Participants at the U.S. Grains Council’s 2011 International Marketing Conference and Annual Membership Meeting learned the potential risk for loss of two government-funded programs vital to the interests of market creation and expansion within the agricultural trade industry: the Market Access Program (MAP) and the Foreign Market Development program (FMD).
Both the MAP and FMD aid in the creation, expansion and maintenance of overseas markets for U.S. agricultural products and each risks financial cuts as the White House begins developing the fiscal year 2012 budget.
Floyd Gaibler, USGC director of trade policy, addressed members of each of the Council’s Advisory Teams (A-Teams), updating them on developments surrounding the fate of the two programs.
“The MAP and FMD international market development programs have been central to the Council’s mission in underpinning the Foreign Agricultural Service’s primary functions of expanding agricultural export market opportunities, maintaining market access by addressing tariff and non-tariff barriers and providing vital market intelligence that undergirds both of these efforts,� Gaibler told A-Team members.
“While funding for these programs has received historical political support from Congress, there are increasing challenges raised about the validity of these programs and the need for continued funding. Increased pressures to reduce Federal budget deficit put these programs at risk in the 112th Congress with MAP funding in particular facing harsh criticism,� he said.
In response to the threat of reduced funding, a call to action was issued to meeting participants, urging Council members to develop a strategic effort to save MAP and FMD funding and to ensure they are kept at existing levels of no less than $200 million and $34.5 million, respectively.
“The strategy would involve the need to develop a broad-based effort involving communication, grass roots support, administration and Hill advocacy, both in the appropriations process as well as the reauthorization of the Farm Bill,� Gaibler said. “It would also involve increased interaction with the Administration to consider increased support for funding these programs rather than continuing to push the concept of taking money from MAP and shifting it to discretionary funding for Foreign Agricultural Service salaries and expenses.�