The Dictatorship
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.
Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren is endorsing Michigan Democratic Senate hopeful Abdul El-Sayed, MS NOW has learned.
“He’s growing a movement of working people all across Michigan,” Warren says of El-Sayed in a video announcing the pick. “Michiganders deserve a senator who will fight for you, not for special interests running millions of dollars in TV ads to buy this seat.”
The announcement makes Warren the latest high-profile progressive leader to pick a side in the El-Sayed versus Rep. Haley Stevens race that is both a marquee primary battle for a must-win seat ahead of November, and one that’s increasingly framed as a test of establishment versus outsider with big implications for the Democratic Party’s future.
The primary has seen millions pour in already — with pro-Stevens groups having a multimillion-dollar advantage on the airwaves.
Warren and El-Sayed are set to make two stops in the Mitten State next weekend — one week before Election Day and one week after Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortes, D-N.Y., barnstormed the state for El-Sayed.
“Eventually, we have to ask ourselves: Is the answer to our problems to turn to the same playbook over and over again?” the New York congresswoman asked a crowd in Detroit over the weekend.
For Warren, it’s a change of heart, after initially backing State Sen. Mallory McMorrow in the primary. McMorrow dropped her bid earlier this month and is not expected to endorse in the primary.
“Senator Warren’s vision for our future — one where corporations can’t buy politicians and people can afford to put food on the table — speaks to Americans everywhere,” El-Sayed told MS of Warren’s endorsement, calling her “a generational voice for Americans who are tired of the status quo.”
The primary is August 4th.
Ali Vitali is MS NOW’s senior congressional correspondent and the host of “Way Too Early.” She is the author of “Electable: Why America Hasn’t Put a Woman in the White House … Yet.”
The Dictatorship
‘It’s a circus’: Republicans have big doubts about their newest reconciliation bill
With just four legislative days until the House breaks for its long August recess, Republicans are racing against the clock to advance their latest reconciliation bill this week. Lawmakers are skeptical they can get it done.
In the House, Republicans are struggling to unite their razor-thin majority on such a tight timeline. In the Senate, the questions about whether the GOP can pass this reconciliation bill are more like doubts.
On both sides of the Capitol, Republicans are naming their price for supporting the package — spending cuts, a stronger version of the SAVE America Act, provisions to defund Planned Parenthood and plenty of parochial asks — making an already difficult effort even harder.
“I do not think it’s likely to get done by next week, but we’ll see,” one House Republican told MS NOW, requesting anonymity to discuss the internal deliberations. “I really don’t think it’s going to happen by next week. I’d be very surprised.”
This lawmaker said Republicans are being pulled in multiple directions.
“Moderates want one thing. The budget hawks want another. And then you have the independent ones that are kind of just everywhere in between,” this GOP lawmaker said. “And it makes it a lot harder with such a slim majority.”
Senate Republicans were even blunter. Asked if there was a good chance the GOP could get the package done with the little time they have left in Washington, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, wasn’t very hopeful.
“Nope,” she said, making it clear she’s “not a fan” of what Republicans are currently considering.
The House kicked off the effort last week, unveiling a $95 billion budget resolution aimed at funding the Iran war, implementing parts of the SAVE America Act and addressing some affordability concerns nationwide.
It’s the party’s latest attempt at passing the GOP voting bill after the measure twice failed to overcome the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster and the Senate parliamentarian ruled that its current language isn’t compliant with the strict reconciliation rules.
The next hurdle is getting the budget resolution passed on the House floor, where Republican opposition is already mounting.
Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who frequently breaks from the GOP, told MS NOW last week he’s “probably a no,” raising concerns that the ultimate package would become “a slush fund for funding the war in Iran.” And Rep. Kevin Kiley of California, who left the GOP to become an Independent earlier this year, told MS NOW that Republicans shouldn’t count on his vote.
“I’m very skeptical of this approach,” he said.
If all Democrats vote against the budget resolution, as expected, Republicans can only afford to lose three votes and still adopt the measure, assuming full attendance. With two of those spots likely already accounted for, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., will need to keep the rest of his conference on board.
The White House, for its part, is running a full-court press to get the reconciliation package to President Donald Trump’s desk. Vice President JD Vance met with House Republicans last week to discuss the effort, relaying that the president supports the package and urging lawmakers to get as much of the SAVE America Act passed as possible, according to three members at the meeting.
Even if Republicans clear the House, they would still have to pass a Senate budget resolution, draft legislation, survive another review by the Senate parliamentarian and assemble a majority in the chamber before sending the package back to the House for final approval.
With just about 20 legislative days planned for the House and Senate before the midterms, Republicans are fairly pessimistic about their chances of passing the package.
“We’ve got a lot of work to do — it’s a pretty significant lift.” Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark., told MS NOW. “We’ve got a lot of convincing to do on our side for a lot of reasons.”
Another House Republican put the odds of this third reconciliation bill passing at 50-50.
“It’s just doing a lot,” the lawmaker said. “The fiscal conservatives are concerned, some people are concerned about the war… So that combination, I think, will prove to be difficult.”
Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, said he needs the spending in the reconciliation bill to be offset by cuts, which is not part of House GOP leadership’s current plan.
Burlison was less optimistic about the bill’s odds.
“I would say probably it’s a 40% chance,” he told MS NOW.
Even Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has been cautious. When MS NOW asked him how realistic it is to get the bill passed, he said, “If I had to handicap it on a scale of one to 10, I don’t know what to say at this point.”
His members have been even more frank about their gripes with reconciliation 3.0.
After it was reported that House GOP leadership wasn’t planning to include cuts in the bill, Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said the package “should be fully paid for,” pointing to the ballooning debt.
“Our national debt is a runaway train,” he wrote on X.
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told reporters “there needs to be a ban on funding for Planned Parenthood” in the final product, while also saying he didn’t want to see “any federal taxpayer money go to transgender treatment, surgeries, hormone therapies, etc., for minor children.”
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., meanwhile, took aim at the proposal potentially including language pertaining to the SAVE America Act. If the package includes any language related to the voting bill, Tillis told reporters he’ll “absolutely” vote against it.
“And I’ll slow other things down, too,” he said. “It’s a waste of time. It’s an exercise in futility, and those are the only positive things I can think of to say about it.”
The inclusion of the SAVE America Act is causing problems for other Republicans — just for a different reason.
After the Senate parliamentarian ruled against including the SAVE America Act in reconciliation, Johnson floated a workaround. He proposed creating a federal fund that states could draw from to implement voter ID and proof of citizenship requirements.
To some Republicans, however, that’s not a suitable option.
“If it’s really gonna be language that just is bribing the states, like with a few million bucks, I don’t think that’s strong enough,” Burlison told reporters.
Another House Republican said the SAVE America Act provisions were “100% snake oil.”
“Nothing in the bill is enforceable when it comes to the SAVE Act,” the lawmaker said. “It’s a complete falsehood. It’s very troubling.”
Beyond the policy, some Republicans have gripes with the process.
Murkowski, who said there’s little chance Republicans get the bill passed, said she’s not in favor of “multiple reconciliations.” (The GOP has passed two other party-line bills in the past year.)
Murkowski also took issue with Republicans seeming to subvert the normal appropriations process through these party-line bills.
“I don’t like to appropriate through reconciliation,” Murkowski said. “That’s the direction that we’re going here.”
Still, there are some Republicans who are optimistic.
Asked by MS NOW last week if he was confident this latest reconciliation bill would pass, Johnson gave a definitive “Yes.”
And other members are backing him up.
“It’s more likely than not,” a House Republican said. “There are plenty of issues to still iron out, but people kind of said we couldn’t get the first reconciliation package done as well. Now, in hindsight, it seems inevitable.”
But the pessimism within the Republican ranks seems to be outweighing the optimism. From the tight legislative timeline and competing policy demands to the razor-thin majorities and difficult Senate rules, the GOP’s luck on reconciliation bills may have finally run out.
Asked about the reconciliation push, one member summed it up this way: “It’s a circus.”
Jack Fitzpatrick and Nora McKee contributed to this report.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
The Dictatorship
3 U.S. troops killed in Middle East and 1 missing after Iranian attacks, CENTCOM says
Three American service members — two in Jordan and one in Iraq — were killed in action and one remains missing after Iranian attacks over the past few days, U.S. Central Command said.
The U.S. military on Sunday carried out new airstrikes in response to “swiftly punish” Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.
The names of the killed service members were being withheld until 24 hours after their families were notified, CENTCOM said. Four others were taken to hospitals and have since been discharged, according to CENTCOM. Others were evaluated for minor injuries and have returned to duty. Another service member was wounded and continues to receive medical treatment for a minor injury.
CENTCOM announced on Sunday that a third U.S. service member in northern Iraq was killed in action July 18 following an attempt to detonate unexploded ordnance from an Iranian drone.
The latest fatalities bring the United States’ combat death toll related to the Iran war to 17. In addition, a soldier died from a noncombat-related incident in Kuwait. Hundreds of other troops have been injured.
In a social media post on Saturday afternoon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote, “Godspeed, heroes,” adding: “Their sacrifice only stiffens our resolve.”
The U.S. and Iran have traded strikes for the past week, with Iran hitting neighboring nations where American military bases are located. Iran has again closed the Strait of Hormuz — access to which has been a major factor in the war — and the U.S. restored its blockade on Iranian ports.
At least 50 people have been killed and more than 500 injured in Iran since the U.S. resumed its bombing campaign, according to Iran’s Ministry of Health.
A senior Iranian government official told MS NOW on Saturday that the memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran is “no longer valid” after days of fighting. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to be able to discuss sensitive issues, said the U.S. had consistently breached the ceasefire and added that Iran had no plans to negotiate while it’s under attack.
A senior foreign diplomat inside Tehran who is linked to Iran-U.S. negotiations told MS NOW that “there is no hope of peace in the near future.” The diplomat, who did not want to be identified due to the sensitive nature of the topic, said it would “take a miracle” to return to negotiations.
The renewed hostilities threaten to upend the fast-deteriorating agreement that the two countries signed last month. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi told state TV that Iran is suspending its commitments to the memorandum of understanding with the U.S., The Associated Press reported Saturdayaccusing the U.S. of violating its own commitments under the deal.
It’s unclear where mediation efforts stand at the moment. Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei said in a statement Saturday that the U.S. violation of the MoU proved the “worthlessness and invalidity” of President Donald Trump’s signature and warned of heavy repercussions for the U.S., state broadcaster IRIB reported.
Clarissa-Jan Lim is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW. She was previously a senior reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News.
Inzamam Rashid is a MS NOW contributor and Monocle’s Gulf Correspondent based in Dubai. He has previously reported for Sky News and the BBC
- South Carolina Republicans test Trump’s clout in race for Graham’s seat
- Pentagon’s budget troubles reverberate across the Atlantic
- Cornyn and Tillis in discussions with White House to get Blanche across the finish line
- Democrats search for options to halt Trump’s renewed attacks on Iran
- White House sends Congress stopgap exception wishlist
- Democrats accuse Kathy Ruemmler of lying about her ties to Jeffrey Epstein
- Booker challenges Blanche on claims he can’t meet with Epstein victims
- Nancy Mace won’t run for Lindsey Graham’s Senate seat
- Senators explore separate stopgap spending bill as House moves ahead
- Booker challenges Blanche on claims he can’t meet with Epstein victims
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words