From declining commodity prices to unpredictable weather, American farmers are at a crossroads - especially smaller operations.

And they're wondering what things will be like after President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

As it did in Trump's first term, the incoming administration is poised to revive trade disputes by implementing tariffs.

Analysts say the first go-round had a negative effect on farmers, with agricultural exports suffering $27 billion in losses.

Emergency aid was approved, but observers say larger agri-businesses were prioritized too much.

Ben Lilliston - the director of rural strategies and climate change at the Minnesota-based Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy - said he wonders if similar patterns will emerge.

"That definitely is a concern because we've seen consolidation in farmland," said Lilliston. "We're losing farmers - particularly losing small, mid-sized farmers - and this would be just another advantage for the largest operators."

Those larger sites, namely concentrated animal feeding operations or CAFOs, are growing in number, creating environmental impacts.

That's on top of talk from Trump and his aides about mass deportations of undocumented individuals, potentially disrupting the farm labor force.

However, Lilliston said Trump has raised legitimate questions about the need for trade reforms.

The Biden administration has been aggressive in addressing market fairness for farmers and improving their climate outlook, but also has been criticized for certain moves.

One is funding bio-digesters, which opponents say helps expand CAFOs.

Lilliston said they're unsure what Trump will do on that front, but conservation funding through the Inflation Reduction Act could take a hit.

"It's given a huge boost and made more money available, close to $20 billion," said Lilliston. "So, the question is, as the Trump administration comes in, how are they going to use that Inflation Reduction Act money?"

He pointed to rumblings that the incoming administration wants to roll back unspent IRA funds. But it could be a thorny issue with Republican lawmakers who tout these investments for their districts.

Those conservation dollars are viewed as ways for smaller farms to make their land more resilient and competitive in the face of climate change.

Lilliston said there are other uncertainties, such as the person chosen for Ag Secretary. She has little policy background, leaving farmers guessing.




get more stories like this via email

Ohio's food and agriculture industry contributes $124 billion to the state's economy annually.

Some farmers, however, argue that government policies need to be revised to support farmers nationwide in cultivating healthier foods for Americans.

A report from President Donald Trump's Make America Healthy Again Commission blames a poor diet as one of the leading causes of childhood chronic diseases.

But Joe Maxwell, president of the nonpartisan ag watchdog group Farm Action Fund, said the government's policies are a major contributor to the problem.

"They could shift government food procurement towards healthier foods," said Maxwell, "using government dollars and purchasing power to shift the agriculture and food system."

The MAHA report also lists toxic materials, medical treatments, lifestyle, environment, government policies, and food-production techniques as potential contributors to chronic childhood illnesses.

Ohio farmers produce more than 200 different crops and livestock, according to the state's Department of Agriculture.

The Ohio Department of Agriculture reports there are over 76,000 farms in the state. And 95% of them are family-owned.

Maxwell said he wants the Trump administration to confront the current system, which he said routinely prioritizes profits of foreign-owned conglomerates over the interests of American farmers and families.

"The president could renegotiate the United States-Mexico-Canada agreement," he said, "and make sure that all beef and pork is labeled as Product of the USA."

Farm Action is also asking the government to shift subsidies toward healthier crops that grow fruits, vegetables and whole grains and to invest in local and regional food systems to strengthen rural economies and improve access to fresh food.



get more stories like this via email

A group of farmers says government policies need to change to support farms in West Virginia and elsewhere in cultivating foods that will improve Americans' health.

A report from President Donald Trump's "Make America Healthy Again" Commission blames a poor diet as one of the leading causes of childhood chronic disease. However, Joe Maxwell, president of the nonpartisan ag watchdog group Farm Action Fund, said the government's policies are a major contributor to the problem.

"They could shift government food procurement towards healthier foods," he said, "using government dollars and purchasing power to shift the agriculture and food system."

The "MAHA" report cites toxic materials, medical treatments, lifestyle, environment, government policies and food-production techniques as some of the many possible factors that cause chronic childhood diseases.

Farm Action believes ending support for big, corporate agriculture would help other farmers produce healthier foods.

Maxwell said he wants the Trump administration to confront the current system -- in which he said the profits of foreign-owned conglomerates are routinely prioritized over the interests of American farmers and families.

"The president could renegotiate the United States-Mexico-Canada agreement," he said, "and make sure that all beef and pork is labeled as 'Product of the USA.'"

Farm Action is also asking the government to shift subsidies toward healthy food crops such as fruits, vegetables and whole grains and to invest in local and regional food systems to strengthen rural economies and improve access to fresh food.


get more stories like this via email

By Olivia Herken for the Wisconsin Independent.
Broadcast version by Judith Ruiz-Branch for Wisconsin News Connection reporting for the Wisconsin Independent-Public News Service Collaboration

Every spring, Kat Becker is busy at her farm in north-central Wisconsin, delivering radishes and preparing for the busy vegetable-harvesting months ahead. But ever since President Donald Trump cut funding for a program that connected local farmers with food pantries across the state, she and other Wisconsin farmers have spent this spring being advocates as well.

In March, the Trump administration cut funding for the Wisconsin Local Food Purchase Assistance Program. Launched in 2021 as part of a nationwide effort to support local farmers and address hunger, the program was administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The Wisconsin Farmers Union, the Wisconsin Food Hub Cooperative, and the organic farming nonprofit Marbleseed were partners in the program.

Wisconsin farmers and community leaders said the program was a win-win for all participants, providing stable income to farmers and connecting residents in need with fresh, local produce. It also helped ignite a plan to improve food deserts around the state. Now that the program has been cut, however, it’s leaving farmers and community members who were banking on the funding and food in the lurch.

“It does feel like the momentum around this program is so important to keep going, because everything is planned, and the idea that we would be starting over in a year or two or four is frustrating,” Becker told the Wisconsin Independent.

Terry Parisi runs a small family farm in Stoughton where she raises cattle, grows vegetables, milks goats, and has a flock of chickens, plus a few helpful farm cats and a reliable dog named Joe. Since her husband died, Parisi and her son Franco run the farm. They work hard, but they still need off-farm jobs to make ends meet.

Last year, she received a $10,000 grant from the Local Food Purchase Assistance program in exchange for grass-fed beef. Parisi said selling beef usually involves a lot of hustle and marketing, but this program gave her peace of mind that they had already sold at least half of their herd before the season even started.

“It was very, very sweet to just rest, knowing that I had $10,000 worth of beef sold up front, ordered up front. Because I don’t have a big website and a big marketing tool to sell all of that beef, but we certainly have space to raise it,” Parisi told the Wisconsin Independent.

She was excited about the program because she knows organic food can be expensive, and she felt that it helped their farm connect with the community. “We are so gifted by having this property and feel a really huge responsibility to take care of it in a way that’s going to benefit the environment as well as feed people. So being able to be connected with, even then, just programs that are reaching the kind of community that we want to reach with our beef was really beneficial,” she said.

This year, Parisi couldn’t afford to buy as many cattle, but, after talking with the program partners, she decided to grow and sell sweet potatoes for the food pantries instead. She doubled her order of sweet potato slips over the winter. Then they found out the program had been cancelled.

Parisi was able to cancel her order of seedlings, but not every farmer involved in the program was able to adjust as quickly.

In rural Viola, Rufus Haucke was ready to plant winter squash, kale and peppers, just as he did in 2024 for the LFPA program. Keewaydin Farms, his family’s farm, which he converted from a dairy operation into an organic vegetable farm about 21 years ago, received a $20,000 grant from the program last year that he said contributed to his farm’s growth.

He said he expected the program to be cut after Trump was reelected, so he had been trying to prepare and find ways to pivot.

“We’re still planting some of those same crops, and there’s other markets we can send them into, probably. But we’re just not as certain, I guess. There’s just a level of uncertainty related to where those sales are going to come from,” Haucke said while picking asparagus during a phone interview with the Wisconsin Independent.

Becker had been planning to hire another staff member this year, but decided not to because of the unpredictability. Other farms, she said, planned to invest their grant money in infrastructure projects. Federal policy can be volatile for farmers, Becker said, and it can be hard to run a business and make confident decisions.

While the program provided farmers with stable income, it also benefited their communities, especially rural ones where there is often less access to fresh and healthy food. This year, the LFPA program was about to spark a stronger initiative to improve those food deserts. In previous years, the Wisconsin Food Hub Cooperative distributed all of the produce for the LFPA across the state, but this year, it was going to have local farmers help distribute in their communities, which it hoped would strengthen local relationships between farmers and food banks, schools and grocery stores.

Haucke was slated to be one of the distributors in southwest Wisconsin; between that work and the money he was set to receive for his vegetables, he expected to receive roughly $50,000 from the program, which would have equaled roughly a quarter of his 2024 sales. Without the delivery trucks the groups running the program had rented to distribute produce, he said, farms too small to do their own distribution will be at risk of closing.

“I think it’s hard to describe how significant it is, but this was a major shift in how food pantries were preparing food, and it was a direct economic benefit to these small farms that were in these neighborhoods,” Haucke said. “Even if it was just $20,000 from my farm, I’m still spending that $20,000 in La Farge, in Viola, in these small areas. You can’t state how important that is. Every single penny is important out here.”

Juneau County ranks third in the state in food insecurity, according to Dustin Ladd, a conservationist for the county. He helped the county apply for an LFPA grant, and last year, it received $180,000 to purchase food from 13 local farms, which it distributed to residents at pop-up markets and through at-home meal delivery services.

The program was helping, Ladd said. Over 70% of the food recipients were over 50, and some of their events would draw over 100 families. The program also provided a less-stigmatized option for residents to access free food and gave them more options for fresh foods over the nonperishable options that often fill food pantry shelves.

“It’s a pretty big deal for those families to not have that option,” Ladd said. Testimonials from residents that Gina Laack, director of the Juneau County Aging and Disability Resource Center, shared with the Wisconsin Independent detailed how families used the program to stretch their monthly budgets and include more vegetables and quality meats in their meals.

Farmers and advocates are pushing for other funding to keep the program running. Becker said there are efforts to try to fund it locally or at the state level. She was recently in Washington advocating for food security programs, and Haucke said he’s been reaching out to his representatives. Gov. Tony Evers included funding for a version of the program in his 2025-27 state budget proposal, but Republican state lawmakers cut it in May. 

Parisi said programs like LFPA have shown her how important it is to feed people, and without them, families will be left hurting.

“The little tiny bit of money compared to all the rest of the money that gets spent on so much stuff, I feel like it’s a huge disservice to a certain population in our culture that is really going to lose out on this,” she said.


Olivia Herken wrote this article for the Wisconsin Independent.


get more stories like this via email