Connect with us

The Dictatorship

I’m a sixth-generation farmer. Trump’s funding freeze is throwing my world into chaos.

Published

on

I’m a sixth-generation farmer. Trump’s funding freeze is throwing my world into chaos.

The Trump administration’s decision to pause and review federal funding has sparked uncertainty for many Americans. Even if you have not personally felt the effects yet, you soon might, because these abrupt freezes are hitting family farmers and ranchers hard. And when farmers struggle, every consumer feels it at the grocery store.

Agriculture is a complex industry, often overlooked in national policy discussions. Farmers take on an immense amount of financial risk to put a crop into the ground or raise a herd of livestock, only to be wiped out by a natural disaster, rising costs or collapsing markets. The programs under review — or those completely frozen — help family farmers manage risk, access credit and stay afloat when times get tough.

Without intervention, these cuts will ripple through rural economies.

Like all businesses, farmers need some stability to succeed. As a sixth-generation farmer from West Virginia, I understand the administration’s desire to root out waste, fraud and abuse in federal programs. But the current freeze is creating chaos instead of reform. No one knows what funding will be available, or if key programs will have the staff needed to operate. Here are a few examples of the funding freeze’s real-world impacts on America’s farmers.

The freeze has most immediately impacted federal conservation and voluntary climate-smart agriculture projects. Across the country, farmers have been left in limbo after making sustainability investments, trusting that the government would uphold its commitments.

For example, some farmers who purchased cover crop seed to improve soil health or installed solar panels to reduce energy costs are now learning that federal reimbursements have been cut off. These are not theoretical losses. These are real financial burdens that could push family farms into bankruptcy. Without intervention, these cuts will ripple through rural economies. Every farm that goes out of business means fewer families in rural communities, less money spent at the local businesses, fewer kids in the local schools, and fewer tax dollars for roads, hospitals and emergency services.

Farmers and policymakers in both parties have broadly supported international food aid for decades. American farmers produce more food than we can consume, and food aid donations serve the dual purpose of providing a new market opportunity for farmers and feeding people in need around the world. The U.S. purchased roughly $2 billion in food aid last year from American farmers; dismantling our food aid program is certain to disrupt market prices and create additional stress for U.S. food producers.

Beyond agriculture, the funding freeze threatens the infrastructure that keeps rural communities running. Federal grants and loans help small towns replace aging and costly infrastructure, such as broadband and water systems, and invest in local meat and food processing. Local entities have relied on federal loans and loan guarantees — existing commitments that the government is now freezing, leaving farmers, investors, lenders and rural communities on the hook for funds already spent.

Shrinking the size of the federal workforce might seem like a reasonable way to cut costs, but in agriculture it could have disastrous consequences. Farmers rely on federal employees to administer disaster relief, risk management programs and conservation initiatives, and rural areas already struggle to recruit and retain qualified staff.

One of the more alarming impacts could be on U.S. Department of Agriculture food safety inspectors. Meatpacking plants cannot operate without them, meaning staffing shortages could slow or shut down processing facilities. This would hurt livestock growers, who already face limited options due to industry consolidation. It would also reduce meat supply, driving up prices for consumers. These funding freezes do not just hurt individual farmers. They reinforce a food system already dominated by a handful of powerful corporations. Over the past several decades, agriculture has become more concentrated, with a few companies controlling everything from seeds and fertilizers to meatpacking and grain trading. Farmers have few choices on where to sell their products, leaving them at the mercy of companies that keep farm prices low while raising costs for consumers.

Every farm that goes out of business means fewer families in rural communities, less money spent at the local businesses, fewer kids in the local schools, and fewer tax dollars for roads, hospitals, and emergency services.

Further instability in federal programs only strengthens these monopolies. When family farmers lose access to credit, conservation programs or technical assistance, they are more likely to be forced out of business or absorbed by corporate interests. That means less competition, fewer independent farmers and higher grocery prices for American families.

Finally, federal research funding drives breakthroughs in crop and animal science, safeguarding our food supply from emerging diseases and advancing technologies that help farmers produce more with fewer resources. However, the current funding freeze has stalled agricultural research, leaving farmers without the tools they need to adapt to a changing climate and evolving threats. Investing in agriculture is investing in the future — ensuring farmers can keep farming, rural communities can stay vibrant, and every American can have access to safe, affordable food.

Supporting family farmers and ranchers means supporting the backbone of our nation. These funding cuts are not just numbers on a budget spreadsheet; they represent real dollars that sustain families and power rural economies. Freezing spending and making sweeping decisions without congressional oversight just adds more uncertainty to a stressed farm economy. The right way to evaluate government programs is through thoughtful, measured approaches that protect taxpayer dollars without causing harm to family farmers, ranchers and rural communities.

Policymakers must listen to the voices of those most impacted and recognize the real-world consequences of any cuts. Our rural economy and food system — and therefore all of America — depends on it.

Rob Larew

Rob Larew is a leader in agriculture, public policy and rural advocacy. Larew leads the second-largest general farm organization as the 15th president of National Farmers Union, representing more than 230,000 family farmers and ranchers across the country. A sixth-generation farmer from West Virginia, Larew has dedicated his career to advancing the interests of family farmers and rural communities across the United States.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Dictatorship

Trump says he’ll release MRI results

Published

on

Trump says he’ll release MRI results

WASHINGTON (AP) — Donald Trump’ s doctor says the president had MRI imaging on his heart and abdomen in October as part of a preventative screening for men his age, according to a memo from the physician released by the White House on Monday.

Sean Barbabella said in a statement that Trump’s physical exam included “advanced imaging” that is “standard for an executive physical” in Trump’s age group. Barbabella concluded that the cardiovascular and abdominal imaging was “perfectly normal.”

“The purpose of this imaging is preventative: to identify issues early, confirm overall health, and ensure he maintains long-term vitality and function,” the doctor wrote.

The White House released Barbabella’s memo after Trump on Sunday said he would release the results of the scan. He and the White House have said the scan was “part of his routine physical examination” but had declined until Monday to detail why Trump had an MRI during his physical in October at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center or on what part of his body.

“I think that’s quite a bit of detail,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday when announcing the memo’s release.

The Republican president said Sunday during an exchange with reporters as he traveled back to Washington from Florida that the results of the MRI were “perfect.”

“If you want to have it released, I’ll release it,” Trump said.

Trump added Sunday that he has “no idea” on what part of his body he got the MRI.

“It was just an MRI,” he said. “What part of the body? It wasn’t the brain because I took a cognitive test and I aced it.”

Doctors typically order an MRI to help with diagnosing symptoms or to monitor an ongoing health problem. So-called “preventive” cardiac and abdominal MRIs are not part of routine screening recommendations. What Trump’s doctor called an “executive physical” generally refers to adding extra, non-routine tests including MRIs to pricey and lengthy exams, not covered by insurance, that are marketed to wealthy people.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Trump commutes prison sentence for private equity executive

Published

on

Trump commutes prison sentence for private equity executive

HALLANDALE BEACH, Fla. (AP) — President Donald Trump has commuted the prison sentence of former investment manager David Gentile, who was convicted of defrauding investors — the latest in a series of clemency actions Trump has taken in white-collar criminal cases.

Gentile had reported to prison on Nov. 14, just days before Trump commuted his sentence, according to a White House official who requested anonymity to provide details of the clemency action. Gentile had been the CEO and co-founder of GPB Capital, which had raised $1.6 billion in capital to acquire companies in the auto, retail, health care and housing sectors.

He had been sentenced to seven years in prison after an August 2024 conviction for his role in what the Justice Department at the time described as a scheme to defraud more than 10,000 investors by misrepresenting the performance of three private equity funds.

But the White House official said GPB Capital had disclosed to investors in 2015 that their capital might go to pay dividends to other investors, which the White House said undercut claims that the company had engaged in a “Ponzi” scheme in which new investments are used to reimburse previous investors.

The government has agreed to no restitution in the criminal case, though various civil cases are handling repayments and damages to investors.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

Lawmakers voice support for congressional reviews of Trump’s military strikes on boats

Published

on

Lawmakers voice support for congressional reviews of Trump’s military strikes on boats

WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawmakers from both parties said Sunday they support congressional reviews of U.S. military strikes against vessels suspected of smuggling drugs in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, citing a published report that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a verbal order for all crew members to be killed as part of a Sept. 2 attack.

The lawmakers said they did not know whether last week’s Washington Post report was true, and some Republicans were skeptical, but they said attacking survivors of an initial missile strike poses serious legal concerns.

“This rises to the level of a war crime if it’s true,” said Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va.

Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, when asked about a follow-up strike aimed at people no longer able to fight, said Congress does not have information that happened. He noted that leaders of the Armed Services Committee in both the House and Senate have opened investigations.

“Obviously, if that occurred, that would be very serious and I agree that that would be an illegal act,” Turner said.

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump on Sunday evening while flying back to Washington from Florida, where he celebrated Thanksgiving, confirmed that he had recently spoken with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

The U.S. administration says the strikes in the Caribbean are aimed at cartels, some of which it claims are controlled by Maduro. Trump also is weighing whether to carry out strikes on the Venezuelan mainland.

Trump declined to comment on details of the call, which was first reported by The New York Times.

“I wouldn’t say it went well or badly,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One, when asked about the call.

The Venezuelan communications ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the call with Trump.

Turner said there are concerns in Congress about the attacks on vessels that the Trump administration says are transporting drugs, but the allegation regarding the Sept. 2 attack “is completely outside anything that has been discussed with Congress and there is an ongoing investigation.”

The comments from lawmakers during news show appearances come as the administration escalates a campaign to combat drug trafficking into the U.S. On Saturday, Trump said the airspace “above and surrounding” Venezuela should be considered as “closed in its entirety,” an assertion that raised more questions about the U.S. pressure on Maduro. Maduro’s government accused Trump of making a ”colonial threat” and seeking to undermine the South American country’s sovereignty.

After the Post’s report, Hegseth said Friday on X that “fake news is delivering more fabricated, inflammatory, and derogatory reporting to discredit our incredible warriors fighting to protect the homeland.”

“Our current operations in the Caribbean are lawful under both U.S. and international law, with all actions in compliance with the law of armed conflict—and approved by the best military and civilian lawyers, up and down the chain of command,” Hegseth wrote.

Trump said on Sunday the administration “will look into” the matter but added, “I wouldn’t have wanted that — not a second strike.” The president also defended Hegseth.

“Pete said he did not order the death of those two men,” Trump said. He added, “And I believe him.”

Republican Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and its top Democrat, Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, said in a joint statement late Friday that the committee “will be conducting vigorous oversight to determine the facts related to these circumstances.”

That was followed Saturday with the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Republican Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama, and the ranking Democratic member, Washington Rep. Adam Smith, issuing a joint statement saying the panel was committed to “providing rigorous oversight of the Department of Defense’s military operations in the Caribbean.”

“We take seriously the reports of follow-on strikes on boats alleged to be ferrying narcotics in the SOUTHCOM region and are taking bipartisan action to gather a full accounting of the operation in question,” Rogers and Smith said, referring to U.S. Southern Command.

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., asked about the Sept. 2 attack, said Hegseth deserves a chance to present his side.

“We should get to the truth. I don’t think he would be foolish enough to make this decision to say, kill everybody, kill the survivors because that’s a clear violation of the law of war,” Bacon said. “So, I’m very suspicious that he would’ve done something like that because it would go against common sense.”

Kaine and Turner appeared on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” and Bacon was on ABC’s “This Week.”

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending