though in my view the winners will substantially outnumber the
losers. Win or lose, no one who farms or is affected by farming
wants to feel that a democratically elected government can make
major changes in policy without consulting those most seriously af-
fected by these changes. F ailing to consult with such groups is politi-
cal folly in any event, as administration after administration has
learned. When Woodrow Wilson went off to Europe to create a
League of Nations designed to end all wars, he failed to protect
these political supply lines, and was dumfounded when Congress
failed to ratify the treaty. His actions contributed to an isolationist re-
sponse that helped bring on World War II.
Successful Home Front Strategy
There are two elements of successful trade strategy on the home
front. The first requires directly involving the members of Congress
whose committees bear responsibility for trade matters so they de-
velop a feel for what negotiators cryptically refer to as the
“modalities” of this process. Earlier this year, House Agriculture
Committee Chairman “Kika” de la Garza left for Geneva in a highly
agitated state, worried that “the farm bill was being written in
Switzerland.” The trip turned out well and helped to allay his fears.
Other key members of Congress, including Senator Patrick Leahy,
chairman of the Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee; Dan
Rostenkowski, chairman of House Ways and Means; and Sam Gib-
bons, chairman of the Trade Subcommittee of Ways and Means,
have all been briefed in Geneva on the process.
Beyond the members of Congress, and perhaps even more impor-
tant, stand the interest groups that exert enormous influence over
Congressional decision-making (Rapp). In agriculture, these include
the commodity groups and general farm organizations as well as the
agribusiness sector.
At USTR, an elaborate network of policy advisory councils, com-
posed of thousands of representatives of U.S. business, labor and
farmers, meets regularly with negotiators to provide input into the
process. The highest level of this pyramid of advisory committees is
the President’s Advisory Committee on Trade Negotiations (ACTN),
a general advisory board on which agriculture is prominently repre-
sented. Members have included the head of the American Farm Bu-
reau Federation and the California Almond Growers Exchange,
among others.
Despite these formal advisory groups, much more must be done
outside Washington to inform (and be informed by) farm interest
groups as the final year of the Uruguay Round commences. This is
especially significant in light of the simultaneity of the farm bill and
GATT processes (Drabenscott, et al.).
35