WASHINGTON, D.C. — Trade promotion authority (TPA), seen by many farm groups as essential for completing the Transpacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement, passed June 18 in the U.S. House by a vote of 218-208.

It was the second House vote in a week on TPA, also known as Fast Track. TPA would give the U.S. Trade Representative authority to negotiate foreign trade deals that may not be amended by Congress.

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the Senate will vote on TPA this week.

On June 12, the House defeated a broader trade package connecting TPA with Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), a jobs training program. Many Democrats supporting TAA voted against the jobs program to halt the TPA. "The facts are these, actually, that if TAA fails, the Fast Track bill is stopped," said Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the House Minority Leader who led opposition to TPA.

The second, and successful, TPA vote decoupled Fast Track from the TAA jobs training program – and provided more accountability for TPA, according to Republicans. "This TPA ensures that the American people can read an agreement long before anyone is asked to vote on it," said Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.). "An agreement must be public and posted online for 60 days before it can even be sent to Congress. This turns Fast Track into slow-track."

Many agricultural groups have lobbied for TPA to pass the House in order to finalize a Pacific nations trade deal. "With TPA in hand, we now turn our attention to finalizing an agreement in the Transpacific Partnership that includes vital export markets for U.S. soybeans and meat products, as well as the developing markets that grow in their demand for American soy every day," said Wade Cowan, a Texas farmer and president of the American Soybean Assoc. "We look to the Senate to take up and pass this legislation as quickly as possible."

Not all agricultural interests support TPA as a pathway to the TPP. "Unfortunately, instead of choosing to pass legislation that protects America’s workers, environment and health, Congress has instead passed a continuation of the status quo," said Roger Johnson, National Farmers Union president. "And that means more lost middle-class jobs and higher trade deficits."

Joel Greeno, president of Wisconsin-based Family Farm Defenders, said in a May essay the TPP could open up the U.S. market to what he termed "unsafe milk powder imports." According to Greeno and other members of the Stop Fast Track coalition, the TPP would most benefit agribusinesses operating at very low production margins. But the National Milk Producers Federation holds the TPP is important to increasing U.S. dairy exports to key markets – exports that help support higher milk prices for all producers.

"In the Transpacific Partnership negotiations, getting TPA in place is essential to increasing pressure on Japan and Canada to improve their offers," said NMPF President Jim Mulhern.

Free trade deals, like the TPP, reduce tariffs and other trade barriers, resulting in a less encumbered flow of goods and services between nations. Some TPA opponents, including Greeno, compare the Pacific trade deal to the 1990s North American Free Trade Agreement, or NAFTA.

While NAFTA’s impact on U.S. manufacturing and labor markets receives mixed reviews from labor and business lobbies, its effect on farm and food trade is viewed in positive terms by economists.

"In general, (NAFTA) enables agricultural producers and consumers in the region to benefit more fully from their relative strengths and to respond more efficiently to changing economic conditions," reported the USDA Economic Research Service, in a final review of NAFTA’s impacts on U.S. agriculture.

The impacts of free trade, including a potential Pacific agreement, extend beyond Midwest commodities. "Trade agreements are critical to the livelihoods of U.S. fruit and vegetable producers," said Robert Guenther, senior vice president of United Fresh. "For example, in 2013, trade agreements resulted in $4.3 million of fresh peach and nectarine exports and $40 million of table grape exports to Australia, alone."

Some become nervous as free trade agreements level the playing field for producers, reducing trade barriers that may be imposed to protect agricultural producers within a certain nation. Writing about NAFTA, ERS reported: "For producers, it opens new territories for the sale of their output, possibly allowing for the further exploitation of economies of scale; however, it also opens the door to new competition from producers in locations that were formerly isolated by tariff and quota barriers."

The necessity of trade to U.S. agriculture makes free trade agreements critical for most farmers, said House Agriculture Committee Chair Michael Conaway (R-Texas).

"Trade is incredibly important to agriculture, with exports accounting for nearly one-third of total U.S. farm income," he said. "With TPA in place, our negotiators will have the credibility necessary to conclude the most effective trade agreements possible."