffs. Everyone is feeling the bite from rising fertilizer and equipment costs.
Is anyone listening, or are red state lawmakers too timid to speak up?
Despite the bluster, President Trump appears more transactional than ideological on trade. That means a change in approach could come. And could have already occurred at Trump's meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.
But an interim "deal" on soybeans doesn’t solve the problem with beef imports. And it’s no substitute for a long-term, fair trade policy that provides certainty, gives producers a chance to compete in the global marketplace and gives consumers the benefit of low-cost, abundant food produced at home.
That’s what farmers and consumers needed when Truman was in the White House. They still need it today.
