WASHINGTON, D.C. — From trade agreements to communicating with media, the American Soybean Assoc. annual Legislative Forum tries to inform soybean shareholders about issues facing the industry.

Cathleen Enright, president and CEO of the Pet Food Institute, for example, discussed last week the importance of providing information to the public. “Corporate America is not good at showing vulnerabilities, but we are trying to fix that,” she said.

Businesses tend to focus on the positives in a company and not share with the public the problems, but people know nothing is perfect and are unlikely to trust information from a source claiming everything is fine. Instead, Enright said, talk about problems you are trying to fix.

“Agriculture is really hard on the environment. We know it is,” she said – so, let people know the farmers and ranchers know this and are trying to address the problems.

She has spoken at town hall meetings with consumers concerned with food labeling. Enright said she spent hours talking to them as a group, explaining why it was a problem for farmers and ranchers. At the end, some people left angry, but others approached her and suggested other ideas, different ways to make labels that would not hurt U.S. agriculture.

She said it is important for farmers to keep their communities aware of their activities. “Find a way to talk about what you do. Don’t do it quietly,” she said.

Another suggestion is to talk with members of media outlets when there isn’t a story so when something occurs, they will contact you for information.

Audience members made suggestions to keep the public aware of farming activities, from using drones to take videos of the farm work, to taking a few photographs of what the farmer is doing every day and posting at least one photo on Facebook. Enright suggested having someone maintain a blog about the farm if possible.

While Canada may back out of its involvement with the Transpacific Partnership (TTP) among North American and Asian countries, it may reach a conclusion as soon as the end of the year and the measure may be voted on in Congress during 2016, said William Reinsch, president of the National Foreign Trade Council, Inc.

“The opposition was extremely well organized and extremely unwilling to compromise,” he said.

Japan specifically was difficult to work with because of a list of items negotiators said from the beginning they were not willing to compromise, Reinsch said. In Canada, the TTP has become a political issue, with a national election occurring in October. Reinsch said Canadian officials may be delaying any final decisions until after the election. As a result, Canada may be left out of the final agreement the United States makes.

The negotiations could end as early as next month when parties are scheduled to meet in Hawaii. Then, for about six months, there will be paperwork, such as translating the agreement into different languages. When it is presented to Congress, there will be 90 days to approve it.

Reinsch said it is important to pay attention to the Congressional sessions because some factions within agriculture may win while others lose.

“You can be sure the losers are going to show up ... the winners need to show up, too” he said. “The stakes are very high.”

He said the United States and European Union are the largest middle class markets in the world: the negotiators for those countries have more power in the negotiations.

“Most of the world is going to have to produce to those rules, which is good for us because that means the world markets will have to perform to levels we’re already doing,” Reinsch said.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union has been delayed – likely, he said, as a result of the TTP. The EU countries are waiting to see what the final agreement will be as a base for their own negotiations.

Craig Thorn, with DTB Associates, legal services regarding international trade and agriculture policy, said there are rumors Brazil may try to prose a case against the United States through the World Trade Organization focusing on corn and soybean support programs. If Brazilian farmers can prove the U.S. suppresses the price of U.S. soybeans on the world market, Brazil may be entitled to money, he said. It may be as much as $1 billion a year in the soybean industry.

“I think Brazilians are more vulnerable. They’re open to a counter-suit,” Thorn said.

In the past 10 years, he said Brazil has greatly increased its price support levels, subsidizing the market to make it more competitive in the export market. Since Brazilian soybeans are grown away from the coast, the government has been supplementing costs to ship the crop.