Part 2
Last month, Farm Journal Foundation brought together Kip Tom, Leesburg farmer and former ambassador to Rome, and former EPA agriculture advisor Rod Snyder to discuss the political policies that presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris have that would affect agriculture. Last week's article featured their opening comments. This week features their answers to the moderator's questions. Moderating was Krista Peterson of The Wall Street Journal.
What are your top priorities as you look head to negotiations for either an extension or a new 5-year farm bill and when you think that might materialize?
"The farm bill that was passed by the House Ag Committee mostly along partisan lines really did undercut SNAP (supplemental nutritional application program) and nutrition programs in a significant way, and that should not be, in my opinion, the starting point for negotiation," Snyder said. "We have a framework that the Senate Ag Committee has put on the table, we've got the House's. We've got proposals out there; we just need folks to come together earnestly and begin negotiating in a way that that I think the American farmer deserves."
"When you look at a farm bill, it's going to be a $1.5 trillion bill over five years and the food provisions, or the SNAP provisions within it is almost 83% of that total cost. I can't believe there isn't some room to negotiate a little bit," Tom said. "I mean this is a program that's grown from, in 2000 (when) it was about $15 billion, (to) this last year (when it) was about $110 billion, and then we see instances around the country where it's been abused.
"I think we need to see some changes in reference pricing. We need to probably see some base acre changes that have occurred over years; we haven't kept it relevant to the time we're in today, but I say clean up SNAP, try to find some provisions over here to assure that we, the farmers, have the ability to withstand any trade issues that come in front of us and reference pricing would do that. I think we need to make sure that this farm bill is looking at our loss in trade over the past three and a half years.
SNAP is obviously where a lot of the partisan controversy centers. Are there any particular changes in the SNAP program that you would advocate for, from larger scale changes to even just collecting some of the data around what is bought with SNAP benefits?
"I'll quickly respond to something that Kip said, which is that if there are problems or people are breaking the rules, there are mechanisms to enforce those. That's actually part of the system," Snyder said. "That is not necessarily an argument for undercutting the entire funding of the program."
Related to this, he listed three events under the leadership of Biden, Harris and Walz. They are: the 2022 Conference on Hunger, Nutrition and Health; the recently established summer EBT program; and Minnesota Gov. Tim Waltz's recent universal breakfast and lunch for public school children.
"Those are the kinds of things that you could see from the Harris-Walz administration in terms of the priorities around these programs," he said. "I think it's just critically important that as we continue the investment but let's make sure we're not stigmatizing this program. Let's make sure that folks have access to it, and they can feel they can go to the grocery store and buy what they need and not put barriers in place. And I think that's the type of priorities that you would see from a President Harris."
"I worked at the U.N. organizations in Rome," Tom said. "One of our mandates was obviously food security around the world dealing with the World Food Program and FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) to create resilience and capacity and Food Systems. I've seen hunger at its worst, and it's heart-wrenching when I come back to the United States and I see those that are in such dire need of that food assistance, but they don't have access to it because we have fraud taking place in other places. I realize there's mechanisms to manage this, but I'm telling you the mechanism is broken."
Tom noted that there are reports from different states showing that food assistance isn't getting to the right people.
"I think the system needs (to be) cleaned up, period," he said.
Related to this, he noted the nearly $238 billion which Secretary (Tom) Vilsack awarded to the Thrifty Food Plan in 2021. Tom said decisions such as this ought have congressional oversight, and no single person should have the power to move so much money without checks and balances.
In answer to this, Snyder noted that the 2018 Farm Bill directed USDA to make updates to the Thrifty Food Plan.
"If you look at the fact that the Thrifty food plan had not been updated in 50 years in terms of the way you calculate that equation, it's not just about food cost inflation. It's also about dietary guidelines, it's about the science around what kids and families should be eating. It's about looking at consumption patterns," he said.
Snyder also noted the SNAP benefit increase averages to $119 per day per person.
(Universal free school meals) is something that a handful of states have been looking at in recent years. Is that something that you think the next administration should push at a federal level?
"There's been some resistance in Congress to this idea. I think there's some concerns that more affluent kids don't need that paid for on their behalf. It's worthy of a debate for sure," Snyder said. "I don't think that Vice President Harris has specific policy on this question, so I don't want to speculate except to say that I think in states where this program has been adopted they're certainly seeing some success. It cuts down the administrative costs around school lunches and breakfast."
"The children that are in need, they need to have that nutrition when they get to school in the morning," Tom said. "But those of us who could afford, it I don't think we should be getting free lunch. I want to make sure that this is reserved for those that are truly in need."
He added that he would like to see the dietary guidelines schools follow change to include whole milk and other nutrient-rich foods, and that ultra-processed foods be restricted on SNAP benefits and school food programs. Also, he said healthy, active lifestyles should be promoted more.
Crop insurance is a priority among lots of ag groups, but there is some opposition on both the right and the left to this. Where do you each stand on the idea of crop insurance, and do you think it needs to be bolstered further or winnowed down a bit?
"Is it important to rural America? Is it important to our country? Absolutely," Tom said. "Whether you're a young producer, whether you're a mature larger operation, crop insurance is critical to us. Can it be fine-tuned and changed? Absolutely. I've got some ideas on that, but not for this dialogue.
He said crop insurance allows banks to have confidence in loaning, bolsters agricultural companies and supports farmers in times of need. It also incentivizes better crop care initiatives.
"I think the crop insurance system in the United States has been a tremendous success," Snyder said. "Ag security and food security is national security, and this tool, I think, is one of the most important ways in which we make sure that our farmers can stay in business through the good years and the bad years."
Snyder also warned that Project 2025 has some endorsers who are calling for the decimation of the farm safety net. He advocates for a bipartisan coalition to strengthen and preserve crop insurance.
You touched on some of this in your introductory remarks, but if we could go a little bit deeper into former president Trump's proposed tariffs and what impact do you think that would specifically have on farmers. In the previous administration there was some economic relief provided to farmers in the aftermath of some of these trade policies. Do you think we would see a repeat of that, would that be necessary?
"He (Trump) did 50-some trade deals, and like I said soon after the tariffs were imposed on China, they did a phase one agreement, almost grew our trade $80 billion," Tom said. "We also created more deals with Mexico, Canada, Japan --nearly half of our exports go to those four countries.
Tom considers Trump to have been "one of the most pro-trade presidents we've had, and I continue to see him being that in the future."
"If we go back to the prior Trump administration, as I said in my opening statement those tariffs and the retaliatory actions from China resulted in $29 billion in lost export revenue, and we the taxpayers essentially had to make up that ground," Snyder said. "When I talk to most farmers across the country, they want to make their living from the markets, not from subsidies or checks from the government."
He said Trump's new tariff plan is "far more stark" at 10-20% for across-the-board imported products and 60% tariffs on China.
"There's no question the type of retaliatory behavior that would come from other countries in terms of market access for American farmers if that type of plan would be put in place. I talked to an expert over the weekend who said that uh the impacts of that could make the 1980 farm crisis look like a picnic in terms of the way that the markets could dry up overnight because of those tariffs.
Snyder also listed trade deals made by the Biden-Harris administration, including: increased ethanol exports to Japan, open potato trade with Mexico, worked with India to remove tariffs on some specialty crops, and launching a market development program to identify growing economic markets around the globe.
He called for diversified markets to better support American farmers.
"It cannot start from a position of 10-20% universal tariffs," he said. "Some are estimating it's $4,000 per family increased cost because of that type of proposal, so I think it's bad news for farmers, it's bad news for the public, and I just think it's unsustainable."
"I don't know of any trade deals that happened under the Biden-Harris administration," Tom said. "They've had four years. And, by the way, we're almost to a 1980s farm crisis right now under the Biden-Harris administration."
I wanted to focus just on China for a minute there's a bipartisan concern on Capitol Hill and in state legislatures about Chinese ownership of U.S. farmland and foreign ownership of U.S. farmland in general. Do you think there need to be further restrictions put in place around that?
"We need to understand China is our largest existential threat so when we talk trade, remember that's on the table, too. And we need to understand that they have a lot of control today that we need to have and harness," Tom said.
He also warned that any foreign adversary to the U.S. will not follow the same rules the U.S. does, and China, especially, has tried to steal seed genetics, intellectual property, and attempted to build a plant near a U.S. military base in North Dakota. Tom warned that China is "finding creative means to collect data and do anything against the United States."
"I'm not sure that the Harris-Walz campaign has specific policy yet on foreign ownership of farmland. I know that conversation is playing out at the state level across the country right now," Snyder said.
He agreed that there should be restrictions around land hosting sensitive facilities and intellectual properties.
Shifting gears a little bit, Vice President Harris has proposed policies that would prevent price gouging in response to Americans persistent concerns about inflation and the price of food specifically um you know how would that kind of plan affect not only consumers but also producers of the food?
"Farmers are not the cause of food inflation. I just want to be really clear upfront. USDA estimates that American farmers receive less than 15 cents in every dollar for domestically produced food, and that should be a concern for all of us. But farmers are not the reason for food price inflation," Snyder said.
Instead, he said the problem centers on corporate anti-competitive practices.
Harris' policy has a three-pronged approach, he said. First, advancing a federal ban on price gouging on food and groceries. Second, setting clear boundaries for corporations so they cannot exploit consumers and putting effective penalties in place. Third, Snyder said Harris plans to secure new authority for the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to investigate and impose those penalties when necessary.
"So, we're not talking about food price caps, we're certainly not talking about things that would penalize farmers. We're talking about companies that have demonstrated that they're willing to break the law in the event of a crisis in a way that disadvantages the American consumer," he said.
"During the Biden Harris administration, we've seen food prices go up roughly 25-30%. And let's remember, energy plays a role here, too, and the cost of energy and the way we move products around the country—the packaging and labor," Tom said., "But I come back to this: We want to provide a safe, affordable, nutritious source of food for Americans consumers."
Further, he said the regulations, amounting to $1.67 trillion, are burdensome and have been imposed on those in the ag supply chain. Tom also suspects that the Green Agenda will create even more food costs and restrict the agricultural sector.
However, he said the Trump administration would unfurl innovation, reduce restrictions that would allow for healthier food sectors to compete with ultra-processed food sectors and remove the government from a place of control, which Tom said is a factor in food inflation across the world.
Snyder said the global food inflation is due to the COVID-19 pandemic and began in the U.S. supply chain under the Trump administration. The supply chain issues sparked a domino effect leading to food price inflation, he said. He noted that inflation is at its lowest in three years.
They also discussed climate and sustainability, biofuels and the divide between rural and urban America. Tom noted that the government should leave environmental and biofuel incentives to the private sector and reduce regulations to allow for more efficient use of resources. He would also like to see more action on broadband availability in rural America. Snyder said it is important for the government to come alongside farmers through incentivized programs in both climate-smart agriculture and biofuels. He said it is important to invest in these areas, but doubts Trump will give climate and sustainability programs much thought. He added that there should also be more investment in not only agricultural communities, but also other rural communities.