Yesterday’s print WSJ had a distrubing editorial about the American Farm Bureau Federation’s apparent flirtation with protectionism. The shift is apparently the result of internal lobbying by the highly subsidized, and “protected,” sugar industry, among others. At last week’s annual meeting, the Farm Bureau adopted a resolution endorsing trade agreements that “prevent economic damage to import-sensitive commodities.” As the Journal noted, this means “opening export markets for U.S. beef and grain are fine, but as for opening U.S. markets to more imports — forget it.” If this is an augur of future Farm Bureau policy, it’s a mistake. It is both bad politics and bad policy. If American farmers want greater access to foreign markets, the U.S. has to be willing to open more of its markets to foreign competition. At the same time, it is important to remember that the benefits to consumers and secondary producers (e.g. food processors, etc.) from opening domestic markets are invariably greater than the losses to a previously protected sector. The Farm Bureau has long been a supporter of free trade. Let’s hope they remain that way.