I realize I have already blogged about agriculture today, and normally I would spare you a second blog entry, but there has been an important development in agricultural trade circles. Canada has requested consultations (the first step in a full‐​blown trade dispute) with the United States over U.S. farm programs.


Specifically, the Canadians want to discuss the subsidies given to U.S. corn farmers, and the damage they did to other world corn producers because of price suppression effects. Enquiring minds in Canada also want to know more about the amount of trade‐​distorting support that the United States paid to its farmers overall in “certain years” (the press release doesn’t specify which).


It’s hard to say at this point what effect, if any, this development will have on the U.S. farm bill debate, or the WTO negotiations in the Doha round. But it would be a stupid brave Congress indeed that paid no heed to the WTO effects (in litigation or negotiation) of American farm subsidies when drafting a new farm policy. History has shown that the costs of farm welfare to consumers and taxpayers tend to get short‐​ish shrift when juxtaposed with the farm lobby, but firms facing possible retaliatory sanctions or failed market access ambitions as a result of an adverse ruling against the United States might carry more weight.