South Dakota farmers leading the "locally grown" movement have visions of a dynamic regional food production system but some of it is in doubt with looming federal cuts.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is swept up in the Trump administration's downsizing of federal agencies, including cancellation of the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program for food banks to buy local produce at a market rate. Grants from the Regional Food Business Center program are also in limbo.

Stephanie Peterson, a funding recipient who operates a small egg-producing farm called Fruit of the Coop near Sioux Falls, said she is unsure she will get the rest of her money to scale up.

"The pandemic showed us the fragility of our industrial ag system, and how important it is to build up and focus on these regional and local systems," Peterson contended.

But after pouring her heart and soul into this seven-acre farm, Peterson wonders if the dream will slip out of her hands. It would mean local restaurants would have one less option for buying eggs at a time when avian flu is disrupting supply chains. The USDA has resumed funding for some initiatives but the department's top official has categorized certain local food programs as "nonessential."

The group Dakota Rural Action said ending the purchasing program for food banks affects nearly 30 farmers around the state.

Kjersten Oudman, owner of Blue Sky Vegetable Company, makes produce deliveries on behalf of a regional food hub. She said she is sad her local food shelf will lose out on some fresh and healthier options.

"We were one of the few deliveries that was giving it potatoes, cabbage, carrots or microgreens," Oudman explained. "I am most upset that people who need good, healthy, nutrient-dense food may not be able to get it."

On the business side of things, Oudman worries specialty farmers in South Dakota will lose ground in attracting new customers and markets for their products.

"We're pretty behind a lot of our other states in our infrastructure," Oudman pointed out. "There's just a lot of uncertainty and a lot of questioning of (if) grant programs do not come through, what do our businesses need to do in order to continue pushing for development?"

Dozens of mine safety field offices in Kentucky and across the country would close under a proposal by the federal Department of Government Efficiency.

According to an analysis by the nonprofit Appalachian Citizens' Law Center, offices in Barbourville and Harlan are on a list of seven in Kentucky slated for closure.

Brendan Muckian-Bates, policy and advocacy associate at the law center, said closing the offices could turn a 30-minute drive to inspect a rural coal mine into a 3- to 4-hour round trip.

"With the proposed consolidations in Kentucky, some of these offices that would be left would essentially make it near impossible for an MSHA field inspector to conduct the mandatory 4-times-a-year underground mine safety inspections," Muckian-Bates contended.

News outlets first reported last month the Department of Government Efficiency had listed the leases of dozens of Mine Safety and Health Administration field offices across the country for cancellation. Trump administration officials and adviser Elon Musk said lease terminations are part of cost-cutting efforts to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse.

Thousands of coal-mining jobs have been lost in recent decades but inspectors remain busy. More than 16,000 inspections were conducted last year, accounting for more than 234,000 hours on site at mines.

Muckian-Bates added proposed cuts to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health would make inspections more challenging.


"Every day that these layoffs remain in effect, that NIOSH offices are closed, more miners will become sick and potentially die," Muckian-Bates argued.

Congress created the federal mine safety agency as part of the Mine Safety Act of 1977, after the deaths of 26 miners in two underground explosions at the Scotia Mine in Letcher County the year prior.

This story is based on original reporting by Liam Niemeyer for the Kentucky Lantern.


get more stories like this via email

A bipartisan group of lawmakers in Congress is joining advocates for energy assistance across the country to warn a dangerous situation is brewing for low-income households.

Federal staffing cuts have stalled the distribution of key funding. The Trump administration's layoffs of 10,000 Health and Human Services workers include the entire office overseeing the Low Income Energy Assistance Program, which gives eligible households a break on their monthly bills to avoid utility shutoffs.

Mark Wolfe, executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association, which works with states on the issue, said the layoffs have blocked the latest round of aid from getting to them.

"Many states have told us that they've either run out of money or they're very close to it," Wolfe reported. "They need these additional funds to help families pay off the remaining winter heating bills or get ready for summer cooling programs, or both."

Minnesota is among the states to report an imminent "zero balance" if action is not taken soon. It has been more than two weeks since the layoffs were announced and Wolfe noted there is no word on funding status. Congress had authorized $378 million to round out the current cycle.

Thirteen U.S. senators have signed a letter asking the administration to get LIHEAP staff back in place and the money moving again.

Wolfe stressed keeping energy bills current is about more than staying cool when the temperature spikes. He noted utility shutoffs can produce dire consequences for some households.

"The loss of access to refrigeration, for example, you can't keep your food safe, or some medications need to be refrigerated," Wolfe outlined.

There was added pressure this past winter on some state programs where there were much colder temperatures. Each year, LIHEAP helps more than 6 million low-income households and seniors on fixed incomes across the country cover their energy bills.


get more stories like this via email

According to state data, as Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, face cuts, Michigan's most vulnerable stand to lose the most.

In the Great Lakes state, more than 2 million people count on Medicaid, and more than 1 million of them are kids. When it comes to putting food on the table, more than 1 million Michiganders rely on SNAP benefits, including one in four children.

Amber Bellazaire, senior policy analyst with the Michigan League for Public Policy, emphasized the ripple effects of these proposed cuts could create widespread challenges, even for those not directly enrolled in Medicaid or SNAP.

"If a rural hospital closes because they're operating on razor-thin margins and have lost a significant amount of their funding, because of Medicaid cuts, that hospital closes not just for Medicaid enrollees but for all folks in that community," she explained.

Supporters of the cuts contend that these programs place a heavy burden on the federal budget, discourage work and self-reliance, and are susceptible to fraud and abuse.

MLPP reports that Medicaid is relied on across all Michigan counties and congressional districts, especially in rural and northern areas. The state also ranks high for SNAP participation among veterans, with 41,000 enrolled.

Bellazaire noted that the proposed cuts won't make health care more efficient or affordable - and if she had a seat at the table where budget decisions are made, she'd offer a more balanced perspective.

"I think that there is opportunity to discuss the balance between fiscal responsibility and protecting and improving upon the successes that we've seen come from the Medicaid program and Medicaid expansion," she continued.

Those in favor of the cuts maintain that private markets and local solutions are more effective than government run programs - and states should have more control over program management, rather than relying on the federal government.