Connect with us

The Dictatorship

Trump proposing $12B farm aid package to soften blow of his tariffs

Published

on

Trump proposing $12B farm aid package to soften blow of his tariffs

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump announced a $12 billion farm aid package Monday — a boost to farmers who have struggled to sell their crops while getting hit by rising costs after the president raised tariffs on China as part of a broader trade war.

He unveiled the plan Monday afternoon at a White House roundtable with Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, lawmakers from farm states, and farmers who thanked him for the help.

From AP’s Standards and Stylebook teams:
The AP is using anonymous sourcing to provide information for this story. Click here to hear Washington Bureau Chief Anna Johnson explain AP’s policy on the use of anonymous sources.

President Donald Trump listens as Cordt Holub of Dysart, Iowa, speaks during a roundtable on farm subsidies in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

President Donald Trump listens as Cordt Holub of Dysart, Iowa, speaks during a roundtable on farm subsidies in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

“With this bridge payment, we’ll be able to farm another year,” Iowa farmer Cordt Holub told Trump during the event.

Rollins put the immediate value of the program at $11 billion — money that the White House said will offer one-time payments to row-crop farmers. Another $1 billion will be put aside for specialty crops as the administration works to better understand the circumstances for those farmers, Rollins said. The aid will move by the end of February, she said.

President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable on farm subsidies in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable on farm subsidies in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

“We looked at how they were hurt, to what extent they were hurt,” Trump said, explaining how the administration came up with the size of the package. Trump said the money for the program will come from tariff revenue.

Later this month, the USDA will use a formula that estimates production costs to come up with a per-acre payment for each type of crop. Payments will be capped at $155,000 per farm or person, and only entities that make less than $900,000 a year will be eligible for aid. That will limit payments to large farms, which was a criticism of farm aid Trump delivered in his first term.

Stay up to date with the news and the best of AP by following our WhatsApp channel.

Follow on WhatsApp

Farmers have backed Trump politically, but his aggressive trade policies and frequently changing tariff rates have come under increasing scrutiny because of the impact on the agricultural sector and because of broader consumer worries.

The aid is the administration’s latest effort to defend Trump’s economic stewardship and answer voter angst about rising costs. Trump has been dismissive of the affordability issue at times, but on Tuesday, he is set to travel to Pennsylvania to talk about how his administration is trying to address a concern that is important for voters.

AP AUDIO: Trump is proposing a $12B aid package for farmers hit hard by his trade war with China

AP Washington correspondent Sagar Meghani reports on President Trump’s plan to offer farmers an aid package to soften the blow of his tariffs.

China purchases have been slow

Soybeans and sorghum were hit the hardest by Trump’s trade dispute with China because more than half those crops are exported each year with most of the harvest going to China.

In October, after Trump met Chinese leader Xi Jinping in South Korea, the White House said Beijing had promised to buy at least 12 million metric tons of U.S. soybeans by the end of the calendar year, plus 25 million metric tons a year in each of the next three years. China is the world’s largest buyer of soybeans, but in recent years it has increasingly been shifting its purchases over to Brazil and other South American nations.

China has purchased more than 2.8 million metric tons of soybeans since Trump announced the agreement at the end of October. That’s only about one quarter of what administration officials said China had promised, but Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said China is on track to meet its goal by the end of February, which is two months later than the White House originally promised.

The size of the $12 billion aid package is roughly the value of total U.S. soybean exports to China in 2024 and half the total exports of U.S. farm goods to China in 2024.

President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable on farm subsidies in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, in Washington, as Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins listens. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

President Donald Trump speaks during a roundtable on farm subsidies in the Cabinet Room of the White House, Monday, Dec. 8, 2025, in Washington, as Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins listens. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Farmers say their costs have surged

Farmers appreciate the aid package, but they say it’s likely only a down payment on what’s needed and government aid doesn’t solve the fundamental problems of soaring costs and uncertain markets. During Trump’s first term, he gave farmers more than $22 billion in aid payments in 2019 at the start of his trade war with China and nearly $46 billion in 2020, although that year also included aid related to the COVID pandemic.

Farmers say want to make a profit off selling their crops — not rely on government aid to survive.

“That’s a start, but I think we need to be looking for some avenues to find other funding opportunities and we need to get our markets going. That’s where we want to be able to make a living from,” said Caleb Ragland, a Kentucky farmer who serves as president of the American Soybean Association.

Most at risk are younger farmers and those who rent — instead of own — their land because they don’t have much ability to borrow against the equity in their farms. If farmers can’t make ends meet this year, there could be additional consolidation in the industry with giant industrial farms getting bigger and the number of smaller family farmers continuing to shrink.

Iowa farmer Robb Ewoldt is in a difficult position because he only owns 160 of the 2,000 acres he farms. So he says he’s selling some of his equipment that’s not essential and looking into whether he can pick up some overnight trucking jobs to help raise some cash.

“It is to the point where I don’t want to saddle my kid with the kind of stress that my wife and I are under right now,” Ewoldt said.

But fourth-generation Minnesota farmer Darin Johnson said he’s more optimistic that most farmers will be able to endure this latest trade war.

“A lot of farms are pretty well-established and they have the equity to be able to still keep borrowing money to get through tougher times like this,” Johnson said.

Tr ump has also been under pressure to address soaring beef prices. Trump has asked the Department of Justice to investigate foreign-owned meat packers he accused of driving up the price of beefalthough he has not provided evidence to back his claims.

On Saturday, Trump signed an executive order directing the Justice Department and Federal Trade Commission to look at “anti-competitive behavior” in food supply chaiHolubns — including seed, fertilizer and equipment — and consider taking enforcement actions or developing new regulations.

___

Funk reported from Omaha, Nebraska. Associated Press writers Michelle L. Price in Washington, Bill Barrow in Atlanta and Jack Dura in Bismarck, North Dakota, contributed to this report.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

The Dictatorship

Trump fires Homeland Security Secretary Noem after mounting criticism over her leadership

Published

on

Trump fires Homeland Security Secretary Noem after mounting criticism over her leadership

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Thursday fired his embattled Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noemafter mounting criticism over her leadership of the department, including the handling of the administration’s immigration crackdown and disaster response.

Trump, who said he would nominate Oklahoma Republican Sen. Markwayne Mullin in her place, made the announcement on social media after Noem faced a two-day grilling on Capitol Hill this week from GOP members as well as Democrats.

Noem’s departure marks a stunning turnaround for a close ally to the president who was tasked with steering his centerpiece policy of mass deportations. But she appeared to increasingly become a liability for Trump, with questions arising over her spending at her department and over her conduct in the aftermath of the shooting deaths of two protesters in Minneapolis earlier this year.

Trump said Noem “has served us well, and has had numerous and spectacular results (especially on the Border!).” He said he was making her a “Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas,” a new security initiative that he said would focus on the Western Hemisphere.

Noem, who appeared at a law enforcement event in Nashville, Tennessee, moments after Trump’s announcement, did not address her ouster there. She read from prepared remarks and was not asked by attendees about the development.

Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem dance to the song

Republican presidential nominee former President Donald Trump and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem dance to the song “Y.M.C.A.” at a campaign town hall at the Greater Philadelphia Expo Center & Fairgrounds, Oct. 14, 2024, in Oaks, Pa. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke, File)

Later, in a social media post, she thanked Trump for the new appointment and touted her accomplishments as secretary.

“We have made historic accomplishments at the Department of Homeland Security to make America safe again,” she wrote.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the administration will work with the GOP-led Senate to get Mullin, whom she called “extraordinarily qualified,” confirmed to lead DHS “as soon as possible.”

The administration’s immigration crackdown faced criticism, especially in Minnesota

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem appears for an oversight hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, at the Capitol in Washington, March 3, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem appears for an oversight hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, at the Capitol in Washington, March 3, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)

Noem is the first Cabinet secretary to leave during Trump’s second term. Her tenure looked increasingly short-lived after hearings in Congress this week where she faced rare but blistering criticism from Republican lawmakers. One particular point of scrutiny was a $220 million ad campaign featuring Noem that encouraged people in the country illegally to leave voluntarily.

Noem told lawmakers that Trump was aware of the campaign in advance, but Trump disputed that in an interview Thursday with Reuters, saying he did not sign off on the ad campaign.

Noem has faced waves of criticism as she’s overseen Trump’s immigration crackdown, especially since the shooting deaths of the two protesters in Minneapolis at the hands of immigration enforcement officers. In the immediate aftermath of the deaths of Renee Good and Alex PrettiNoem portrayed both of them as aggressors, contradicting widely viewed videos and descriptions of their deaths from bystanders. She declined to apologize for her description over two days of Congressional testimony.

The former South Dakota governor was also criticized over the way her department has spent billions of dollars allocated to it by Congress.

Her department, DHS, has been at the center of a funding battle in Congress over immigration enforcement tactics and has been shut down for 20 days, although many of the employees are continuing to work, often without pay.

Even before Noem’s appearance before key congressional committees this week, Republican lawmakers had been anticipating the secretary’s eventual ouster, particularly after her handling of the immigration enforcement crackdown in Minneapolis.

As they tried to end the ongoing Homeland Security shutdown, Senate Republicans had noted privately to Democratic senators that Noem was likely on her way out and that that should prompt Democrats to move forward with agreeing to fund the department again, according to two people familiar with the discussions.

Democrats did not see that as an actual concession by Republicans, considering Noem was becoming a political liability for the GOP, said the people, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private negotiations.

Aside from immigration, Noem also faced criticism — including from Republicans — over the pace of emergency funding approved through the Federal Emergency Management Agency and for the Trump administration’s response to disasters.

Critics welcomed Noem’s departure. Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey wrote “good riddance” on social media, a sentiment echoed by Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer.

Some immigration activists questioned whether her departure would change the execution of an immigration agenda that they fundamentally disagree with.

“This is not accountability, just a reshuffling of the enablers of the agenda of President Trump,” said Vanessa Cárdenas, Executive Director of America’s Voice, an advocacy group. She said Noem’s tenure was “marked by cruelty.”

Gregory Bovino, a Border Patrol official who was elevated under Noem’s watch to lead immigration crackdowns in cities including Los Angeles, Chicago and Minneapolis, was one of the few who applauded Noem’s tenure.

“She is the best Secretary I ever worked for, period. The others weren’t even close. Noem is the ultimate patriot,” Bovino told The Associated Press.

DHS leadership changes come at a pivotal time

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., speaks with reporters on the steps at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, March 5, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., speaks with reporters on the steps at the Capitol in Washington, Thursday, March 5, 2026. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

Mullin would need to be confirmed by the Senate, but under a federal law governing executive branch vacancies, he would be allowed to serve as an acting Homeland Security secretary as long as his nomination is formally pending.

Voting in the Senate just after Trump’s announcement, Mullin said he has “no idea” how quickly his nomination will move.

“The president and I are good friends. So we look forward to working closer with the White House, and obviously I’m gonna be over there a lot more,” he said.

Mullin would take over the third-largest department in government that has responsibility for carrying out Trump’s hardline immigration agenda. And he would assume the role at a pivotal time for that agenda.

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla. speaks during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Jan. 14, 2025, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File)

Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla. speaks during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Jan. 14, 2025, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File)

Immigration enforcement during the first year of Trump’s administration was largely defined by high-profile, made-for-social-media operations with flashy names, often led by Bovino, who reported directly to Noem. Noem herself often went out on those operations, riding along with officers when they went out to make arrests.

But those high-profile operations in places like Los Angeles, Chicago and Minneapolis often led to clashes with activists and protesters that were captured on video and drove opposition to the president’s immigration agenda.

That culminated with the shooting deaths in Minneapolis after which Trump shuffled leadership of the operation. The number of officers there was drawn down shortly after.

___

Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

How Kristi Noem got herself fired

Published

on

Kristi Noem’s tenure”https://www.ms.now/news/kristi-noem-out-as-homeland-security-secretary”>atop the Department of Homeland Security ended abruptly Thursday after months of speculation about her future. Noem spent years crafting herself into the perfect avatar of political womanhood in the age of MAGA ascendance. Noem now finds herself plummeting back toward Earth, relegated to a sinecure position that keeps her beholden to President Donald Trump, but far removed from the lofty heights of power and influence that she’d reached.

There is little to praise of Noem’s time at DHS that isn’t likewise damning. She successfully positioned herself to be the figurehead of the president’s central policy, the mass deportation of millions of immigrants while their rights were summarily trampled. And she oversaw a massive influx of funding for her still burgeoning department, even as she reportedly micromanaged spending it with the controversial assistance of her rumored paramour slash chief advisorCorey Lewandowski. (Both have repeatedly denied having a relationship, despite numerous reports to the contrary.)

There is little to praise of Noem’s time at DHS that isn’t likewise damning.

An absurd focus on style over substance is a hallmark across the Trump administration, but Noem took that disparity to another level. For years, Noem has placed burnishing her own image over the work of governing. She transformed herself into a national figure, while governor of South Dakota, using the position as a megaphone for parroting the Trump agenda in hopes of going viral. Once tapped to lead DHS, she quickly became a laughingstock for her camera-ready appearancesincluding her trip down to the notorious CECOT prison in El Salvador to appear in front of incarcerated men while wearing a $50,000 Rolex.

Just months into the job last year, she already appeared over her head at the sprawling department she managed. As I wrote at the time: “As homeland security secretary, Noem wields powers that range all the way from immigration to natural disaster reliefto cybersecurity. It would be a lot of responsibility for one person who is supremely well-versed in all those areas. Noem is not that person.” She did little to make up that ground in the time since, instead whipsawing from crisis to crisismany of her own making, especially those contained internally within DHS.

The most generous read of Noem’s focus on appearances is that it was in some ways preordained. Her power was always limited in some ways by the authority White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller holds over immigration policy. While she held the purse strings to the billions of dollars funneled towards DHS last year, Noem was in many ways little more than a figurehead for Miller’s vision. But even if we were to judge her solely on that role, there were far more missteps than successes.

It was Noem who signed off on a farcical, English-language ad campaign urging self-deportation for undocumented immigrants. It was Noem who repeatedly defied court orders to release detainees like Kilmar Abrego Garcia that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement arrested in their sweeping raids. It was Noem who joined Lewandowski in tapping Border Patrol chief Greg Bovino to lead the aggressive deportation operations that ran amuck in city after city. It was Noem who callously smeared dead Americans as “domestic terrorists” after agents under her authority shot and killed them in Minneapolis. All of this has helped tank Trump’s approval rating on immigration, once considered his top issue.

Being fully fired might have been more of a kindness, as it would have freed her up to carve a new path — or at least write a tell-all book.

Meanwhile, Noem made enemies of the lawmakers whose states rely on the disaster aid that she’s curtailed and hamstrung through her aborted attempt to dismantle the Federal Emergency Management Agency. DHS’ inspector general recently said the department “systematically obstructed” his work during her reign. She’s reportedly taken to flying around the country in a plane purchased for deporting immigrants alongside Lewandowski. And she reportedly questioned DHS staffers under polygraph exam for potentially leaking her behavior to the media, a baffling choice for someone who seems so obsessed with public perception.

And yet, reportedly it was none of that that doomed Noem. It was instead her willingness to defend herself when pressed by putting Trump in the hot seat. When asked about her $220 million dollar ad campaign, Noem told senators Tuesday that the president himself had signed off on the expenditures. Trump denied doing so in an interview with Reuters and reportedly was unhappy with being used as a cover. Blaming Trump for taking an unpopular action is a one-way ticket to excommunication in the best of times, let alone when he’s spent months considering her fate and weighing potential replacement.

True to form, Trump’s Truth Social post announcing her departure cast her as an afterthought compared to his effusive praise for her replacement, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla. Noem, Trump said, would be instead shunted to the soon-to-be-announced “Shield of the Americas” security initiative as special envoy. Being fully fired might have been more of a kindness, as it would have freed her up to carve a new path — or at least write a tell-all book.

Instead, Noem finds herself powerless and tethered to the man whose coattails she hoped to ride no matter how much devastation she caused in his name. She leaves behind a department less poised to handle threats like terrorism and cyberattacks it was hastily cobbled together to address and a less secure homeland overall. Noem’s transformation into a MAGA darling may have gotten her the job, but it was her lack of competence in even the narrowed scope she was cast in that ultimately doomed her.

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MS NOW. He focuses on politics and policymaking at the federal level, including Congress and the White House.

Read More

Continue Reading

The Dictatorship

What’s exposed by the Justice Department’s reversal on Trump’s campaign against law firms

Published

on

ByMary McCord

The Department of Justice both embarrassed and exposed itself this week in its handling of the appeals of federal court orders striking down presidential executive orders against four high-profile law firms.

First, the department embarrassed itself by reversing course and moving Tuesday morning to withdraw motions it had filed Monday evening to dismiss its appeals. Four different judges had held that the executive orders violated the First Amendment because they retaliated against the law firms for representing people and causes President Donald Trump dislikes.

Second, the department exposed itself as a purely political actor because every lawyer in the department knows that the federal court rulings were correct and that the executive orders are indefensible.

The department exposed itself as a purely political actor because every lawyer in the department knows that the federal court rulings were correct and that the executive orders are indefensible.

The administration’s efforts and the resulting judicial orders are worthy of careful review. The president began blacklisting law firms last March — using executive orders to, among other things, direct federal departments and agencies to prevent the firms’ lawyers from entering federal government buildings and engaging with federal employees; to revoke their lawyers’ security clearances; and to cancel contracts with companies that do business with the firms. Four law firms subject to the orders filed suit.

Four judges appointed by Republican and Democratic presidents swiftly issued temporary restraining orders barring the provisions that made it nearly impossible for the firms to continue to represent clients that had business with the federal government, threatening their very existence. Two of those emergency orders were issued within hours of the law firms seeking them; the other two within a day. The cases all proceeded quickly to final judgment with the same result: All judges concluded that the orders violated the First Amendment rights of the law firms.

(Shamefully, other law firms that wanted to avoid being blacklisted entered into agreements with the administration to provide hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of pro bono work to causes favored by the president, raising ethical issues for the lawyers at those firms and the appearance of pay-to-play.)

The judges who ruled in the law firms’ favor didn’t mince words. Judge John Bates, a George W. Bush appointee, wrotequoting a recent Supreme Court case: “[R]etaliating against firms for the views embodied in their legal work — and thereby seeking to muzzle them going forward — violates the First Amendment’s central command that government may not ‘use the power of the State to punish or suppress disfavored expression.’” He also warned, “More subtle but perhaps more pernicious is the message the order sends to the lawyers whose unalloyed advocacy protects against governmental viewpoint becoming government-imposed orthodoxy. This order, like the others, seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the Executive Branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers.”

Judge Beryl Howella Barack Obama appointee, put it even more succinctlyborrowing from Shakespeare: “In a cringe-worthy twist on the theatrical phrase ‘Let’s kill all the lawyers,’” the executive order “takes the approach of ‘Let’s kill the lawyers I don’t like,’ sending the clear message: lawyers must stick to the party line, or else.”

Judges, like all lawyers, know why this is so important. As Judge Richard Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, put it“The cornerstone of the American system of justice is an independent judiciary and an independent bar willing to tackle unpopular cases, however daunting.” Without lawyers to advocate for people and causes a president disfavors, even obviously unlawful executive actions could go unchallenged.

With the court decisions stacked so overwhelmingly against the government, one could wonder why the department appealed the lower court rulings in the first place.

With the court decisions stacked so overwhelmingly against the government, one could wonder why the department appealed the lower court rulings in the first place. But it isn’t unusual for the Department of Justice to file a notice of appeal of an adverse ruling even while it is still considering whether to go forward.  Decisions like these, at least when I was in the department, were not made by line-level attorneys. The decision to appeal, especially in high-profile cases, would be made by the solicitor general. Today that’s John Sauer, a former personal attorney to President Trump.

Sauer is a seasoned  advocate. He famously won Trump v. United Statesthe 2024 case in which the Supreme Court gave Trump immunity from criminal prosecution for exercising “core constitutional powers” — including directing the Department of Justice to launch “sham” investigations into election fraud — and at least “presumptive” immunity for other official acts.

Whoever made the decision to dismiss the appeals, you can bet that in this administration it would have been considered at the highest levels. That means it likely would have been blessed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche — another former personal attorney to Trump — and Attorney General Pam Bondi, who represented Trump in his first impeachment trial. Although the Justice Department has, under their leadership, become a tool for enforcing the president’s political whims, Blanche, Bondi and Sauer are all experienced enough to know that appealing the district court decisions was a sure loser.

Until the recent tariff decisionthe Trump administration has had a winning record at the Supreme Court, and Justice Department leadership presumably preferred to keep it that way. With no hope of winning in the D.C. Circuit — which would have been the next stop for the four cases — and no reason to want to seek review in the Supreme Court and risk losing there, the smart move was to cut their losses and dismiss the appeals. Another reason to think department leadership recognized this: They had already made the decision last spring not to ask the Supreme Court to stay the district courts’ temporary injunctions, something they have done in so many other cases.

They knew then, as we all know now, that the blacklisting orders were textbook First Amendment retaliation.

So what happened to cause this legal about-face?  Was it the headlines calling out the decision to dismiss the appeal? A call from the president or fear of a call from the president? Whatever the specific motivation, there is no reason to think that Justice Department leadership saw the legal merits of the cases change overnight. Instead, the department has embarrassed and exposed itself yet again.

Mary McCord

Mary B. McCord is an MS Now legal and national security contributor, and co-host of the MS Now podcast “Main Justice.”She is executive director of Georgetown Law’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection. She previously served as the acting assistant attorney general for national security at the Department of Justice and was an assistant U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia for nearly 20 years.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending