Why Trump Must Act Now to Secure Global Agricultural Leadership
By Emily Bass and Dan Blaustein-Rejto
American agricultural leadership is being put to the test. Farmers are grappling with high input costs, non-tariff trade barriers, and ongoing tariff fights that threaten to cut farm exports and sales. Retaliatory tariffs from China and other countries are already reducing agricultural exports by billions of dollars, which could easily escalate to tens of billions of dollars.
Meanwhile, growth in U.S. farm productivity and crop yields has slowed, eroding American farmers’ advantage in the international market. This stagnation could cost U.S. farmers tens of billions of dollars in annual exports on top of losses from tariffs. It also nudges prices up, incentivizing farmers around the world to clear forests and grasslands to grow more food. If U.S. productivity continues to lag, it could lead to millions of acres of forest—the size of Wisconsin or larger—being converted to farmland, exacerbating biodiversity loss and releasing vast amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. Reversing this slowdown is crucial for the profitability and global competitiveness of American farmers, especially as countries like China aggressively invest in agricultural innovation.
And yet, the Trump administration’s agricultural policymaking has been confused at best. The rise of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s ascendance to the head of the Department of Health and Human Services have clashed with Trump’s Department of Agriculture picks and the long-running Republican support for commercial agriculture. This shaky alliance has rolled out a haphazard agriculture agenda that is less about feeding the future than it is about feeding Trump’s base.
Instead, the Trump administration must leverage the strength of U.S. farmers and agriculture companies to drive productivity growth, reduce the cost of food, and keep American agriculture competitive in the global market. This will require an approach that combines accelerating biotechnological breakthroughs, opening new pathways for U.S. agricultural exports, increasing investment in agricultural research, and redirecting ineffective subsidies toward improving efficiency and productivity.
Trump’s Agricultural Policy Maelstrom
The White House and USDA have released a slew of action plans, strategies, and reports in their first six months in office. However, instead of articulating a cohesive, farmer-first vision for the future of agriculture, President Trump and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins have advanced a fragmented agenda heavily shaped by Health Secretary Kennedy and his MAHA following. In February, Rollins released a five-part strategy to address highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) and lower egg prices, which included modest funding for vaccine research and development. In the days that followed, Kennedy questioned support for poultry vaccines and urged producers to allow the virus to instead “run wild.” Rollins was then quoted saying, “vaccines were off the table,” but the Department of Agriculture (USDA is still expected to issue research grants this fall for HPAI prevention, therapeutics, and potential vaccines.
USDA later released their Farmers First policy agenda that outlines priorities for supporting small and family farms. However, the agenda lacks any mention of science, research, or innovation priorities that could help improve farmers’ productivity; guard against losses from pests, disease, or weather pressures; and ultimately boost farmers’ economic bottom lines.
Meanwhile, the Make Our Children Healthy Again Assessment released by the Make America Healthy Again Commission—which is chaired by Kennedy and lists Rollins and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin as Commissioners—takes direct aim at widely used crop protection tools like glyphosate. The assessment received considerable backlash from farm groups for insinuating the U.S. food supply is unsafe and has left the door open to future drastic policy changes that could impede the use of pesticides. In other venues, Kennedy continues to call for the government to give farmers an “off-ramp” to move away from high-yielding practices. His proposals would jeopardize U.S. agricultural productivity, spurring farmland expansion, biodiversity loss, and greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation.
Instead of heeding Kennedy’s calls, Rollins should throw her weight behind policies that will enable U.S. farmers to harness technological innovations to sustainably produce more for both domestic consumption and export. This can be achieved by building on USDA’s recently released Farm Security Is National Security Plan, which calls agricultural research, development, and innovation “the cornerstones of U.S. dominance in the global agricultural sector” and recognizes the power of biotechnology advances to improve plant and animal health.
A Roadmap to U.S. Agricultural Abundance
The administration has signaled they want to support farmers, unleash American innovation, and shore up domestic supply chains. As Rollins recently stated, President Trump’s goal is that “American agriculture will be strong, secure, and resilient.” USDA should build on these commitments and lead a whole-of-government approach to accelerating agricultural innovation. Such an effort must include:
Accelerate American biotechnology. Though the U.S. has historically been a global leader in agricultural biotechnology, we are falling behind. China published over twice as many patents and papers related to agricultural applications of CRISPR as of 2018, ramped up approvals of gene-edited crops in 2024, and issued new guidelines this year to further promote gene-edited crops. American biotechnology innovators face years-long bottlenecks waiting for federal agencies to approve genetically engineered crops—some of which are not even subject to premarket oversight at all in countries like Canada and Argentina. Congress and the administration should support American biotechnology by improving agency coordination between USDA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and EPA, as well as by modernizing regulations for plants, animals, biopesticides, and microbes developed using biotechnology.
Leverage trade negotiations to increase U.S. agricultural exports. Increasing U.S. farm exports would benefit farmers, consumers in importing countries, and the environment. But exports have fallen since 2022, resulting in a record agricultural trade deficit that is expected to grow in 2025. In ongoing trade and tariff negotiations, the White House should focus on reducing non-tariff barriers and executing bilateral trade agreements that expand export markets for agricultural commodities like beef and products of biotechnology like genetically modified corn.
Invest in agricultural research. Though USDA funding for R&D has recently risen, overall U.S. public funding has declined by about one-third since the early 2000s. In contrast, China has significantly increased its agricultural R&D investments, now significantly outspending the U.S. Meanwhile, recent staff reduction and relocation efforts jeopardize USDA’s in-house agricultural research workforce. Congress should respond to this trend by doubling down on investments in agricultural research programs. USDA must bolster in-house research capacity, including retaining staff scientists and maintaining research facilities. In addition to strengthening existing research efforts, USDA must launch the Agriculture Advanced Research and Development Authority (AgARDA) which was authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill—signed by President Trump during his first term—but has yet to be stood up. The current administration has an opportunity to leverage AgARDA to advance high-risk, high-reward projects that are poorly suited for the private sector.
Redirect ineffective subsidies to innovation. Many federal programs reward farm practices that unintentionally constrain yields and food production. Chief among them are subsidies for crop-based biofuels, which Congress further entrenched earlier this year. Yet increasing yields and overall farm productivity is more important than ever to meet rising global food demand, control food price inflation, and limit agricultural deforestation in other countries. To address this disconnect, Congress should repeal subsidies for first-generation crop-based biofuels and for farming practices that reduce yields, such as cover crops and organic farming, reallocating funds to practices and programs that improve productivity.
These recommendations will require buy-in from Trump Administration officials and commitments from the White House and federal agencies. Administration actions on trade agreements, regulatory changes, and program administration must be accompanied by strong oversight on the part of Congress and legislative action. The latter is likely to prove difficult over the next two years due to the shifting political dynamics plaguing the farm bill legislative process.
Advancing Reform Without a Farm Bill
The chances of Congress passing meaningful new agricultural policy this year are dwindling. The 118th Congress failed to pass a new farm bill package with support from the usual farm bill coalition of rural Republicans representing farmer interests and urban Democrats supporting food and nutrition programs. The 119th Congress, with both chambers controlled by a Republican majority, recently passed a reconciliation bill along partisan lines that included some changes to farm policy but was nowhere near as comprehensive as a full farm bill agreement. The reconciliation measure pours more money into the farm safety net but is expected to lead to the largest slashing of federal SNAP nutrition benefits since the program was launched. By splitting out key pieces of the farm bill, Republicans have splintered the bipartisan coalition that has ushered in farm bills roughly every 5 years since the 1960s.
However, legislative gridlock need not mean inaction. Even without a new farm bill, Congress can advance agricultural reform through annual appropriations and standalone bills. At the same time, the White House can push for change not only within USDA, but also FDA, EPA, the Department of Energy, and the office of the US Trade Representative.
To maintain a productive, resilient, and globally competitive American agricultural system, policymakers must embrace innovation by modernizing agricultural research, removing regulatory barriers, boosting exports, and redirecting funds from counterproductive subsidies. While passing a comprehensive farm bill remains ideal, meaningful progress is still possible. By acting decisively today, the White House and Congress can secure American dominance for generations to come.