Bill Overview
Title: Supporting Market Access to Reinvigorate Trade Act of 2022
Description: SMART Act This bill increases through FY2029 funding to carry out the Market Access Program and the Foreign Market Development Cooperator Program, which are programs administered by the Department of Agriculture to promote exports of U.S. agricultural products.
Sponsors: Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-16]
Target Audience
Population: People reliant on U.S. agricultural exports
Estimated Size: 3000000
- The bill is focused on increasing funding for programs that promote U.S. agricultural exports.
- Exporters of U.S. agricultural products will benefit from increased market access and development programs.
- The agricultural industry in the U.S. will see potential growth due to broader market access.
- Farmers, agribusinesses, and rural communities in the U.S. could benefit economically.
- Global markets importing U.S. agricultural products may experience changes in supply and potentially pricing.
Reasoning
- Considering the policy focuses on improving export market access, the key beneficiaries will likely be farmers, agricultural business owners, and workers involved in agriculture-related industries. However, the policy budget does have constraints, meaning the reach may not extend to all potential beneficiaries immediately.
- Depending on geographic location, type of farming (e.g., crops vs. livestock), and the scale of operations, the impact of the policy might vary significantly. Larger enterprises might have more resources to leverage the increased funding, potentially increasing regional economic disparities in initial stages.
- Since agricultural exports contribute substantially to certain regional economies, rural communities will possibly experience income effects from these policies, impacting their wellbeing ratings in both the short and long term.
- Given the focus period of the funding is through 2029, immediate effects might be modest, with more significant impacts seen over 5 to 10 years. Long-term planning is crucial for stakeholders to maximize benefits, given the eventual budget limitations and international competition in agricultural exports.
Simulated Interviews
Corn Farmer (Iowa)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could open up new markets for my corn, potentially increasing revenue.
- I am concerned about the increasing competition, but more opportunities abroad could mean more profits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Almond Exporter (California)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased funding could help offset logistical costs to new markets, helping my business grow.
- The policy seems promising for expansion, but execution is key to see real benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Agricultural Economist (New York)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This bill could invigorate U.S. market presence internationally if implemented effectively.
- There's a need for measurable impact assessments to truly gauge its success over time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cattle Rancher (Texas)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The international meat market is very competitive, so any aid in opening doors helps.
- I hope the funding truly reaches the operations level where it's needed most.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Soybean Farmer (Kansas)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Elevated funding brings hope, especially with recent drops in soybean prices.
- Long-term engagement with foreign markets could stabilize income.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Agricultural Cooperatives Manager (Nebraska)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Streamlining market access will be beneficial, though there's uncertainty in administration.
- Cooperatives stand to build better relationships with global partners.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Peach Farmer (Georgia)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's critical to see funding support the local farms venturing into exports.
- Diversifying markets can hedge against local market volatility.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Apple Orchardist (Washington)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Adapting to foreign consumer preferences will be an opportunity and challenge.
- Sustainability in exports needs to match the push for market access.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Citrus Grower (Florida)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Expanding exports is crucial, especially given domestic citrus challenges.
- The policy is a step in the right direction, but requires robust implementation.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Agricultural Policy Analyst (Illinois)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The intended outcomes are positive, contingent on cross-sector collaboration.
- An effective feedback mechanism for farmers would ensure policy efficiency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $300000000 (Low: $275000000, High: $325000000)
Year 2: $315000000 (Low: $290000000, High: $340000000)
Year 3: $330000000 (Low: $305000000, High: $355000000)
Year 5: $360000000 (Low: $335000000, High: $385000000)
Year 10: $400000000 (Low: $370000000, High: $430000000)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The impact of the bill will strongly depend on global market conditions and trade policies.
- U.S. agricultural competitiveness will influence the effectiveness of increased funding.
- The long-term benefits depend on sustained demand for U.S. agricultural products.