A farmer on a tractor sprays soybean crops. (Photo by Westend61/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump’s administration will pursue a ban on Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland as part of an effort to strengthen farm security, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said Tuesday.

Appearing alongside other Cabinet officials, Republican governors and members of Congress at an event outside the U.S. Department of Agriculture headquarters in Washington, D.C., Rollins announced a department initiative to block “foreign countries of concern” from owning U.S. agriculture lands.

Rollins said officials will even try to revoke lands already owned by China-backed entities.

The administration will “take swift legislative and executive action to ban the purchase of American farmland by Chinese nationals and other foreign adversaries,” she said.

The executive branch will also work with state and local officials “to do everything within our ability, including presidential authorities, to claw back what has already been purchased by China and other foreign adversaries.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the nation’s food supply was a national security issue on par with energy and water supplies.

Plan details

The seven-part initiative, titled the National Farm Security Action Plan, is based on the idea that “farm security is national security,” according to a preamble to USDA’s written plan.

U.S. farmers dominate the global industry, the preamble said.

“Because that dominance is earned and not assured, it is critical we continuously adapt our approach to American agriculture security and elevate it to the top echelon of national security priorities,” the document read.

To protect U.S. farmland, the USDA, with help from the Justice Department, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security and cooperative state and local governments, will seek to block investment by foreign adversaries and launch an online tool to help farmers report on potential unknown foreign ownership.

The administration will look for vulnerabilities in the agricultural supply chain and attempt to ensure crop and nutrition programs are not being used to fund terrorist or criminal activity, while cutting down on fraud and abuse. The plan instructs the administration to strengthen biosecurity measures.

The initiative also calls for making sure foreign governments cannot access USDA research grants or other department funding programs.

The USDA will continue to work with the national security establishment and law enforcement to protect the agriculture sector’s critical infrastructure, according to the plan.

After Republican Sens. Tommy Tuberville of Alabama and Roger Marshall of Kansas at the event criticized the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an executive branch agency, for not having a spot for the Agriculture secretary, Rollins said she would be joining the panel as of Tuesday afternoon.

Farmland security

At the Tuesday event, speakers offered few specifics about the initiative but praised the administration for elevating the issue of foreign investment in farmland.

“A country has to be able to feed itself, fuel itself, and fight for itself to truly be free,” Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders said. “We now have a president who understands it and is willing to do everything within his power to make sure the United States continues to be the greatest country on the face of the planet.”

“Our farmland is not just dirt, it is our national security, it is our economic future, it is our children’s heritage,” Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee said. “And it is under threat, and the leaders here recognize that.”

Speakers emphasized what they called the threat of Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland.

“Today, we tell China to get the hell out of American agriculture,” Marshall said.

Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen said his state had moved to ban Chinese equipment from telecommunications infrastructure and has worked to deny Chinese companies from owning farmland. He related a story of stonewalling Chinese-owned Syngenta, which sought a meeting with the governor.

“I said, ‘I have no interest in having a meeting,’” he said. “‘Have no interest in you being in Nebraska. My suggestion would be to leave. My suggestion would be to get a different job.’”

The company later sold their assets in Nebraska, Pillen said.

Alabama and China

Tuberville, who is running in the state’s gubernatorial race next year, appeared to say China owned 2.2 million acres of farmland in his state alone – a number that actually describes the acres of land owned by all foreign entities in the state. Chinese entities own no acres in Alabama, according to USDA data.

“China is a threat,” he said. “They’re not a threat. They are dominating us in almost everything that they do because we’ve sat back and the politicians have been counting their money instead of doing what’s right and helping this country stay in the front. We’ve got to be number one. We can’t be number two. We’ve got to fight back.

“They are coming into our country and buying our farmland. In my state of Alabama alone, they own 2.2 million acres of farmland. That’s right in Alabama. Foreign adversaries.”

Asked about the comment, Tuberville spokesperson Mallory Jaspers said he was referring not only to Chinese ownership but all foreign adversaries and indicated that he opposed any foreign ownership of U.S. farmland.

“Sen. Tuberville believes American farmland should be owned by Americans,” she wrote in an email.

The most recent year-end USDA report on foreign investment, in 2023, showed Chinese-linked investors held about 276,000 acres of U.S. farmland nationwide.

An analysis from the American Farm Bureau, an advocacy group, estimated Chinese investors accounted for only about .02% of all foreign owned U.S. agricultural land.

GOP governors back plan

In addition to Lee, Huckabee Sanders and Pillen, who spoke outside of USDA, the Republican governors of Indiana, Idaho, Iowa, South Dakota and Oklahoma signed a Tuesday letter to Rollins in support of the plan.

“As America First Governors, we firmly stand together in our unwavering support of President Donald J. Trump and his administration’s National Farm Security Action Plan,” they wrote. “This plan is a critical and decisive response to the invasion of our land, food system, and sovereignty by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).”

One mile outside Milwaukee, 25 farmers — most of them Hmong — grow produce at the Mequon Nature Preserve. They're part of a project by a Milwaukee farmer's market, which broke ground at the preserve in 2018, aiming to relieve the pressure of dwindling affordable farmland on the market's vendors.

The post Hemmed in by development, small farmers are part of conservation effort in a Wisconsin county appeared first on WPR.

High meat prices mean Wisconsinites are paying more for a summer cookout this year. The Wisconsin Farm Bureau's annual survey of grocery store prices found a meal for 10 people cost $69.03, coming in 4 percent higher than in 2024.

The post Higher beef prices increase the cost of a Wisconsin summer cookout appeared first on WPR.

Reading Time: 12 minutes

Click here to read highlights from the story

• Jess D’Souza, a small-time pig farmer in Klevenville, is challenged to sustain her livelihood in the wake of a sudden federal funding cut.

• After years of taking no salary, she had hoped 2025 would be the first year she turned a profit, aided by Wisconsin’s participation in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Local Food Purchase Assistance program, designed to support underserved farmers and bolster local food systems. But the Trump administration abruptly rescinded the program, upending Jess’ plans.

• As she contends with the government’s broken promise and weighs whether to raise or sell her newest piglets, Jess seeks to build a more resilient food system independent from political whims.

Two piglets jostled in the barnyard as Jess D’Souza stepped outside. Neither youngster seemed to be winning their morning game of tug-of-war over an empty feed bag.

Jess approached the chicken coop. She swung open the weathered door. The flood of fowl scampered up a hill to a cluster of empty food bowls.

Groans resembling bassoons and didgeridoos leaked from the hog house as groggy pigs stirred. Jess often greets them in a singsong as she completes chores.

Hi Mama! Hi babies! 

She asks if she can get them some hay. Or perhaps something to drink? The swine respond with raspy snorts and spine-rattling squeals.

Jess unfurled the hose from the water pump as pigs trudged outdoors into their muddy pen.

“Is everybody thirsty? Are you all thirsty? Is that what’s going on?”

That morning, Jess slipped a Wisconsin Farmers Union beanie over her dark brown hair and stepped into comfy gray Dovetail overalls — “Workwear for Women by Women.” The spring wind was still crisp. Bare tree branches swayed across the 80-acre farm.

She filled a plastic bucket, then heaved the water over a board fence into a trough.

Growing up, the Chicago native never imagined a career rearing dozens of Gloucestershire Old Spots pigs in Klevenville, Wisconsin — an agricultural enclave surrounded by creeping neighborhoods of the state’s capital and surrounding communities.

She can watch the precociously curious creatures from her bedroom window much of the year. Their skin is pale, dotted with splotchy ink stains. Floppy ears shade their eyes from the sun like an old-time bank teller’s visor.

Jess spends her days tending to the swine, hoisting 40-pound organic feed bags across her shoulder and under an arm. Some pigs lumber after her, seeking scratches, belly rubs and lunch. Juveniles dart through gaps in the electric netting she uses to cordon off the barnyard, woods and pastures up a nearby hill.

She knows she shouldn’t view her pigs like pet dogs, but she coos at them when she works. Right until the last minute.

Jess hadn’t anticipated politics would so dramatically affect her farm.

Last year, Jess doubled the size of her pig herd, believing the government’s agriculture department, the USDA, would honor a $5.5 million grant it awarded to Wisconsin. 

Under the Biden administration, the agency gave states money for two years to run the Local Food Purchase Assistance program, or LFPA, which helped underserved farmers invest in local food systems and grow their businesses.

In Wisconsin, the state, Indigenous tribes and several farming groups developed a host of projects that enabled producers to deliver goods like plump tomatoes and crisp emerald spinach to food pantries, schools and community organizations across all 72 counties.

The Trump administration gutted the program in March, just as farmers started placing seed orders. For her part, Jess must anticipate the size of her pork harvests 18 months in advance. She banked on program funding as guaranteed income.

This was supposed to be the year Jess, 40, broke a profit after a decade of toiling. She has never paid herself.

Jess chuckles as she admits she worries too much. She’s an optimist at heart but mulls over questions that lack ready-made answers: How will she support herself following her recent divorce? How are her son and daughter faring during their tumultuous teens? How will she keep the piglets from being squished by the adults?

Now, if she can’t find buyers for the four tons of pork she expects to produce, will she even be able to keep farming?

The world, she thinks, feels like it’s on fire. 

***

In childhood, Jess, the elder sibling, strove to meet her parents’ expectations. School was her top priority. Academic achievement would lead to a good job, material comfort and happiness. She realized only as an adult that her rejection of this progression reflected a difference in values, not a personal deficiency.

She almost taught high school mathematics after college, but didn’t like forcing lukewarm students to learn.

Jess moved in 2005 to Verona, Wisconsin, where she planted fruit trees and vegetable gardens in her suburban yards. But a yard can only produce so much. She wanted chickens and ducks and perennial produce.

Jess can’t pinpoint a precise moment when she decided to farm pigs.

She attended workshops where farmers raved about Gloucestershires. The mamas attentively care for their offspring. Jess wouldn’t have to fret that the docile creatures would eat her own kids. Pigs also are the source of her favorite meats, and the breed tastes delicious. Her housemate wanted to harvest one.

It took almost 3 ½ years to name the farm after Jess and her then-husband located and purchased the property in 2016. 

She hiked it during a showing and discovered a creek and giant pile of sand in the woods that for her children could become the best sandbox ever.

What did the place encapsulate, she mused.

She chronicled life on “Yet to be Named Community Farm” across social media: Photographs of piglets wrestling in straw piles next to lip-smacking pork entrees.

Also, lessons learned.

“I like to tell people I’m a recovering perfectionist, and farming is playing a large part in that recovery,” Jess posted to Facebook. She can’t develop the perfect plan in the face of unpredictability. Farmers must embrace risk. Maybe predators will infiltrate the hen house, the ends of a fence don’t quite align or a mama will crush her litter. 

On the farm, life and death meet.

Some days, Jess can only keep the dust out of her eyes and her wounds bandaged.

Years later, the creatures living on the land still insist she take a moment to pause.

Jess once encountered a transparent monarch chrysalis. She inspected the incubating butterfly’s wings, noticing each tiny gold dot.

The farm instills a sense of wonderment.

When the idea for a name emerged, she knew.

Wonderfarm.

***

In March, a thunderstorm crashed overhead, and Jess couldn’t sleep. Clicking through her inbox at 5 a.m., she had more than five times her usual emails to sift through.

The daily stream of news from Washington grew unbearable. Murmurings that LFPA might be cancelled had been building.

President Donald Trump’s administration wasted no time throttling the civil service since he took office in January. Billionaire Elon Musk headed a newly created Department of Government Efficiency that scoured offices and grants purportedly seeking to unearth waste and fraud.

The executive branch froze payments, dissolved contracts and shuttered programs. Supporters cheered a Republican president who promised to finally drain the swamp. Detractors saw democracy and the rule of law cracking under hammer blows.

But agriculture generally gleans support from both sides of the aisle, Jess thought. Although lawmakers disagree over who may claim to be a “real” farmer versus a mere hobbyist, surely the feds wouldn’t can the program.

Like the lightning overhead, the news shocked.

LFPA “no longer effectuates agency priorities,” government officials declared in terse letters sent to states and tribes.

Its termination left Jess and hundreds of producers and recipients in a lurch. The cut coincided with ballooning demand at food banks and pantries while congressional Republicans pushed legislation to shrink food assistance programs.

LFPA is a relic of a bygone era, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said in May.

She smiled as she touted the administration’s achievements and defended agency reductions before congressional appropriations subcommittees.

Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., pressed the secretary, asking if the department will reinstate “critical” food assistance programs. One in five Wisconsin children and one in 10 adults — often elderly, disabled or employed but struggling — are unable to or uncertain how they will obtain enough nutritious food.

“Those were COVID-era programs,” Rollins said, shaking her head. “They were never meant to go forever and ever.”

But LFPA also strengthened local food infrastructure, which withered on the vine as a few giant companies — reaching from fields to grocery aisles — came to dominate America’s agricultural sector.

The pandemic illustrated what happens when the country’s food system grinds to a halt. Who knows when the next wave will strike?

***

Nearly 300 Wisconsin producers participated in LFPA over two years. A buyer told Jess their organization could purchase up to $12,000 of pork each month — almost as much as Jess previously earned in a year.

Wisconsin’s $8 million award was among the tiniest of drops in the USDA’s billion-dollar budget. The agency’s decision seemed illogically punitive.

Only a few months earlier, Biden’s agriculture department encouraged marginalized farmers and fishers to participate so underserved communities could obtain healthy and “culturally relevant” foods like okra, bok choy and Thai chilis.

Then the Trump administration cast diversity, equity and inclusion programs as “woke” poison.

Cutting LFPA also clashes with Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again initiative and his calls to ban ultra-processed foods. Farmers and distributors wondered what goods pantries would use to stock shelves instead of fresh produce. Boxed macaroni?

The aftershocks of the canceled award spread through Wisconsin’s local food distribution networks. Trucks had been rented, staff hired and hub-and-spoke routes mapped in preparation for three more years of government-backed deliveries.

For a president who touts the art of the deal, pulling the plug on an investment that neared self-sufficiency is just bad business, said Tara Turner-Roberts, manager of the Wisconsin Food Hub Cooperative.

Democratic Gov. Tony Evers accused the Trump administration of abandoning farmers, and Attorney General Josh Kaul recently joined 20 others suing to block grant rescissions.

Meanwhile, participants asked the agriculture department and Congress to reinstate the program. Should that fail, they implored Wisconsin legislators to fill the gap and continue to seek local solutions.

Jess is too.

***

Jess alternately texted on her cellphone and scanned a swarm of protesters who gathered across the Wisconsin State Capitol’s lawn.

She had agreed to speak before hundreds, potentially thousands, of people and was searching for an organizer.

Madison’s “Hands off!” rally reflected national unrest that ignited during the first 75 days of Trump’s term. In early April, a coalition of advocates and civil rights groups organized more than 1,300 events across every state.

Jess pulled out a USDA-branded reusable sandwich bag, which she had loaded with boiled potatoes to snack on. She and her new girlfriend joined the masses and advanced down State Street to the University of Wisconsin-Madison campus.

A hoarse woman wearing a T-shirt covered in peace patches and a tie-dye bandana directed the marchers. She led them in a menagerie of greatest protest hits during the 30-minute walk past shops, restaurants and mixed-use high-rises.

“Money for jobs and education, not for war and corporations!” her metallic voice crackled through a megaphone. 

Trump’s administration had maligned so many communities, creating a coherent rallying cry seemed impossible. The chant leader hurriedly checked her cellphone for the next jingle in a dizzying display of outrage.

“The people, united, will never be defeated!”

“Say it loud! Say it clear! Immigrants are welcome here!”

Jess leaned into her girlfriend, linking arms as they walked. 

They ran into a friend with violet hair. Jess grinned sheepishly, trying not to think about the speech.

“You’ll be fine,” her friend said.

The chant captain bellowed. 

“Hands off everything!”

A black police cruiser flashed its emergency lights as the walk continued under overcast skies.

An hour later, Jess stood atop a cement terrace, awed by the sea of chatter, laughter and shouts that swamped the plaza.

A friend took her photo. Jess swayed to the chant of “Defund ICE!” A protester walked past, carrying a sign bearing the silhouette of Trump locking lips with Russian President Vladmir Putin.

Someone passed Jess a microphone. The crowd shouted to the heavens that “trans lives matter!” A cowbell clanged.

She grinned.

“I don’t want to slow us down,” Jess began.

She described her dilemma as the crowd listened politely. The government broke its commitments. She struggles to pay bills between unpredictable sales. Some farm chores require four working hands. 

Jess only has two.

“LFPA kind of gave me hope that I’d be able to keep doing the thing that I love,” she said.

Bystanders booed as she recounted the night of the fateful email. Jess chuckled and rocked on her foot, glad to see friends in the audience.

“The structures around us are crumbling,” she said, shrugging. “So let’s stop leaning on them. Let’s stop feeding them. Let’s grow a resilient community.”

The crowd whooped.

 ***

It’s hard for Jess to stomach meat on harvest days.

Naming an animal and later slaughtering it necessitates learning how to grieve. Jess had years to practice.

The meat processor’s truck rumbled up the farm driveway at 7 a.m. in late April.

Jess spent the previous week sorting her herd, selecting the six largest non-breeding swine. She ushered them to either side of a fence that bisected the barnyard.

It took roughly 30 minutes for the two butchers to transform a pig into pork on Jess’ farm. The transfiguration occurred somewhere between the barnyard, the metal cutting table and the cooler where the halved carcasses dangle from hooks inside the mobile slaughter unit.

The butchers unpacked their gear in the gentle morning glow. Jess carried a plastic tray of eggs, squash shavings and mango peels to the pen.

The snack helps lure anxious pigs during the harvest. It’s also a final gift for the one they are about to give.

The butchers employed an electrical stunner that resembles a pair of barbecue tongs. A coiled cord connects the contraption to a battery that releases an electric current.

When pressed to a pig’s head, the animal seizes and passes out. The butchers cut its chest before it awakens.

An hour into the harvest, Jess guided more swine from a trailer, where a cluster slept the previous night, along with a seventh little pig that wasn’t headed to the block.

A male began to urinate atop a dead female — possibly mating behavior. Jess smacked his butt to shoo him away. She regretted it. 

He bolted across the yard, grunting and sidestepping whenever Jess approached.

“Just leave him for the next round,” one of the butchers said.

Jess remembers her first on-farm slaughter years ago when a female spooked and tore through the woods. Jess kept her as a breeder.

The agitated male disappeared behind the red barn. He sniffed the air as he peeked around the corner.

The standoff lasted another hour. One of the butchers returned with a 20-gauge shotgun. He unslung it from his shoulder, then walked behind the building.

Jess turned away. She covered her ears. A rooster crowed.

The crack split the air.

The other worker hauled the pig across the barnyard, leaving a glossy wake in the dirt.

Jess crossed the pen, shoulders deflated, and stepped over the dividing fence to feed the others.

A 6-month-old trotted over to her. Jess squatted on her haunches and extended a gloved hand. 

“Are you playing?” she asked. “Is that what is happening?”

***

The May harvest never happened.

Nearly all the females were pregnant, even though they aren’t designated breeders. Jess will postpone the slaughter day for now.

She needs to decide whether to raise her spring piglets or sell them. It all depends on how quickly she can move product, but she’s leaning toward keeping them.

The pork from April’s butchering is on ice as she works her way down a list of potential buyers. She still serves people in need by selling a portion to a Madison nonprofit that distributes Farms to Families “resilience boxes.”

Jess marks the days she collects her meat from the processor. She defrosts, say, a pack of brats and heats them up for dinner. 

She celebrates her pigs.

Jess and her farming peers are planning for a world with less federal assistance.

One idea: They would staff shifts at the still-under-construction Madison Public Market, where fresh food would remain on site 40 hours a week. No more schlepping meat from cold storage to a pop-up vendor stand.

She dreams of a wholesale market where buyers place large orders. One day maybe. No government whims or purse strings.

Like seeds that sprout after a prairie burn, some institutions will survive the flames, she thinks. Perhaps it doesn’t have to be the ones in Washington. 

Those that remain will grow anew.

This story is part of a partnership with the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an editorially independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri School of Journalism in partnership with Report for America and funded by the Walton Family Foundation.

Wisconsin Watch is a member of the Ag & Water Desk network. Sign up for our newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

Wisconsin pig farmer holds on at Wonderfarm as Washington breaks a promise is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Specialty producers exporting to China have been hit just as hard as those producing soybeans and beef. But they often have fewer alternative markets for their crops, worsening the impact of retaliatory tariffs.

The post US ginseng growers and animal breeders rely on exports to China. Now they wait on a trade deal. appeared first on WPR.

Photo by Gregory Conniff for Wisconsin Examiner

The U.S. Senate is currently working on its version of  the so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”—a deeply misleading attempt to dismantle the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and derail America’s clean energy future.

Let’s be clear: This isn’t just political posturing. This bill, backed by fossil fuel interests and already passed in the House, would strip away the very tools Wisconsin families, businesses, farmers and communities are using to lower energy costs, create jobs and build a more resilient future. The damage to our state would be both immediate and long-term.

In Wisconsin alone, 82 clean energy projects are currently in the pipeline. These projects represent not just thousands of jobs and billions in investment — they’re the backbone of a 21st-century economy. From wind turbine manufacturing in Milwaukee’s Menomonee Valley to solar installations in rural communities, Wisconsinites are hard at work powering our future.

If the “Big, Broken Bill” becomes law, it threatens to cancel or delay many of these efforts. Clean energy tax credits would vanish. The Solar for All program and clean manufacturing investments would be eliminated. Tax incentives for electric vehicles, energy-efficient buildings, and sustainable agriculture would be repealed. These aren’t just policy tools — they’re direct investments in our people, places and potential. Many Wisconsin communities have used these credits to launch local projects that reduce taxpayer dollars through direct pay for solar, geothermal and clean vehicles.

And we can’t afford to go backward. Energy demand is skyrocketing — especially with the rapid expansion of AI and data centers. Experts warn electricity bills could jump by 70% in the next five years if we don’t act. Clean, renewable energy remains the cheapest and fastest option to deploy. Gutting these investments would lead to higher prices, more power interruptions and less energy reliability — leaving Wisconsin families and businesses to bear the cost.

Without these programs, household energy costs could rise by up to $400 a year. That’s a hidden tax hike on working families — piled on top of rising costs from tariffs and supply chain disruptions already straining our economy.

Even worse, the bill guts EPA pollution standards and allows major polluters to sidestep environmental compliance. It’s a taxpayer-funded giveaway to fossil fuel interests, trading our health, air and water for short-term corporate profits.

Let’s not forget Wisconsin’s farmers, who were just beginning to benefit from billions in IRA investments for conservation, renewable energy and carbon-smart agriculture. With grant contracts abruptly canceled, many family farms are left holding the bag, having made plans in good faith only to be blindsided.

We can do better. Wisconsin has the talent, tools and environmental leadership tradition to lead the clean energy economy. Clean energy already supports more than 71,000 jobs in our state. With the right investments, we could add 34,000 more and grow our economy by $21 billion by 2050.

We’re also home to over 350 clean energy supply chain companies. With support from IRA tax credits and the Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation (WEDC), we can expand local manufacturing of batteries, solar panels, wind components, EV systems and smart grid technology — positioning Wisconsin as a national clean energy hub.

This is the kind of forward-thinking, common-sense investment we need. It creates good jobs, lowers energy bills, strengthens supply chains and revitalizes communities.

The Senate still has time to act. Let’s urge our lawmakers, regardless of party, to reject this harmful bill and stand with the workers, innovators and families building a cleaner, stronger Wisconsin. Our policies should reflect our shared values of fairness, innovation, resilience and stewardship — not special treatment for polluters.

This isn’t about partisan politics. It’s about economic survival, energy independence and the future we want to leave our children.

It’s time to move forward, not backward, with a smarter stronger, and more sustainable Wisconsin.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

The average price of a pound of ground beef hit a record $5.98 in May, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s a 16 percent increase from a year before, and with a short supply of cattle, experts say they don’t expect prices to fall anytime soon.

The post Beef prices are at an all-time high as demand rises, droughts hit herd appeared first on WPR.

Reading Time: 6 minutes

For Pepper Roberts, running a successful farm comes down to managing risk and planning for potential challenges.

While other farmers sold their crops last fall, Roberts used grain bins to store half of his corn harvest, betting that he’d get a better price once corn supplies grew scarce. 

In January, Roberts sold the corn at an inflated rate, which helped cover bills left over from last year. The funds also provided a financial buffer for the current growing season.

“The Good Lord blessed me,” said Roberts, who grows soybeans, cotton, corn and other grains on a 6,250-acre farm in Belzoni, Mississippi. “There’s opportunities out there for (every farm) — it doesn’t matter what size.”

Like many other farmers, Roberts is now preparing for a year of uncertainty and tight margins. Since returning to the White House, President Donald Trump has enacted sweeping tariffs on imported goods, igniting trade disputes and disrupting global markets. Farmers were already facing high input costs and falling crop prices entering 2025, and many relied on government aid to offset losses last year.

Despite these headwinds, however, Roberts steadfastly supports the tariffs.

“In the long run, it’s going to be the best thing that ever happened,” he said, predicting that the levies will pressure trade partners like China to negotiate new purchasing agreements with the U.S.

Roberts is not alone. Though there’s been plenty of backlash from the agricultural sector, Trump’s tariffs have also drawn support from a subset of farmers, who see them as a means of regaining an edge in an increasingly competitive global economy.

A May survey of 400 U.S. producers found that 70% believe the tariffs will strengthen their industry in the long term. The same poll found that just 43% of respondents think the levies will hurt their earnings this year, down from 56% a month earlier. Respondents were based around the country and ran operations that grossed above $500,000 annually, according to the survey authors.

Much of this support reflects the belief that the tariffs will lead to better trade deals for American farmers. China is a top destination for U.S. agricultural exports like soybeans, and getting it to buy a set amount of crops each year would guarantee a market for producers without the threat of competition, one economist explained. That certainty, in turn, would stabilize commodity crop prices.

A new trade deal with China “locks in a source of demand” for U.S. farm products, said Will Maples, a professor at Mississippi State University’s Department of Agricultural Economics.

That guaranteed demand is essential for the 10 states bordering the Mississippi River, where agriculture exports collectively surpassed $57 billion in 2023. Though some Mississippi farmers worried the tariffs could backfire and worsen market conditions, others said they would be willing to weather a difficult year or two for increased trade opportunities down the road.

“Coming into all of this, we were already facing a downturn in the ag economy,” Maples said. “(If) you think about … Trump’s base, most of these guys probably voted for him. So it seems like they are willing to give him (the) benefit of the doubt in the short term.”

A high-stakes gamble

Trump’s trade war has proven divisive for American farmers — a group that overwhelmingly backed the president during last year’s election, according to a county-level analysis by Investigate Midwest.

When the White House imposed tariffs on most foreign imports earlier this year — including a staggering 145% tax on Chinese goods — many farmers and trade groups sounded the alarm, warning that the levies would raise supply costs domestically and threaten U.S. crop sales overseas. China retaliated with its own tariffs throughout the spring, though both countries have since scaled back their steepest duties.

In May, a federal court declared many of the president’s tariffs illegal. A separate court allowed them to remain in place while the administration appeals the decision.

As of June 11, the U.S. and China have reportedly reached a tentative accord to deescalate their trade dispute without inking a significant deal. According to the New York Times, some tariffs will remain in place on both sides.   

As the administration continues to adjust the size and scope of its levies, the agricultural sector has already sustained losses. China has canceled mass shipments of American farm products, and industry groups warn that a lengthy trade dispute could further reduce demand for U.S. exports.

China has been steadily developing agricultural markets in other parts of the world, primarily Brazil, explained Mike McCormick, president of the Mississippi Farm Bureau Federation. 

“They’re developing a lot of farmland there, and (China is) buying a lot of their products,” McCormick said. 

Of particular concern to McCormick is China’s growing reliance on Brazilian soybeans, which are used as livestock feed. Soybeans remain the United States’ largest agricultural export to China, and they’re mostly grown around the Mississippi River Basin, with Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota accounting for nearly 40% of the nation’s total production in 2022. But Brazil has dominated China’s soybean import market for more than a decade.

Should Chinese demand for soybeans increase amid a prolonged trade standoff with the U.S., experts say Brazil is uniquely positioned to fill that void.

“Brazil could convert an additional 70 million acres of pasture land into crop production without knocking down a single acre of forest,” said Joe Janzen, an agricultural economist at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. That’s over 80% of the total soybean acreage grown in the U.S. last year.

Proponents of Trump’s trade policies hope the tariffs will bring China back to the negotiating table, culminating in a trade deal similar to the one announced during the president’s first term.

In January 2020, Trump and China inked an agreement that called for China to purchase $80 billion in U.S. agricultural products through 2022. Crop prices soared in the next two years, though Maples at MSU stressed that market forces beyond the agreement — namely higher global spending in the latter stages of the pandemic — contributed to the increases.

The problem with Trump’s more expansive and erratic tariff strategy this time is that it risks alienating trade partners and further destabilizing markets, which in turn would drive down crop prices, Maples explained. Farmers base yearly planting decisions on what they can reasonably expect to earn for each crop, and the president’s on-again, off-again tariffs have made these projections significantly more tenuous.

“You can’t plan well when there’s so much uncertainty,” said Maples. “As long as we keep dealing with this, it’s going to be hard for prices to recover.”

Planning for pain

Roberts plans on sticking to his usual crop rotation this year despite the tariff-fueled uncertainty. The rotation has “paid for itself” in past years, he said, and he’s hoping to squeeze enough profit out of this year’s cycle to balance out expenses. He also has some savings from past years to fall back on if things go south.

“You can’t hit a grand slam every year,” Roberts said. “We all want the biggest profit we can ever make, but when I cross (the) break-even point, I’m ready to lock something in.”

Other farmers are more bearish about their prospects this season. In Clarksdale, Mississippi, Cliff Heaton has struggled to keep up with ballooning production costs on his 15,000-acre farm, where he grows cotton, corn, soybeans and other grains. Consecutive years of falling crop prices on top of high input costs created a perfect storm for Heaton, who suffered record losses in 2024. “I lost more money last year than I’ve lost in my entire life put together,” he said. “And it looks like this year’s heading in the same direction.”

Heaton said he supports the goal of securing better trade deals for U.S. producers, but he worries farmers may not survive the tariffs and their financial fallout without ample government assistance. He says recent market conditions have forced some of his friends to give up farming, and he’s considering a 40% reduction in operations if conditions don’t improve by harvest time.

“Inflation is taking its toll on us in our industry, and we’re not seeing (improvements) on our sales side,” said Heaton. He says particularly for products without a significant domestic market, like cotton, “as long as we’re dependent on selling into a world market … we need help.”

On March 18, U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced that her agency would distribute up to $10 billion in subsidies to help farmers bounce back from 2024. The funds, authorized by Congress at the end of last year, have helped Mississippi farmers reduce outstanding debts and secure crop loans for the current growing season, according to McCormick.

As Trump fights to preserve his tariffs in court, McCormick said his members may be willing to “stand a little bit of pain” if the trade dispute leads to new markets. “We just gotta hope that we can get better deals and … a quick resolution,” he said.

Maples worries that pain could prove too great for some local producers, especially those who are new to the industry and lack the capital to withstand an extended tariff onslaught. The trade dispute could fast-track retirement plans for some older farmers in the state, he added.

These farm closures would have ripple effects across entire communities, affecting people and companies that rely on their business, Maples concluded.

“A bad farm economy hurts rural America at the end of the day,” he said.

Nick Judin contributed reporting.

This story is a product of the Mississippi River Basin Ag & Water Desk, an independent reporting network based at the University of Missouri in partnership with Report for America, with major funding from the Walton Family Foundation.

Wisconsin Watch is a member of the Ag & Water Desk network. Sign up for our newsletters to get our news straight to your inbox.

Trump’s tariffs are hurting US agriculture. Some farmers support them anyway. is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

A Wisconsin dairy farmer alleged in a federal lawsuit filed Monday that the Trump administration is illegally denying financial assistance to white farmers by continuing programs that favor minorities.

The conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty filed the lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture in federal court in Wisconsin on behalf of a white dairy farmer, Adam Faust.

Faust was among several farmers who successfully sued the Biden administration in 2021 for race discrimination in the USDA’s Farmer Loan Forgiveness Plan.

The new lawsuit alleges the government has continued to implement diversity, equity and inclusion programs that were instituted under former President Joe Biden. The Wisconsin Institute wrote to the USDA in April warning of legal action, and six Republican Wisconsin congressmen called on the USDA to investigate and end the programs.

“The USDA should honor the President’s promise to the American people to end racial discrimination in the federal government,” Faust said in a written statement. “After being ignored by a federal agency that’s meant to support agriculture, I hope my lawsuit brings answers, accountability, and results from USDA.”

A spokesperson for the USDA declined to comment, saying the agency does not comment on pending lawsuits.

John Boyd, president of the National Black Farmers Association, said the lawsuit is “frustrating for me personally and as the leader of this movement.”

“The farmers that are hurting now are clearly the Black farmers out here,” he said. “You can couch it any way you want.”

The lawsuit contends that Faust is one of 2 million white male American farmers who are subject to discriminatory race-based policies at the USDA.

The lawsuit names three USDA programs and policies it says put white men at a disadvantage and violate the Constitution’s guarantee of equal treatment by discriminating based on race and sex.

Faust participates in one program designed to offset the gap between milk prices and the cost of feed, but the lawsuit alleges he is charged a $100 administrative fee that minority and female farmers do not have to pay.

Faust also participates in a USDA program that guarantees 90% of the value of loans to white farmers, but 95% to women and racial minorities. That puts Faust at a disadvantage, the lawsuit alleges.

Faust has also begun work on a new manure storage system that could qualify for reimbursement under a USDA environmental conservation program, but 75% of his costs are eligible while 90% of the costs of minority farmers qualify, the lawsuit contends.

A federal court judge ruled in a similar 2021 case that granting loan forgiveness only to “socially disadvantaged farmers” amounts to unconstitutional race discrimination. The Biden administration suspended the program, and Congress repealed it in 2022.

The Wisconsin Institute has filed dozens of such lawsuits in 25 states attacking DEI programs in government. In its April letter to the USDA, the law firm that has a long history of representing Republicans said it didn’t want to sue “but there is no excuse for this continued discrimination.”

Trump has been aggressive in trying to end the government’s DEI efforts to fulfill a campaign promise and bring about a profound cultural shift across the U.S. from promoting diversity to an exclusive focus on merit.

Wisconsin Watch is a nonprofit and nonpartisan newsroom. Subscribe to our newsletters to get our investigative stories and Friday news roundup. This story is published in partnership with The Associated Press.

Wisconsin dairy farmer sues Trump administration claiming discrimination against white farmers is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

A Wisconsin dairy farmer backed by a conservative law firm is suing the U.S. Department of Agriculture over program incentives offered to people of color and women.

The post Wisconsin farmer sues USDA over help for women farmers, people of color appeared first on WPR.

Conservation advocates are petitioning the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to list the gray wolf as a state-threatened or endangered species as Republicans in Congress seek to remove federal protections for the animal.

The post Petition seeks state listing of wolves as bills seek to remove federal protections appeared first on WPR.

Data collected in part by the Great Lakes Indian Fish & Wildlife Commission shows a decrease in manoomin — a wild rice plant important to Ojibwe lifeways.

The post ‘As vulnerable as a plant can be’: New study finds climate change largely to blame for less wild rice appeared first on WPR.

The Trump Administration is asking states to more closely watch the citizenship status of people receiving benefits through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. But some advocates for immigrant families worry the messaging could hurt people who are eligible for the food assistance.

The post Federal calls for SNAP data could deter eligible immigrants from applying, advocacy groups say appeared first on WPR.

A new book traces changes to America’s farming community through more than half of the 20th century. Author Peter Simons told WPR’s “Wisconsin Today” that Midwestern farmers became a key to America’s ascent to power in the 1900s.

The post New book argues Midwestern farms were key to America’s rise to power appeared first on WPR.

USGS staff install a microsampler in a Milwaukee creek. (Photo by Peter C. Van Metre/USGS)

A field office of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in Rice Lake that serves as part of an expansive national network monitoring water data is set to close next year as part of a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) effort to terminate the leases of the agency’s offices. 

The Rice Lake office and an office in Mounds View, Minn., are both operated by the USGS Upper Midwest Water Science Center. They are among the more than two dozen offices across the country DOGE has targeted for closure, according to Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. 

USGS staff and environmental policy workers across Wisconsin say closing  the office in Rice Lake could harm the quality and quantity of the data available in the state — making it harder for local, county and state governments, as well as private citizens and businesses, to make plans and policies in a region that will be at more risk of both drought and extreme weather events as climate change intensifies. 

The USGS water science centers operate thousands of streamgages across the country, gathering data on stream flows and water quality. That data can be used to help design plans for infrastructure such as bridges and dams; inform research on pollutants such as nitrates and pesticides; help farmers set irrigation plans during droughts; give homeowners information on flood plains and support recreational industries such as whitewater rafting. 

“The Rice Lake office is just a very important but small piece of what they do, and what they do is so fundamental to what so many other people are trying to do across so many sectors in the state of Wisconsin,” says Erin O’Brien, a spokesperson for the Wisconsin Wetlands Association. “They support state agencies and local communities and others doing not just land and water conservation work, but development and transportation planning and all these other sectors.” 

The agency has been operating streamgages in the United States since the 1880s. One of the first 120 gages the agency installed was in Wisconsin in 1899, according to USGS data. That longevity gives scientists an essential resource for tracking Wisconsin’s bodies of water. It’s easier to understand the effect of a 100-year flood when you’re working with more than a century of data. 

Each individual streamgage increases the value of the entire network, and every additional year of data further improves the data. Many practical uses of the data to understand how rivers and watersheds are functioning require 20 years of measurements, according to a 2021 report on the USGS streamgage network by the Congressional Research Service. 

At a field office such as the one in Rice Lake, the staff is responsible for maintaining and repairing the gages. The risk of closing an office is that the staff won’t be close enough to do that work, resulting in lower quality data, according to Paul LaLiberte, who serves as the chair of Wisconsin Green Fire’s Environmental Rules and Water Resources Work Group. LaLiberte worked on water quality issues for 36 years at the state Department of Natural Resources. 

“This flow data is continually recording, and [the field offices are] the ones that install the equipment, maintain the equipment, and, importantly, go out and calibrate it on a schedule and even in response to events,” says LaLiberte, who worked with staff in the Rice Lake office when he was based in Eau Claire with the DNR. 

“By closing the field offices, that’s going to make it a whole lot harder to do this calibration and maintenance and even run as many stations as they do,” he said. “The consequences will probably be some combination of dropping some stations or having the data be less accurate, because due to travel times, they just can’t send the crews out there to recalibrate the stations. So if the data is less accurate, then the predictions are going to be less accurate, and the infrastructure designs associated with that are going to be less accurate.”

One USGS staff member who works outside of Wisconsin, granted anonymity because agency employees have not been authorized to speak to the media, says staff members across the country weren’t aware their offices were being shut down until the General Services Administration told their landlords the leases would not be renewed. 

The staffer says the terminations are “shocking” because these offices are filled with lab equipment that is difficult to move and there are still not yet plans for alternatives. The result is that the data won’t be collected. 

“I guess maybe this is apparent, but leaving these leases was not a strategy for efficiency,” the staffer says. “There’s no plan in place to leave these facilities and find other alternatives. And it’s a huge effort to now create a plan to find alternatives for these facilities when you know these facilities are in full use, and we don’t see any other options. We will not be able to collect the data that we need to fulfill our mission, because we will be reassigning resources to deal with moving that we don’t have.” 

A USGS spokesperson said in a statement the terminated leases will not harm the agency’s mission. 

“USGS remains committed to its congressional mandate as the science arm of the Department of the Interior,” the spokesperson said. “We are actively working with GSA to ensure that every facility and asset is utilized effectively, and where necessary, identifying alternative solutions that strengthen our mission. These efforts reflect our broader commitment to streamlining government operations while ensuring that scientific endeavors remain strong, effective, and impactful. This process is ongoing, and we will provide updates as more information becomes available.”

The Rice Lake office’s lease is set to end July 31, 2026.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Farmers and scientists in the Midwest are working on finding a way to cultivate the elusive morel mushroom.

The post Morels remain a tough-to-farm delicacy. Midwest cultivators are slowly figuring out how. appeared first on WPR.

President Donald Trump points during a White House event for the release of Make America Healthy Again commission report on May 22, 2025. Also pictured are, from left, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Education Secretary Linda McMahon. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON — The Make America Healthy Again commission, created earlier this year by President Donald Trump, released its first report Thursday, calling on the administration and lawmakers to improve the well-being of the country’s children.

The 73-page report was published just after Trump and several Cabinet secretaries held an event highlighting their concerns with four areas — nutrition, physical activity, environmental factors and “overmedicalization.”

“Over the next 80 days, the commission will build on its work in this report to develop a road map to bold and transformative public health reforms for our consideration,” Trump said.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said the report and the administration’s approach to childhood health issues is that “there is no difference between good economic policy, good environmental policy and good public health policy and good industrial policy. We can have all of them.”

U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said that everyone knows American farming interests need to be at the center of the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, agenda.

“We have the most robust, the safest, the best agriculture system in the world,” Rollins said.

Mainstream farm groups, however, were not happy. “Farmers are identified as ‘critical partners,’ yet were excluded from development of the report, despite many requests for a seat at the table,” American Farm Bureau President Zippy Duvall wrote in a statement.

‘Corporatization and consolidation’ in food system

The numerous ways that American agriculture and the food people choose to eat have evolved received considerable attention in the report.

“Our agricultural system has historically focused on abundance and affordability. The progress we have made is largely thanks to the hard work of American farmers, ranchers, and food scientists,” it states. “However, the rise of (ultra processed food) has corresponded with a pattern of corporatization and consolidation in our food system. Today’s diet-related chronic disease crisis, demand a closer examination of this pattern and its broader impact.”

The report mentions pesticides numerous times, but doesn’t call for them to be banned outright.

“Some studies have raised concerns about possible links between some of these products and adverse health outcomes, especially in children, but human studies are limited,” the report says. “For example, a selection of research studies on a herbicide (glyphosate) have noted a range of possible health effects, ranging from reproductive and developmental disorders as well as cancers, liver inflammation and metabolic disturbances.”

Kennedy testified during a U.S. Senate committee hearing earlier this week that based on drafts of the report he had seen, “there is not a single word in them that should worry the American farmer.”

His comments came during an exchange with Mississippi Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, who specifically asked him about glyphosate, a commonly used herbicide, that she referred to as “one of the most thoroughly studied products of its kind.”

“We’re talking about more than 1,500 studies and 50-plus years of review by the EPA and other leading global health authorities that have affirmed its safety when used as directed,” Hyde-Smith said. “Have you been able to review thousands of studies and decades of scientific review in a matter of months?”

Kennedy responded during that Tuesday hearing that her “information about the report is just simply wrong.”

Sleep, stress, social media

The report combines recommendations that have long been supported by research, like exercising regularly and eating a well-balanced diet, with proposals that aren’t fully supported by science.

It notes that “physical activity, encompassing moderate-to-vigorous exercise, aerobic fitness, and reduced sedentary time, is critical for child health and well being.

“However, American youth have seen a steady decline in activity and cardiorespiratory fitness over decades, contributing to rising obesity, diabetes, mental health disorders, and cardiometabolic risks.”

The report calls out children who are unable to get enough sleep and chronic stress as health challenges, in addition to the prevalence of social media.

“The near-ubiquitous presence of social media in the lives of American adolescents, with up to 95% of teens regularly using at least one or more of these platforms—is increasingly correlated with a concerning rise in mental health challenges, particularly among younger users,” the report says. “With the vast majority of teenagers engaging with these platforms, understanding the nuanced consequences and mental health impacts of social media on their developing well-being is of critical public health importance.”

No mention of gun violence

The report didn’t include any mention of gun violence, a leading cause of death in American children and teenagers, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, analysis from the nonpartisan health research organization KFF and a report from the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions.

“The United States has by far the highest rate of child and teen firearm mortality among peer nations. In no other similarly large, wealthy country are firearms in the top four causes of death for children and teens, let alone the number one cause,” KFF’s analysis states. “U.S. states with the most gun laws have lower rates of child and teen firearm deaths than states with few gun laws. But, even states with the lowest child and teen firearm deaths have rates much higher than what peer countries experience.”

The Johns Hopkins report notes that the gun death rate in children between the ages of 1 and 17 has “increased by 106 percent since 2013 and (has) been the leading cause of death among this group since 2020.”

In 2022, there were 2,526 gun deaths in that age range, for an average of seven a day, according to the report.

The KFF analysis shows other leading causes of childhood death include motor vehicles, cancer, suffocation, congenital anomalies, poisoning and drowning. 

Farm Bureau, Corn Growers critical

Farm groups were dubious about the report’s conclusions.

The American Farm Bureau’s Duvall said it was “deeply troubling for the White House to endorse a report that sows seeds of doubt and fear about our food system and farming practices, then attempts to celebrate farmers and the critical role they play in producing the safest food supply in the world.”

“The report also expresses a desire to ensure farmers continue to thrive, but undermining confidence in our food system directly contradicts that noble goal,” said Duvall. “The report spotlights outlier studies and presents unproven theories that feed a false narrative and only then does it acknowledge a mountain of evidence about the safety of our food system.”

Iowa Corn Growers Association Chair Jolene Riessen said the “misinformation surrounding crop protection tools is incredibly upsetting because if there’s one thing all farmers have in common, it’s that we care about raising safe, healthy, and affordable food that nourishes families around the world.

“Agriculture is a science, and we have spent years testing and researching pesticides, like glyphosate, to reaffirm that they are a safe and vital tool farmers rely on to feed and fuel the world.”

Others said the report was lacking. Lori Ann Burd, the Center for Biological Diversity’s environmental health director, wrote in a statement the “report’s acknowledgement of pesticides’ risks to our children’s health is a small step forward,” before rebuking Trump administration officials for not going further.

“The grassroots movement of millions of Americans who trusted Trump with their votes won’t forget that RFK Jr. was cowed by the powerful industrial farming forces determined to make sure there are no U.S. restrictions on harmful pesticides like atrazine, which is banned in 60 nations,” Burd wrote. “Instead of protecting our kids, we use over 70 million pounds of atrazine each year on the corn and sugarcane crops that are making Americans sick. The fight to ban atrazine will continue.”

Manure runoff from a dairy farm in Monroe County has caused hundreds of fish kills in nearby waterways, according to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.

The post Hundreds of fish killed by manure runoff in Monroe County appeared first on WPR.

Changes a U.S. House bill makes to the federal program known as FoodShare in Wisconsin would increase costs for the state, the state Department of Health Services (DHS) reports. (Getty Images Creative)

Food and nutrition cuts in the reconciliation bill that passed the U.S. House early Thursday would cost Wisconsin taxpayers at least $314 million if they are signed into law, a state health official said Thursday.

A requirement for the state to pick up some of the costs of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, a provision penalizing the state for errors in distributing benefits, expanded work requirements for recipients and the elimination of a nutrition education program will all contribute to that cost, said Bill Hanna, Medicaid director at the Department of Health Services (DHS) in a briefing for reporters Thursday afternoon.

The SNAP program is known as FoodShare in Wisconsin and administered by DHS.

SNAP currently includes a work requirement for adults ages 18 to 54 without children to receive benefits. The legislation would raise the upper age to 65 and add the requirement to adults with children who are 7 or older.

Wisconsin has an employment and training program to help FoodShare recipients meet the existing work requirement. With the increase in people who would have to meet the requirement, “We estimate that would cost another $44 million a year,” Hanna said.

Currently the federal government funds 100% of the food benefits under SNAP. The new bill requires states to pick up a portion of the cost, which is tied to a state’s error rate, Hanna said. Errors include the payment of more benefits than a person qualifies for or the payment of fewer benefits than they qualify for.

“When errors are identified, we correct them, meaning if there was an overpayment to a member, that is recouped on future benefits, or if there’s an underpayment, we fix that and back pay those payments,” Hanna said.

Wisconsin’s error rate is low enough to require the state to submit only a 5% match for SNAP funds under the House Republican proposal, he said. But another change — which would allow zero tolerance even for errors that in the past have not counted against state programs — would boost the state’s required match to 15%.

DHS estimates based on the proposed new requirements the state would have to pay about $207 million a year in benefit costs, he said. If the state is able to reduce its error rate to qualify for the 5% match, it would still need to pay $69 million a year.

A higher state share of administrative costs in the bill would add $51 million to the state’s costs for SNAP, Hanna said.

The state would also lose the $12 million it receives for SNAP-Ed, a program that provides education to SNAP participants on healthier food choices.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

SUBSCRIBE

Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testifies before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Tuesday, May 20, 2025. (Screenshot from committee webcast)

WASHINGTON — U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testified before Congress on Tuesday that a major report due out later this week from his agency will not disparage farmers or a commonly used pesticide.

Kennedy, who has long been critical of certain aspects of modern agriculture and processed food, at a U.S. Senate hearing urged lawmakers to read the widely anticipated “Make America Healthy Again” report once it’s published Thursday, but didn’t go into details about any possible recommendations.

“Everybody will see the report,” Kennedy said. “And there’s nobody that has a greater commitment to the American farmer than we do. The MAHA movement collapses if we can’t partner with the American farmer in producing a safe, robust and abundant food supply.”

His comments followed stern questioning from Mississippi Republican Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith, who said she had read news reports from “reliable sources” that the MAHA Commission’s initial assessment “may unfairly target American agriculture, modern farming practices and the crop protection tools that roughly 2% of our population relies on to help feed the remaining 98%.”

“If Americans lose confidence in the safety and integrity of our food supply due to the unfounded claims that mislead consumers, public health will be at risk,” Hyde-Smith said. “I’ve said this before, and it’s worth saying again, countries have gone to war over many things — politics, religion, race, trade, natural resources, oil, pride, you name it — but threaten a nation’s food supply and allow people to go hungry. Let’s see what happens then.”

Hyde-Smith, who was her home state’s commissioner of agriculture and commerce from 2012 to 2018, probed Kennedy about his past work in environmental law and whether he might be inserting “confirmation bias” into the forthcoming report.

She asked Kennedy if he would try to change the current approval for glyphosate, a commonly used herbicide, that she referred to as “one of the most thoroughly studied products of its kind.”

“We’re talking about more than 1,500 studies and 50-plus years of review by the EPA and other leading global health authorities that have affirmed its safety when used as directed,” Hyde-Smith said. “Have you been able to review thousands of studies and decades of scientific review in a matter of months?”

Kennedy responded that her “information about the report is just simply wrong.”

“The drafts that I’ve seen, there is not a single word in them that should worry the American farmer,” Kennedy said.

Hyde-Smith continued her questioning and told Kennedy that it would be “a shame if the MAHA commission issues reports suggesting, without substantial facts and evidence, that our government got things terribly wrong when it reviewed a number of crop protection tools and deemed them to be safe.”

Home energy program in Maine

Several other Republicans on the Senate Appropriations Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee raised concerns during the two-hour hearing about how Kennedy has run HHS since they confirmed him in February.

Maine Sen. Susan Collins, chairwoman of the full Appropriations Committee, brought up the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, which the Trump administration has called on Congress to eliminate.

“The LIHEAP program, which we’ve talked about, is absolutely vital for thousands of older Mainers and low-income families,” Collins said. “It helps them avoid the constant worry of having to choose between keeping warm, buying essential foods and medications and other basic necessities.”

Kennedy sought to distance himself from the president’s budget request, saying that he understands “the critical, historical importance of this program.”

“President (Donald) Trump’s rationale and (the Office of Management and Budget’s) rationale is that President Trump’s energy policies are going to lower the cost of energy … so that everybody will get lower cost heating oil,” Kennedy said.

NIH indirect costs

Subcommittee Chairwoman Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., brought up several issues with Kennedy, including efforts to change how much the National Institutes of Health provides to medical schools and research universities for Facilities and Administrative fees, often called indirect costs.

NIH sought to set that amount at 15% across the board for any institution that receives a research grant from the agency, a significantly lower amount than many of the organizations had negotiated over the years, bringing about strong objections from institutions of higher education.

That NIH policy has not taken effect as several lawsuits work their way through the federal court system.

Kennedy indicated NIH has figured out a way to help medical schools and research universities pay for items like gloves, test tubes and mass spectrometers, particularly at state schools.

“In the public universities, we are very much aware that those universities are using the money well, that it is absolutely necessary for them. And we’re looking at a series of different ways that we can fund those costs through them,” Kennedy said. “But not through the independent, indirect cost structure, which loses all control, which deprives us of all control of how that money is spent.”

Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran, a Republican, brought up the measles outbreak and pressed Kennedy on whether HHS needed additional resources to help his home state and others get the virus under control.

Kennedy testified the “best way to prevent the spread of measles is through vaccination” and that HHS has been urging “people to get their MMR vaccines.”

South Dakota grant on mine safety

South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds called on Kennedy to continue fixing issues created earlier this year when HHS fired people working on mine safety issues at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

“My office has learned that staff at NIOSH’s Spokane mining research division have been laid off. This office focuses on the unique challenges of Western mining operations that are often more geologically complex and exposed to harsher conditions,” Rounds said. “This division provides critical technical support for institutions like the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, which recently received a $1.25 million grant to improve underground mining safety. However, the grant has now been canceled due to loss of oversight from the Spokane office.

“This is not just a missed opportunity, it undermines our ability to meet national security goals tied to mineral independence and supply chain resilience.”

Kennedy testified that he’s been able to bring back 238 workers at the agency and said he would work with Rounds to address ongoing issues.

Pledge to fund Head Start, but no dollar amount

Alabama Sen. Katie Britt, a Republican, asked Kennedy about news reports earlier this year that HHS would ask Congress to zero out funding for Head Start, one of numerous programs left out of the administration’s skinny budget request. Head Start provides early learning, health, family and development programs for free for children from low-income families.

Kennedy testified that eliminating Head Start would likely not be in the full budget request, which is set to be released later this year, though the White House budget office has not said when. He said it would ask Congress to fully fund the program, but didn’t share a dollar amount.

“There’s 800,000 of the poorest kids in this country who are served by this program. It not only teaches the kids preschool skills — reading, writing and arithmetic — before they get to prepare them for school. But it also teaches the parents and teaches them how to be good parents.”

Kennedy said there are challenges faced by the Head Start program that he hopes to change during the next four years, including the quality of the food.

“The food they’re serving at Head Start is terrible. You need to change that,” Kennedy said. “We’re poisoning the poorest kids from their youngest years, and we’re going to change that.”