Environmental Policy

Trump Signals More DEF Rollbacks, Pushes Manufacturers to Lower Equipment Costs

Fri, 27 Mar 2026 19:20:23 GMT

In front of a gathering of farmers, ranchers and growers at the White House, President Trump and EPA announced new guidance that will remove the DEF sensor requirements, which the Small Business Administration (SBA) estimates will save farmers $4.4 billion a year and translate into $13.79 billion for Americans. Administrator Lee Zeldin says the move impacts farmers, truckers, motor coach operators and other diesel equipment operators.

“I have heard from truck drivers, farmers and many others complaining about DEF and pleading for a fix in all 50 states I visited during my first year as EPA administrator,” Zeldin says. “Americans are justified in being fed up with failing DEF system issues. EPA understands this is a massive issue and has been doing everything in our statutory power to address this. Today, we take another step in furthering our work by removing DEF sensors. Farmers and truckers should not be losing billions of dollars because of repair costs or days lost on the job.”

Every farmer now has the Right to Repair their own equipment thanks to President Trump. It’s crazy that our talented farmers were being prevented from doing this previously. This announcement is about common sense. Farmers will be able to spend more time in the field and less… pic.twitter.com/4hROUN45EU
— Lee Zeldin (@epaleezeldin) March 27, 2026

New Guidelines Focus on DEF Sensors

EPA says that sudden speed losses and shutdowns caused by DEF system failures compromise safety and productivity. It calls the issue unacceptable and problematic. In a release, EPA says it plans to continue to pursue all legal avenues to address Americans’ complaints. On Feb. 3, 2026, EPA demanded critical data on DEF system failures from the manufacturers that account for over 80% of all products used in DEF systems. This information will arm EPA with what it needs to permanently address DEF system failures. Thus far, the agency has received data from 11 of the 14 manufacturers, and in less than a month, EPA has turned around preliminary findings to issue today’s guidance, demonstrating Administrator Zeldin’s commitment to fixing this issue.

“Today, by eliminating DEF mandates, the Trump Administration is taking yet another step to free up hardworking Americans to focus on the vital work of feeding, clothing, building, and fueling our nation,” says SBA Administrator Kelly Loeffler. “I applaud Administrator Zeldin for his leadership on this issue, and I look forward to our continued collaboration to cut red tape for small businesses across the U.S. food supply chain.”

Several ag equipment manufacturers were highlighted during the event at the White House, including John Deere. The company weighed in EPA’s latest announcement about DEF.

“John Deere applauds the EPA’s leadership to provide as much flexibility through agency guidance as possible to limit the frequency of false DEF-quality inducements,” says Kyle Gilley, vice president for global government affairs at John Deere. “Today’s announcement builds upon EPA guidance from February 2026, requested by John Deere, to provide farmers additional tools to complete emissions-related repairs. These announcements are a win for farmers and their ability to keep modern equipment operating in the field.”

EPA says the preliminary review of the warranty data suggests that DEF sensor failures are a significant source of warranty claims and DEF-related inducements. The agency’s new guidance makes clear that under existing regulations, manufacturers can stop inaccurate DEF system failures by removing traditional emission sensors, known as Urea Quality Sensors, and switching to nitrous oxide (NOx) sensors.

EPA also affirms that approved NOx sensor-based software updates can be installed on existing engines without being treated as illegal tampering under the Clean Air Act. This is in line with EPA’s February 2026 Right to Repair clarification guidance , which removed a major barrier keeping farmers from fixing their faulty DEF systems in the field. EPA anticipates the switch will greatly curb errors that traditional sensor technologies have been prone to and reduce the issues Americans face with inaccurate DEF failures.

For more information, see EPA’s Diesel Exhaust Fluid .

Trump Calls on Manufacturers to Lower Equipment Prices If DEF Rolled Back

During Friday’s event, Trump also spoke about the rising complexity and cost of modern farm equipment.

“When you buy a tractor today, you spend 50 percent of your time fixing the environmental — I say environmental impact statement garbage that’s on the tractor,” he says.

He adds that equipment often includes computerized systems that can shut down tractors unnecessarily, increasing repair costs.

“I said to the head of John Deere, ‘Is this a good thing or a bad thing?’ He said, sir, you have no idea how bad it is. It’s made our tractors so complicated. … We want to go back to the old ways, sir. And I said, I agree with you 100 percent.”

During remarks at the event at the White House today, President Trump said EPA is working to further roll back DEF-related requirements and pushed manufacturers to cut equipment costs:

“You’re going to lower the cost of a tractor… they’re going to be able to very shortly…
— Tyne Morgan (@Tyne_Ag) March 27, 2026

The president says the administration is looking into further rolling back DEF requirements, but as he does, he is also urging manufacturers to reduce equipment prices for farmers if the added environmental regulation costs are no longer there.

“Lee (Zeldin), I think we can say, I know you’re in the process of cutting out massive amounts of nonsense that are mandated to be put on your tractors, that all of your trucks that cost your fortune…and I know that they’re going to do this. And I asked one thing, you got to promise me one thing. You’re not going to take any profits. You’re going lower the cost of a tractor. I want you to lower the costs. And if they don’t lower the course, you’ll let me know. And I’ll have to do a big number of those companies. Okay? They’re going to be able to, very shortly, produce a bigger, better tractor and substantially less money. It’s going to be better. It’s gonna be a better tractor at substantially less,” Trump says.

He adds that future tractors will be simpler, more reliable and less expensive.

“I want John Deere and Case and all of the great companies … to give it to you in the form of lower tractor and equipment costs. And I think it’s going to have a huge impact,” he says.

President Trump then directed EPA Administrator Zeldin to explore ways to require, or mandate, manufacturers to lower the cost of farm equipment.

EPA’s guidance issued on Friday is part of a broader effort to address complaints from farmers, truckers and other diesel equipment operators about DEF system failures that cause equipment shutdowns, but Trump says more action on DEF is currently underway.

More DEF Relief? EPA Takes New Action for Farmers and Truckers

Tue, 03 Feb 2026 16:14:40 GMT

On the heels of clarifying farmers’ right to repair their own equipment, EPA is escalating pressure on diesel engine manufacturers over ongoing Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system failures the administration claims continue to sideline farm machinery and trucks.

On Tuesday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency is demanding detailed failure data from major diesel engine manufacturers as it considers additional rules aimed at reducing DEF-related shutdowns and derates that have plagued farmers, truckers and equipment operators for years.

The move builds directly on Monday’s EPA right-to-repair guidance announcement that clarified the Clean Air Act does not prohibit farmers from fixing their own non-road diesel equipment, which includes making temporary emissions overrides when necessary to complete repairs.

“As I traveled to all 50 states during my first year as EPA administrator, I heard from truck drivers, farmers and many others rightly complaining about DEF and pleading for a fix,” Zeldin said in a statement on Tuesday. “EPA understands this is a massive issue, which is why we have already established commonsense guidance for manufacturers to update DEF systems.

“Today, we are furthering that work and demanding detailed data to hold manufacturers accountable for the continued system failures,” he added.

While neither announcement fully rolls back DEF requirements on tractors, a step many farmers and truckers continue to push for, both signal movement in that direction.

With today’s news in the mix, here’s what farmers and truckers need to know:

1. Increased Operational Up-Time.

The most immediate benefit is the reduction of “forced downtime.” Under the clarified guidance announced on Feb. 2, farmers can now perform temporary emissions overrides to complete essential work, such as planting or harvesting, even if a DEF failure occurs. The extension of warning periods — specifically the 36-hour window for non-road equipment before a derate kicks in — provides a buffer to finish a job before seeking repairs.

2. Legal Empowerment for Repairs.

EPA has explicitly stated the Clean Air Act cannot be used by manufacturers as a shield to prevent farmers from fixing your own equipment. This clarification removes a major legal hurdle in the right-to-repair movement, potentially lowering repair costs by allowing farmers and independent mechanics to access the tools and software needed to address DEF-related faults.

3. Manufacturer Accountability.

Under Section 208(a) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is demanding warranty and failure data for Model Year 2016, 2019 and 2023 engines from 14 major on-road and non-road diesel manufacturers (covering 80% of the market). That shifts the burden of DEF reliability from the end-user to the manufacturer. EPA says the information will help determine whether persistent DEF problems are tied to specific product generations, system designs or materials, and will inform further regulatory steps in 2026. Manufacturers have 30 days to comply or face potential enforcement actions.

4. Impact on Machinery Values.

Auction data suggests farmers are already voting with their checkbooks. According to Machinery Pete , demand and values remain strongest for pre-DEF used equipment, while interest in DEF-equipped machinery has softened.

If these EPA actions lead to more reliable DEF systems or easier repairs, the high demand (and inflated prices) for older, less efficient equipment might eventually stabilize as newer models become less of a liability in the field.

5. More Changes are Coming.

When asked why EPA has not eliminated DEF requirements entirely,Zeldin said the agency said it is actively building on last summer’s guidance and actively moving toward “common-sense” adjustments that prioritize productivity alongside emissions standards.

EPA’s demand for warranty and failure data follows DEF guidance issued in August 2025 that significantly softened inducement rules. That guidance delayed severe derates, reduced sudden shutdowns and required manufacturers to update software so operators could continue safely working while addressing faults.

For heavy-duty trucks, warning periods were extended to up to 650 miles or 10 hours before derates begin, with weeks of normal operation allowed before speed is limited. Non-road equipment now sees no impact for the first 36 hours after a DEF fault.

EPA has also said that starting with Model Year 2027, new diesel trucks must be engineered to avoid sudden and severe power loss after running out of DEF.

$280,000? 18-Year-Old Semi Sells for Record Price, Signaling Pre-DEF Equipment Demand Is Surging

Thu, 18 Dec 2025 17:56:02 GMT

An 18-year-old semi just set a record at auction, offering one of the clearest signals yet of where demand is flowing in today’s machinery market — and where it isn’t.

A 2007 Peterbilt 379, built before diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) systems were required, sold for $280,000 during a late-year consignment auction in North Dakota. The truck was a rare example: one owner, always shedded, and showing just 20,817 miles. Still, the price stunned even seasoned auction watchers.

Greg Peterson — better known as Machinery Pete — says the sale eclipses every previous result he has tracked for the iconic model.

“I’ve seen about 2,800 Pete 379s over the last 25 years,” Peterson says. “The previous high was $262,000, and that was back in July 2022 when the whole market was absolutely on fire. To come along now and just smoke that number, with an 18-year-old truck, that tells you something.”

That “something,” Peterson says, is demand not just for trucks, but for pre-emissions equipment across agriculture and transportation. Auctions, he notes, are brutally honest. They don’t care about model-year labels or marketing cycles. They simply reflect what buyers want — and what they are willing to pay for.

“That Peterbilt is an 18-year-old truck,” Peterson says. “And it brings $280,000. Auctions don’t lie. They tell you exactly what people want — and right now, that’s used, pre-DEF equipment.”

‘07 Peterbilt 379 w/ only 20,817 miles, 1 owner, always shedded, sold $280,000 today on @UlmerAuction sale. I’ve compiled 2800+ auction sale prices on 379’s past 25 Yrs. $280,000 is new record high auction price. Was $262K on 7/28/22 Villa Grove, IL salehttps://t.co/S6yC5PLDvR pic.twitter.com/TxdTN67GIH
— Greg Peterson (@MachineryPete) December 17, 2025

Used Equipment Values Gain Momentum

The Peterbilt sale is not an isolated case. Peterson says used equipment values, broadly speaking, have been strengthening for much of the year — a trend that runs counter to what the machinery market has historically done during periods of soft farm income.

“Used values started to solidify in the third week of February,” Peterson says. “They held, held, held. Then we got into November and December and it was like, ‘Katie, bar the door.’ I’ve never seen this in my 36 years.”

What makes the current cycle unusual, he says, is not just that used values are strong — it’s that they’re strengthening at a time when new equipment sales are clearly contracting.

“In the past, when I’ve seen auction prices take off like this, it’s always been equivalent to optimal conditions for new equipment sales,” Peterson says. “That ain’t the case this time.”

Recent auction data reinforces the point. A 2011 Case IH 6088 combine, pre-DEF and with low hours, sold for $178,000, the highest auction price for that model in nearly 11 years. A 2009 John Deere 8295R tractor with just over 1,000 hours brought $230,000, the strongest result in more than 30 months.

“I’ve never seen used values going up while new sales are going down,” Peterson says. “Never.”

Price of New Forces a Rethink

Peterson says the underlying force behind this shift is impossible to ignore: the cost of new equipment.

“I don’t know how tall the ceiling is, but that’s the price of new,” he says. “We understand why prices went up — labor, materials, everything through the pandemic — but at some point you have to ask, ‘Just because you can raise the price, should you?’”

As the grain downturn stretches on, Peterson says farmers have had time to pause and reassess their operations — and their machinery lineups.

“What it’s done is it’s given farmers time to catch their breath,” he says. “They’re saying, ‘We’ve got a lot of iron on this farm. We’ve got more equipment than my dad had and more than my grandpa had. Do we really need all this going forward?’”

That mindset shift doesn’t necessarily mean farmers will stop buying equipment forever. But Peterson says it has changed buying behavior — especially in the short term — and it’s pushed many operators toward well-kept used machines rather than six- or seven-figure new purchases.

“When the money’s not flowing, people think differently,” he says. “That’s just the reality.”

Dealers, Manufacturers Pull Back on New

At the same time farmers are stepping back, Peterson says the supply side of the market has also changed in ways that amplify used-equipment demand.

Manufacturers have dramatically reduced production, closing plants and laying off workers at levels Peterson says he has never seen before. While painful, those moves have eliminated excess new inventory sitting on dealer lots — and the interest expense that comes with it.

“What manufacturers have achieved is basically no backlog of new equipment,” Peterson says.

He says dealer consolidation over the past decade has played a major role. Larger dealer groups now carry more leverage with manufacturers, and when the slowdown hit, dealers acted quickly.

“They were paying 8% interest on all this stuff sitting on their lots,” Peterson says. “Their No. 1 mission wasn’t selling new equipment. Their No. 1 mission was, ‘We are going to move this one-, two-, three-year-old stuff.’”

Manufacturers responded with incentives to help dealers clear late-model used inventory — a level of cooperation Peterson says he has not seen in more than three decades of tracking the market.

“I’ve never seen that level of coordination before,” he says. “And the focus clearly shifted away from new.”

Pre-DEF Machines Command a Premium

Layered on top of price and supply issues is deep frustration with emissions systems. Peterson says pre-DEF equipment — whether trucks, tractors or combines — now stands out immediately to buyers.

“The good pre-emission stuff jumps forward like a neon sign,” he says.

That demand is no longer subtle. Practices that once happened quietly, such as emissions deletions, are now openly acknowledged — and reflected in sale prices.

“It used to be hush-hush,” Peterson says. “It’s not anymore. People say it right on the auction bill because it sells for more money. It just flat does.”

He says recent political discussion around environmental regulations has only amplified that sentiment, particularly among farmers who feel reliability and repair costs have been compromised.

“When he talked about it, I honestly thought it was an AI clip at first,” Peterson says. “He sounded like every farmer I’ve talked to for the last 15 years.”

New Equipment Demand Remains Weak

While used values climb, new equipment sales continue to struggle. November data show four-wheel-drive tractor sales down 19%, with self-propelled combine sales down 35% for the month and nearly 40% year-to-date. Livestock producers remain a bright spot, but on the grain side, Peterson says demand is clearly subdued.

Looking ahead, he says today’s production cuts could have major consequences when farm income eventually improves.

“When corn and beans finally move higher and stay there, we’re going to see exactly what we saw in 2021,” Peterson says. “Farmers are going to want to update, and dealers are going to say, ‘I can only sell you eight — that’s all we get.’”

Until then, he says the auction market continues to speak clearly.

Will Trump Roll Back DEF?

During a roundtable at the White House last week when the Trump administration rolled out $12 billion in farmer aid , President Trump also revealed other actions the Trump administration is working on to reduce regulations. Trump told farmers Monday his administration plans to scale back environmental requirements on tractors and other farm equipment, framing the move as a way to bring down machinery costs that have climbed in recent years.

“The other thing I’d like to add … we’re going to also give the tractor companies, John Deere and all of the companies that make the equipment, we’re going to take off a lot of the environmental restrictions that they have on machinery,” Trump said. “It’s ridiculous.”

While Trump didn’t provide specifics on how the details of that plan will come together, Trump said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin would be involved in carrying out the effort. There’s speculation on if that will be removing diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) requirements on tractors or also addressing the long-standing right-to-repair issue.

Farm Journal reached out to EPA, and the agency confirmed it was DEF to which the president was referring.

“EPA has heard loud and clear from truckers and farmers across the United States that the Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system was unacceptable and cost millions of dollars in lost productivity,” Brigit Hirsch, EPA press secretary, told Farm Journal. “This summer, Administrator Zeldin issued clear guidance urging engine and equipment manufacturers to revise DEF system software in existing vehicles and equipment to prevent sudden shutdowns. It is essential manufacturers give operators more time to repair faults without impacting their livelihoods or safety. EPA will continue to evaluate ways to expand the work the agency has already done on DEF and looks forward to working across the administration to do so.”

Trump argued added systems meant to meet environmental rules have driven up price tags and made equipment harder to operate and repair.

“You buy it, it’s got so much equipment on it for the environmental, it doesn’t do anything except it makes the equipment much more expensive and much more complicated to work,” he said, adding, “it’s not as good as the old days.”

Trump said the administration’s goal is to remove what he called “nonsense” and require manufacturers to pass savings along to farmers.

Read more about what President Trump may do with DEF in the coming months.

The Death of DEF? Trump Says He’ll Roll Back Environmental Requirements to Cut Farm Equipment Costs

Tue, 09 Dec 2025 16:41:03 GMT

During a White House roundtable on Monday tied to a new $12 billion “bridge payment” plan , President Donald Trump said his administration will move quickly to ease environmental requirements affecting tractors and other farm machinery, arguing the changes will lower sticker prices and simplify repairs.

While the headline of the event was to announce the payments, which Trump says will be funded by tariff revenue, the roundtable discussion with farmers also revealed other actions the Trump administration is working on to reduce regulations. Trump told farmers Monday his administration plans to scale back environmental requirements on tractors and other farm equipment, framing the move as a way to bring down machinery costs that have climbed in recent years.

President Trump said that farming equipment has gotten too expensive and his administration would help tractor companies by removing some environmental rules that affect them https://t.co/nKzE5ACyBp pic.twitter.com/oexiZnfxgf
— Reuters (@Reuters) December 9, 2025

“The other thing I’d like to add … we’re going to also give the tractor companies, John Deere and all of the companies that make the equipment … we’re going to take off a lot of the environmental restrictions that they have on machinery,” Trump said. “It’s ridiculous.”

While Trump didn’t provide specifics on how the details of that plan will come together, Trump said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin would be involved in carrying out the effort. There’s speculation on if that will be removing diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) requirements on tractors or also addressing the long-standing right-to-repair issue.

Earlier this year, EPA announced guidance to change, not eliminate, DEF requirements, allowing for softer power loss in new trucks (from model year 2027) when DEF runs low, preventing sudden shutdowns and enabling software fixes for existing vehicles, easing burdens on truckers and farmers. This guidance removed what EPA called “red tape,” allowing manufacturers to develop less disruptive fixes for performance issues caused by emissions systems, though it doesn’t legalize “deleting” emissions equipment.

EPA Says DEF Is “Unacceptable”

While Trump didn’t outline exactly what EPA plans to roll back, he hinted toward DEF being the target. Farm Journal reached out to EPA for clarification and comment, and EPA’s press secretary confirmed rolling back DEF requirements is the target for this administration.

“EPA has heard loud and clear from truckers and farmers across the United States that the Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) system was unacceptable and cost millions of dollars in lost productivity,” Brigit Hirsch, EPA press secretary, told Farm Journal. “This summer, Administrator Zeldin issued clear guidance urging engine and equipment manufacturers to revise DEF system software in existing vehicles and equipment to prevent sudden shutdowns. It is essential manufacturers give operators more time to repair faults without impacting their livelihoods or safety. EPA will continue to evaluate ways to expand the work the agency has already done on DEF and looks forward to working across the administration to do so.”

She also pointed farmers toward EPA’s website dedicated to actions on Diesel Exhaust Fluid .

Trump Says “It Makes the Equipment Much More Expensive”

Trump argued added systems meant to meet environmental rules have driven up price tags and made equipment harder to operate and repair.

“You buy it, it’s got so much equipment on it for the environmental, it doesn’t do anything except it makes the equipment much more expensive and much more complicated to work,” he said, adding, “it’s not as good as the old days.”

Trump said the administration’s goal is to remove what he called “nonsense” and require manufacturers to pass savings along to farmers.

“And we’re going to do it, and we’re going to say: ‘You’re going to reduce the prices.’ We’re not going to do it, and they’re not going to reduce. They’re going to have to reduce their prices because farming equipment has gotten too expensive,” Trump said during the roundtable. “A lot of the reason is because they put these environmental excesses on the equipment which don’t do a damn thing except make it complicated, make it impractical.”

Trump Claims Modern Equipment is Overly Complex and Difficult to Service

Trump also described modern equipment as overly complex and more difficult for farmers to service themselves.

“For you really have to be, in many cases, you need about 185 IQ to turn on a lawn mower,” he said. “So we’re going to take that … off … that they put on Biden mostly.”

Trump claimed the changes would quickly impact costs, bringing down equipment prices and saying: “We’re going to do that immediately.”

“The machines, they’re always under repair because they’re so complicated that you can’t fix them,” “he said. The old days you used to fix it yourself. Now you can’t do that. You have to be a Ph.D. from, let’s say, MIT.”

Comments Came During Event Announcing $12 Billion in Bridge Payments

Trump made the remarks during a roundtable discussion with farmers at the White House that coincided with an announcement by the White House and USDA of $12 billion in bridge payments for farmers.

Up to $11 billion will go toward a newly designed Farmer Bridge Assistance (FBA) program targeted toward row crop farmers hit hardest by trade disruptions. Those payments will be sent by the end of February, according to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins. The remaining $1 billion will be set aside and is designated for other crops affected by the ongoing disputes.

USDA says the bulk of the funding will run through the new FBA program, administered by the Farm Service Agency (FSA) and funded under the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC). Rollins framed the package as near-term help while trade and farm-safety-net updates ramp up.

John Deere Reacts

In a post on X following the announcement, John Deere commended the Trump administration’s announcement of relief and bridge payments for farmers saying: “The timely assistance will protect this essential industry, help rural communities and support critical long-term investments in the future of U.S. agriculture and manufacturing.”

Hat’s off to those who feed and fuel America pic.twitter.com/UWBvmAus20
— John Deere USA (@JohnDeere) December 8, 2025

John Deere also said it shares the administration’s focus on reducing costs for both producers and consumers.

“We are doing all we can to help U.S. farmers reduce input costs,” according to the post. “The equipment and technologies Deere makes here in the U.S. are giving American farmers new tools and technologies that can substantially reduce their input costs and labor costs while increasing yields, boosting margins.”

Those comments are drawing backlash from farmers and others online. Some argue if John Deere truly wants to help farmers, then they can start by lowering the price of their equipment. While others Deere will be one of the beneficiaries of farmers receiving these payments.

https://cms.farmjournal.com/cms/content/edit.jsp?id=0000019b-0351-d956-a5ff-8bdf58620000&typeId=c2a98712-61fa-35ef-bd5d-e0bfe394c8b6

Of course you commend relief and bridge payments, you make more financing tractors than you do selling them 🤣
— Drake (@silvopasturist) December 9, 2025

New WOTUS Proposal Could Reduce Red Tape for Farmers and Ranchers

Mon, 17 Nov 2025 18:01:44 GMT

Farmers and ranchers could soon face fewer regulatory hurdles when working near waterways, as EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers released a new proposal on Nov. 17 to redefine “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS). The agencies say the proposed rule is designed to bring long-requested clarity to what features fall under federal jurisdiction potentially reducing permitting uncertainty for agriculture, landowners and rural businesses.

The proposed rule can be found on the Federal Register . The public can submit comments online there or via Regulations.gov on or before Jan. 5, 2026. During the announcement event on Nov. 17, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin urged the public to submit comments.

The definition of WOTUS determines when producers must secure permits for projects that could affect surface water quality, including common activities such as building terraces, installing drainage or expanding livestock operations. EPA officials say the new proposal aims to align fully with the Supreme Court’s Sackett decision and prevent farmers from needing lawyers or consultants simply to determine whether a water feature on their land is federally regulated.

The proposal follows Zeldin’s promise in March to launch the biggest deregulatory action in history and a series of listening sessions in April and May that asked states, tribes, industry and agriculture to weigh in on WOTUS needs.

Clearer Definition After Years of Confusion

Zeldin and Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works Adam Telle emphasize the rule is designed to be clear, durable and commonsense.

Key elements include:

Defined terms such as relatively permanent, continuous surface connection, and tributary to outline which waters qualify under the Clean Water Act.
A requirement that jurisdictional tributaries must have predictable, consistent flow to traditional navigable waters.
Wetlands protections are limited to wetlands that physically touch and are indistinguishable from regulated waters for a consistent duration each year.
Reaffirmed exclusions important to agriculture, including prior converted cropland, certain ditches and waste treatment systems.
A new exclusion for groundwater.
Locally-familiar terminology, such as “wet season,” to help determine whether water features meet regulatory thresholds.

EPA says these changes are intended to reduce uncertainty that has stemmed from years of shifting definitions across administrations.

Impact of WOTUS Proposal on Agriculture

For producers, the proposal could simplify compliance by narrowing which water features fall under federal oversight and confirming exclusions that many farm groups have long advocated.

Zeldin says the aim is “protecting the nation’s navigable waters from pollution” while preventing unnecessary burdens on farmers and ranchers. He criticizes past Democratic administrations for broad interpretations that, in his view, extended federal reach to features that did not warrant regulation.

Farm groups have argued for years that unclear or overly broad definitions can lead to significant costs, delays and legal risks when planning conservation work, drainage projects or infrastructure improvements. A more consistent rule could reduce project backlogs and limit case-by-case determinations that often slow progress during planting, construction or livestock expansion.

“We’ve seen WOTUS definitions, guidance and legal arguments change with each administration,” said Garrett Hawkins, president of the Missouri Farm Bureau, during the May 1 EPA listening session for agriculture . He adds: “farmers, land owners and small businesses are the ones who suffer the most when we don’t have clear rules.”

Several of those who gave testimony and public comment during the ag listening session argued that farmers and ranchers, who already struggle with unpredictable markets and tight margins, shouldn’t have to hire experts to identify elements of their own land.

“A practical WOTUS definition will allow the average landowner — not an engineer, not an attorney, not a wetland specialist — to walk out on their property, see a water feature and make, at minimum, a preliminary determination about whether a feature is federally jurisdictional,” says Kim Brackett, vice president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, who also gave testimony in May.

Alignment With the Sackett Decision

After the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett v. EPA ruling , which restricted federal authority over many wetlands, the agencies say the previous WOTUS definition no longer aligned with the law. EPA already issued a memo earlier this year clarifying limits on jurisdiction over adjacent wetlands. The newly proposed rule is the next step in that process.

The proposed rule focuses on relatively permanent bodies of water — streams, rivers, lakes and oceans — and wetlands that are physically connected to those waters. Seasonal and regional variations are incorporated, including waters that flow consistently during the wetter months.

The current situation is a regulatory patchwork. Due to litigation that followed the January 2023 WOTUS rule, which was considered in the Sackett decision, different states are following different rules. Currently, 24 states, mostly the coastal and Great Lakes states, are operating on the 2023 rule, while the other 26 states, mostly those in center and in the Southeast, are operating on pre-2015 WOTUS rule.

Oversight Rests With State and Tribes

A major theme of the proposal is cooperative federalism, giving more authority to states and tribes to manage local land and water resources. EPA says the rule preserves necessary federal protections while recognizing states and tribal governments are best positioned to oversee many smaller or isolated water features.

Sections 101b and 510 of the CWA are key structural examples of the concept of cooperative federalism. The sections give states and tribes the right to set standards and issue permits for federal activities that could discharge pollutants into a water of the U.S. within the state or territory. The most common example of this are 404 dredge and fill permits.

This focus on cooperative federalism was the main chorus of the EPA’s listening session for states , held April 29, especially as it concerns wetlands.

“If more wetlands are excluded from WOTUS, then certain federal projects would not require a section 401 water quality certification by the states,” noted Jennifer Congdon, director of federal affairs for New York Department of Environmental Conservation, during the states’ listening session. She argues that such a situation could impair water quality within a state, thus violating states’ rights under the CWA.

What Happens Next

The proposed rule is available online for public comment on the Federal Register and Regulations.gov on or before Jan. 5, 2026. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers will hold two hybrid public meetings, and details for submitting comments or registering to speak will be available on EPA’s website .

After the comment period, the agencies plan to move quickly toward a final rule.

“Once the rule is finalized, it typically takes effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register pursuant to Congressional Review Act requirements,” the EPA press office told The Packer earlier this summer .

Based on these potential timelines, a new — potentially final — WOTUS rule could take effect as early as early March.

California's Water Crisis: Farmers Warn Water Rules Could Cripple Central Valley Agriculture

Wed, 01 Oct 2025 10:52:48 GMT

On Hansen Ranch in the Central Valley, fifth-generation farmer Erik Hansen grows a little bit of everything — pistachios, almonds, pomegranates, alfalfa, corn for silage and cotton.

“We farm 15, 16 different crops,” Hansen says. “Cotton is our biggest acreage crop, and that’s in the form of Pima cotton.”

That diversification has long been the Hansen family’s survival strategy. But in spring 2023, no amount of crop rotation could shield them from disaster.

“Where we’re standing right now was underwater,” Hansen recalls. “A mile from here, over by that PG&E substation, was the edge of the lake.”

The flood wiped out 600 acres of pomegranates and 400 acres of pistachios. One thousand acres of permanent crops gone in one season.

“It was a massive hit,” Hansen says. “We had about 5,000 to 6,000 acres under water. Some of that water lasted for over a year.”

From Too Much Water to Not Enough

The irony is hard to ignore: In 2023, floodwaters destroyed thousands of acres. Now, Hansen says it’s the lack of access to water that could cripple farms across the Central Valley.

“The last projections I heard were anywhere from 1 million to 1.2 million acres totaled in the valley,” he says, referring to farmland that could be idled by the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA) .

Passed in 2014, SGMA requires local agencies to reduce groundwater overdraft and achieve sustainable use by 2040. On paper, Hansen says, that makes sense.

“To some extent it is good because you have to have a way to manage the overdraft,” he explains. “The problem is there are surface water facilities we developed back in the 50s and 60s that we’re just not using. A lot of that water is going out to the Pacific Ocean.”

For Hansen, the politics sting. He believes decades of state decisions — prioritizing fish and wildlife, reallocating water, and neglecting infrastructure — set up today’s crisis.

“I’m frustrated because the families that have been farming here for years, some decades, sometimes even more, are being footed with a bill for problems that somebody else created,” Hansen says. “If the state doesn’t look in the mirror, I think we’re going to find ourselves in the same position again.”

Young Farmers Face the Same Struggles

Forty miles south, 30-year-old Elizabeth Keenan is navigating the same regulatory headwinds. Her grandfather Charlie started Keenan Farms in 1972, acquiring one of California’s first pistachio orchards. Today, Elizabeth farms alongside her parents and brother.

“Rolling with the regulatory punches can be complicated,” she admits. “Despite pistachios being such a high-value product, despite having optimal land and weather conditions, we really have everything set up beautifully — except for legislation.”

Water, she says, is the most difficult hurdle.

“We’re up to a 50% allocation,” Keenan explains. “The base allocation is 2.2 acre-feet, so we get 1.1 acre-feet to use. Otherwise, we have to have open fallow fields. To pump more water, we have to buy it on the open market, and that’s expensive too.”

A Political Battle Over Flows

Signs line highways across the Central Valley warning that 80% of California’s river water flows out to the Pacific instead of farms. Assemblyman David Tangipa, a freshman lawmaker representing the 8^th District, says those numbers are real.

“It’s 100% happening,” Tangipa says. “Almost 83% of all water in the state is automatically pushed out for environmental purposes.”

California averages about 200 million acre-feet of water each year, Tangipa notes, but despite record rainfall, farms often get less than half of their allocations.

“We’ve prioritized so much environmental legislation that more than 80% of our water is pushed out immediately to the ocean, unnaturally,” he says. “Meanwhile, farmers get less water and more land goes out of production.”

Proponents of Current Water Flows

There are proponents of the current way the water flows, mainly for environmental reasons and to prevent saltwater contamination of freshwater sources.

California releases water into the ocean to prevent saltwater intrusion into freshwater supplies, protect endangered aquatic species and ecosystems, and maintain the delicate balance of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta estuary, a critical source of drinking and irrigation water.

A portion of released water is also used for stormwater management to prevent flooding, as it can be difficult and impractical to capture and store all of it.

And those in favor of environmental water releases say it’s essential to support broader ecosystem benefits like water filtration and carbon sequestration, which are important for overall environmental health.

The Ripple Effect

The Central Valley of California is a powerhouse in food production for the U.S. That area alone produces approximately half of all the fruits and vegetables grown in the U.S., as well as a large portion of the nation’s nuts and other foods. When you break down the numbers, the Central Valley accounts for about 60% of the nation’s fruits and nuts, and about 30% of the nation’s vegetables.

For Thomas Putzel, who works with farmers across the Central Valley, the impact of regulations isn’t just measured in acre-feet. It’s measured in livelihoods and the food supply.

“The environmentalists try to say farmers are wasting water,” he says. “But when we look at what farmers provide, we’re planting forests. One acre of almonds will capture 18 metric tons of carbon a year. That’s like taking 29 million cars off the road.”

Putzel says California voters already approved a water bond to build new storage a decade ago, but no new projects have been built.

“Not one shovel has gone in the ground in 10 years,” he says. “Actually, they took some of that money and tore dams down.”

Meanwhile, permanent crops wither when water isn’t available, leaving behind dead orchards that invite pests and rodents into neighboring fields.

“SGMA’s not necessarily a bad thing,” Putzel says. “But you’ve asked growers to run a marathon with their legs tied together. People don’t understand; food doesn’t come from a grocery store. It comes from a farmer. If California stopped shipping produce for one week, our stores would be empty.”

“Is Farming in California’s Best Interest?”

For Erik Hansen, the question is bigger than water allocations or acreage lost.

“Government is probably the biggest problem right now,” he says. “It just seems California hasn’t really decided whether farming is in their best interest. Politicians like to say they’re for small business and small farming, but virtually every piece of legislation makes it more difficult to survive.”

As the Central Valley wrestles with the challenges of floods, drought and regulations, one reality is clear: The fate of these farms is tied not just to weather and soil but to political decisions that could shape the future of food in America.

Could EPA Decision Signal The Beginning Of The End For DEF?

Thu, 31 Jul 2025 16:27:17 GMT

Mike Berdo has strong words to describe his ongoing experiences using machinery requiring DEF ( Diesel Exhaust Fluid ) on his southeast Iowa farm.

“It has been an absolute nightmare, at least for us. Mechanics make trip after trip to do little stuff that’s very expensive to fix,” said Berdo, who produces grain and beef cattle near Washington. “We had planting delays last spring … little stuff that came from it and just seemed like [an issue to deal with] day after day.”

The ongoing mechanical issues and costs are why Berdo said he is “all for” EPA rescinding the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding. The Finding has enabled the agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under Section 202 of the Clean Air Act and, in recent years, and launch requirements such as the use of DEF systems in diesel-powered engines.

EPA Draws A Line In The Sand
On Tuesday, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin released a proposal to rescind the 2009 Finding.

If finalized, the proposal would remove all greenhouse gas standards for light-, medium- and heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engines, EPA said in a follow-up press release .

The move would start with EPA’s first greenhouse gas standard set in 2010 for light-duty vehicles and those set in 2011 for medium-duty vehicles and heavy-duty vehicles and engines.

EPA said the proposal is expected to “save Americans $54 billion in costs annually through the repeal of all greenhouse gas standards, including the Biden EPA’s electric vehicle mandate, under conservative economic forecasts.”

Zeldin made the announcement to rescind the Finding in Indiana, alongside Energy Secretary Chris Wright, and called it the largest deregulatory action in U.S. history.

What The Decision Could Mean To Farmers
Specific to U.S. farmers, the proposal could potentially result in DEF systems no longer being included on new tractors and other heavy equipment using diesel-powered engines, said Chip Flory, host of AgriTalk, during a Farmer Forum discussion on Wednesday.

South Dakota farmer Ryan Wagner told Flory he has a wait-and-see perspective on how or whether the EPA proposal goes into effect. He anticipates that reversing the Finding will take considerable time and effort for EPA to implement.

“It took a long time with the interim engines and things to get into full DEF in the first place,” Wagner said. “I don’t know how long it would take to unwind all that and how quickly manufacturing will just take those systems right off, but it’ll be interesting to see what happens.”

To Wagner’s point, here’s a brief look back at some timing showing when DEF rolled out in agriculture and nonroad equipment and became mandatory . The regulations were phased in over several years based on the type of equipment and engine size:

2008: DEF became required for all new diesel engines with engine sizes over 750 horsepower.

2011: the regulations expanded to include equipment with engine sizes between 175-750 horsepower.

By 2015, all new nonroad diesel engines were required to be Tier 4 compliant and utilize DEF, regardless of equipment type or engine size.

As Wagner considers DEF, he noted its use in diesel engines has provided him with one benefit: “On the plus side, I do like that they don’t make the walls of my shop black. That’s been nice,” he said. “You can run them inside for a short time and not not feel like you’re breathing in a bunch of soot and making everything black.”

Expect Legal Challenges To EPA Decision
A number of environmental groups have already blasted the move by EPA, saying it spells the end of the road for U.S. action against climate change, according to an online article by Reuters .

Legal challenges from various environmental groups, states and lawyers are likely ahead.

That fact wasn’t lost on Flory and the Farmer Forum participants during the AgriTalk discussion on Wednesday.

“If this proposal is finalized, it’s going to start a lot of conversations … and the dominoes are going to start to fall, something that we need to keep track of, no doubt,” Flory said. You can hear the complete Farmer Forum discussion on AgriTalk here:

EPA will initiate a public comment period to solicit input. Further information on the public comment process and instructions for participation will be published in the Federal Register and on the EPA website .

Your next read: Right To Repair Granted? John Deere Launches Digital Self-Repair Tool for $195 Per Tractor

USDA Releases Approximately $20 Million of Paused Inflation Reduction Act Funding That Had Been Under Review

Fri, 21 Feb 2025 02:36:01 GMT

USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins announced today that USDA will release the first tranche of funding that had been paused due to a review of Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) allocations.

Following White House directives, USDA is honoring existing contracts with farmers, releasing approximately $20 million for the Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), and the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP).

“American farmers and ranchers are the backbone of our nation,” said Rollins, citing regulatory burdens, environmental policies, and inflation as major challenges. She criticized the Biden administration’s handling of IRA funding but affirmed commitments to farmers who had already made investments.

.@SecRollins announced that @USDA will honor contracts that were already made directly to farmers and release the first tranche of funding that was paused due to the review of funding in the so-called Inflation Reduction Act.https://t.co/xQdmZFzkwp
— House Committee on Agriculture (@HouseAgGOP) February 21, 2025

This marks the initial phase of released funding, with further announcements expected as USDA continues its review to ensure taxpayer dollars support farmers and ranchers rather than unrelated initiatives.

Earlier this week, while speaking at the Top Producer Summit in Kansas City, Rollins told AgriTalk’s Chip Flory asked about the paused IRA funding earlier this week, specifically the status of EQIP.

“Any commitments that were made previously, we will, of course, fulfill those commitments,” Rollins told Flory. “That’s the only way to do it. Everything that is forward leaning, that’s what we’re really focusing on reevaluating in the current environment.”

You can hear the full interview between Rollins and Flory below.

Your Next Read:
30 Minutes With Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins In Her First Week On the Job

RFK Jr. and Zeldin Comment on How They Would Implement Trump Policy

Thu, 30 Jan 2025 22:46:07 GMT

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation hearing for Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) on Wednesday (Jan. 29) before the Senate Finance Committee lasted over three hours, revealing key points:

Vaccine stance: Kennedy attempted to soften his past anti-vaccine rhetoric, stating support for vaccines but struggling to explain previous controversial statements.
Health policy priorities: He emphasized addressing chronic diseases, promoting safe food, removing conflicts of interest in health agencies, and using “gold-standard science.” Kennedy said that federal dollars spent on SNAP and school lunch programs could be one place to start, “helping kids” avoid obesity and chronic illness by cutting out sugary drinks and “ultra-processed foods.” He would also fund federal research into the link between food additives and chronic illnesses, though he didn’t specify which ingredients sparked the most concern. “I don’t want to take food away from anybody,” Kennedy said.
Kennedy emphasized his support for American farmers, stating:
- “American farms are the bedrock of our culture, of our politics, [and] of our national security.”
- He was a “4-H kid” and spent summers working on ranches.
- He wants to work with farmers and food producers to remove burdensome regulations and unleash American ingenuity.
Agricultural practices and health. Kennedy expressed concerns about current agricultural practices:
- He criticized the use of certain chemicals in farming, stating they destroy soil microbiomes and cause erosion.
- He linked chemical-intensive agriculture to health problems, mentioning clusters of cancers, autoimmune diseases, and obesity in farming communities.
- He called for incentivizing transitions to regenerative agriculture and less chemically intensive practices.Kennedy told Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) that farmers are affected by cancers and autoimmune illnesses that he believes are caused by ingredients like food dyes. “We need to fix our food supply,” Kennedy said, noting that “seeds and chemicals” used by U.S. farmers are “destroying our soil” in the long term. When asked about Kennedy’s “seeds and chemicals” comment, Grassley told Politico: “I’ll have someone from Iowa State University talk to him.”
Collaboration with USDA. Kennedy emphasized his intention to work closely with the Department of Agriculture:
- He stated that MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) “simply cannot succeed without a partnership a full Partnership of American farmers.”
- He committed to working collaboratively with USDA and other federal agencies before implementing policies affecting food supplies.
- Kennedy mentioned that President Trump instructed him to work with Brooke Rollins at USDA to ensure policies support farmers. Rollins told reporters last week that she was supportive of Kennedy’s “Make America Healthy Again” movement. “But what is important and, if confirmed, what my role will be, will be to strike a balance between defending our farmers and our ranchers but also working with Bobby Kennedy, who I adore, to effectuate the president’s vision on all of the above,” Rollins said
Regulatory approach. Kennedy outlined his approach to agricultural regulations:
- He promised to work with farmers to remove burdensome regulations.
- Kennedy acknowledged the “very thin margins” farmers operate on and stated he doesn’t want any farmer to leave their farm for economic or regulatory reasons.
- He agreed that agricultural practice regulations should primarily be left to USDA and EPA.
- “I expect you to leave agricultural practice and regulation to the proper agencies,” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told Kennedy. That means, for the most part, leaving policies that impact farmers to USDA and EPA, Grassley clarified.
Future of agriculture. Kennedy shared his vision for the future of American agriculture:
- He called for fixing the food supply as a top priority. Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told Kennedy that he was happy the nominee addressed the “social media rumors” about agriculture.
- “You made it very very clear you’re not going to tell Americans what to eat, but you do want Americans to know what they’re eating,” Lankford said, calling that a “pretty fair perspective” on food policy.
- Kennedy advocated for supporting the transition to regenerative and sustainable farming practices.
- He mentioned plans to rewrite regulations to give smaller operators “a break.”
- Throughout the hearing, Kennedy attempted to position himself as an ally to farmers while also advocating for changes in agricultural practices to address health and environmental concerns.
Controversial past: Democrats challenged his history of health misinformation and grasp of Medicare and Medicaid.
Republican support: Some GOP senators backed Kennedy, with Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) calling him “awesome,” though the final vote remains uncertain.
Financial concerns: His financial ties to lawsuits against Merck raised conflict-of-interest questions.
Abortion stance: Kennedy sidestepped direct answers but aligned with Trump’s anti-abortion policies, shifting from his previous pro-choice stance.

Bottom line: With strong opposition and divided support, Kennedy’s confirmation vote is expected to be closely contested. Today he attends another confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. The Senate Finance Committee expects to hold its RFK Jr. vote next week.

Zeldin Confirmed as EPA Administrator

On Wednesday (Jan. 29), the Republican-led Senate confirmed former Congressman Lee Zeldin as the new administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in a 56-42 vote. A staunch Trump ally, Zeldin is expected to steer the agency in alignment with the former president’s environmental policies.

Vote breakdown: All 53 Republicans backed Zeldin, joined by three Democrats — Sens. Ruben Gallego (Ariz.), Mark Kelly (Ariz.), and John Fetterman (Pa.).
Policy direction: Zeldin is expected to roll back environmental regulations, emphasizing economic growth and private-sector collaboration.
Biofuel policy. Zeldin has raised concerns among ethanol and biofuel advocates due to his past opposition to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and ethanol. However, during his confirmation process, Zeldin made some commitments that suggest a potential shift in his stance. As a congressman, Zeldin had a history of opposing biofuels and the RFS. He signed letters expressing concern about proposed RFS volume increases, citing issues with the “E10 blend wall.” In 2017, Zeldin cosponsored an unsuccessful bill to repeal the RFS. He raised concerns about the validity and practicality of higher ethanol blends like E15 and E85. But during his confirmation process, Zeldin made several statements that indicate a potential change in his approach:
- He committed to giving producers and the industry certainty in the marketplace regarding Renewable Volume Obligations (RVOs).
- Zeldin acknowledged the importance of the RFS issue to President Trump and certain senators.
- He stated that no person or industry has any special influence over his decision-making, addressing concerns about his past connections to the oil industry.
Biofuel industry representatives have expressed cautious optimism:
- The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) looks forward to working with Zeldin on keeping the RFS on track and addressing other priorities like E15 availability.
- The Iowa Renewable Fuels Association (IRFA) encouraged Zeldin to pursue the role biofuels can play in U.S. energy dominance.
- The American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE) appreciated Zeldin’s commitments to follow the law regarding RVO rulemakings and supporting year-round E15 nationwide.

Of note: While Zeldin’s past positions raised initial concerns, his recent statements during the confirmation process suggest he may be open to working with the biofuels industry in his new role as EPA Administrator.

Climate stance: Critics warn his leadership could weaken climate initiatives, favoring fossil fuel interests.
Reactions: Republicans praise his “common-sense regulation” approach, while environmental groups call his confirmation a serious setback for public health and environmental justice.

Bottom line. As Zeldin assumes leadership, his tenure is likely to reshape the EPA’s role in U.S. environmental policy for years to come.

Cassidy Casts Doubt on RFK Jr.’s HHS Nomination

Senate HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy (R-La.) delivered a blunt message to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during Thursday’s hearing, signaling serious concerns about his nomination for Health and Human Services (HHS) secretary.

“I’ve been struggling with your nomination,” Cassidy stated in his closing remarks, a potential roadblock for Kennedy, given Cassidy’s influential position on the Senate Finance Committee. If Cassidy votes against Kennedy in the panel’s decision, the nomination may not advance.

The Louisiana senator expressed deep skepticism about Kennedy’s stance on vaccines, questioning whether he could be trusted to uphold sound public health policy. Cassidy specifically criticized Kennedy’s history of vaccine skepticism, warning that such views could erode trust in essential immunizations.

“A worthy movement, called MAHA, to improve the health of Americans?” Cassidy asked. “Or will it undermine it, always asking for more evidence and never accepting the evidence that is there?”

He also recounted a recent case of two children dying in a Baton Rouge ICU from vaccine-preventable diseases. “My concern is that if there’s any false note, any undermining of a mama’s trust in vaccines, another person will die from a vaccine-preventable disease,” Cassidy warned.

Beyond his own reservations, Cassidy’s remarks signal broader challenges for Kennedy’s nomination. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a childhood polio survivor, is unlikely to back a nominee with anti-vaccine ties. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also remain key votes to watch, with both urging Kennedy to support vaccinations.

Cassidy, up for re-election in 2026, has already drawn a Trump-aligned challenger, State Treasurer John Fleming. Though Cassidy emphasized his desire for Trump’s policies to succeed, he warned that anti-vaccine rhetoric could tarnish Trump’s legacy.

“I want President Trump’s policies to succeed,” Cassidy said. “But if there’s someone that is not vaccinated because of policies, of attitudes we bring to the department, and there’s another 18-year-old who dies of a vaccine-preventable disease… The greatest tragedy will be her death. I can also tell you an associated tragedy will be that it will cast a shadow over President Trump’s legacy, which I want to be the absolute best legacy.”

Bottom line: With Cassidy’s support in doubt and broader Senate skepticism, Kennedy’s path to confirmation remains steep.

90% of Ag Economists Say RFK Jr. Wouldn't Be Positive for U.S. Agriculture

Tue, 28 Jan 2025 12:46:44 GMT

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s confirmation hearings for the position of Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) are scheduled for this week.

President Trump’s pick to lead the HHS Department is scheduled to appear twice this week:

Senate Committee on Finance: Wednesday, Jan. 29, at 10 a.m. ET.
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP): Thursday, Jan. 30, at 10 a.m. ET.

Kennedy’s nomination has generated significant attention and controversy, primarily due to his past statements and positions on various health-related issues:

Vaccine concerns: Kennedy’s views on vaccines have been scrutinized by both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. He has been accused of promoting doubts about vaccine efficacy, particularly during a 2019 measles outbreak in Samoa.
Abortion stance: Some Republican lawmakers have expressed concerns about Kennedy’s pro-abortion views.
Agricultural impact: There are worries about Kennedy’s potential impact on the agriculture sector, including calling glyphosate “a poison.”

Ag Economists Weigh In

Farm Journal’s Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor survey asked in January if Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, positive for U.S. agriculture? 90% of the economists surveyed said no.

One economist said, “His disrespect for science is troubling.” Another economist weighed in by saying, “His positions on crop protection will be an interesting storyline to watch early in 2025.”

Another economist has concerns about the division it will create within agriculture, saying, “I fear there will be policy to limit/restrict crop protection tools currently available to producers and his advocacy will continue to foster division between organic/regenerative producers and more commercial producers.

However, not all economists think RFK Jr. would be bad for agriculture. In fact, one economist thinks it could actually restore confidence in agriculture.

“Improving health outcomes, even if over a longer time period, should improve the consumer opinion of agriculture and be a net gain overall,” said one economist in the anonymous survey.

U.S. Farmers Express Concern Over Potential Role in Trump Administration

Farmers across the United States are voicing alarm about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s potential influence on agriculture and food policy in a Trump administration. Key concerns include:

Policy Positions” Advocacy for banning widely used chemicals like glyphosate, shifting to organic and regenerative farming, and opposing genetically modified crops could disrupt large-scale farming practices.
Regulatory Changes: Potential regulatory overhauls, such as “weaponizing” agencies, may create uncertainty for genetic technologies and USDA guidelines.
Economic Impact: Farmers fear decreased productivity, increased costs, and potential rises in food prices due to a move away from conventional farming methods.
Contrast with Trump’s First Term: Kennedy’s vision contradicts Trump’s earlier deregulatory efforts, causing confusion among farmers who supported his pro-agribusiness policies.

“Make America Healthy Again”

Kennedy’s push to “Make America Healthy Again” could come with some benefits for certain segments of U.S. agriculture. That includes pushing for American food providers to start using more animal fats versus seed oils.

“People who enjoy a burger with fries on a night out aren’t to blame, and Americans should have every right to eat out at a restaurant without being unknowingly poisoned by heavily subsidized seed oils. It’s time to Make Frying Oil Tallow Again,” he said in an Instagram post in October.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by RFK Jr. (@robertfkennedyjr)

Looking Ahead: Possible Challenges in Confirmation

Kennedy’s confirmation process could face a number of challenges, including:

Kennedy can only afford to lose three Republican votes if the Democratic caucus remains united in opposition.
Some Republicans, including incoming HELP Committee chair Bill Cassidy (R-La.), have expressed concerns about Kennedy’s views.
Hawaii Governor Josh Green has traveled to Washington to lobby against Kennedy’s confirmation.

Upcoming Meeting with Senators

Kennedy has been meeting with senators from both parties to make his case. He met with dozens of Republican senators and plans to meet with key committee members last week. Meetings with Democratic senators, including Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and John Fetterman (D-Pa.) were also scheduled.

Economists Say Brooke Rollins Would Be Positive for Agriculture

Just last week, Brooke Rollins, President Trump’s nominee for Agriculture Secretary , powered through her confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Ag Committee . The Senate still needs to vote on her confirmation, but no timeline has been given on when that vote will happen yet.

During her testimony last week, she addressed several issues during her confirmation hearing on Jan. 23 in an attempt to position herself as a supporter of diverse agricultural interests and commit to protecting producers.

In her opening statement, Rollins outlined several key priorities for USDA if confirmed, as is expected:

Rapid deployment of disaster and economic assistance authorized by Congress.
Addressing current animal disease outbreaks.
Modernizing and realigning USDA.
Ensuring long-term prosperity for rural communities.

80% of economists in the January Ag Economists’ Monthly say if confirmed, Rollins is a positive pick for U.S. agriculture.

“Rollins knows ag and has Trump’s ear,” said one economist.

“Her close connection the President and reasons outlined in the letter sent by 427 ag organizations and businesses on January 15th,” said another economist.

20% of economists say Rollins wouldn’t be positive for U.S. agriculture.

One economist said, “USDA focused heavily on under-served producers during the Vilsack era and my sense is that producers wanted the Secretary to come from a production ag view; whereas Rollins come at it more from an overall domestic policy view. Also, feel the administration isn’t helping her out with the Deputy Secretary nomination. Producers don’t see themselves in the upcoming USDA leadership.”

Senate confirms historic Treasury Secretary; Transportation Vote on Deck.

The Senate confirmed Scott Bessent as Treasury Secretary in a 68-29 vote, with support from 16 Democrats and independents. Bessent becomes the highest-ranking openly LGBTQ official in U.S. history and is set to play a key role in upcoming tax and trade debates.

Meanwhile, Sean Duffy is poised for confirmation as Transportation Secretary in a vote at noon ET today, following a unanimous procedural vote (97-0) Monday.

Your Next Read:

Trump 2.0: From Early Executive Orders to Delaying Tariffs Against China, Here’s What to Expect as Trump Takes Office

Biggest Takeaways From President Trump's First Day in Office

Tue, 21 Jan 2025 16:27:08 GMT

President Trump may enact 25% tariffs on Mexico and Canada on Feb. 1, he said during remarks in the Oval Office. Trump had initially suggested implementing these tariffs on his first day in office. This delay may allow for some negotiation or preparation time.

The exchange happened while the president was signing a number of executive orders just hours after inauguration. While signing those orders, Trump fielded a host of reporter questions, answering or commenting on them specifically. He asked the reporters if they ever had a similar opportunity with former President Joe Biden. During one of the exchanges, that’s when Trump revealed he may enact 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico on Feb. 1.

Proposed 25% Tariffs on All Goods Imported from Canada and Mexico

The proposed 25% tariff would apply to all goods imported from Canada and Mexico, although there have been some conflicting reports about some product exemptions.

Trump has cited concerns about illegal immigration and drug trafficking, particularly fentanyl, as the primary reasons for these tariffs. He aims to pressure these countries to increase their efforts in addressing these issues.

Economic Impact

If implemented, these tariffs could have significant consequences for the North American economy:

Increased consumer prices in the U.S. for a wide range of goods, including produce, automobiles, and manufactured products.
Potential disruption of integrated supply chains across North America.
Estimated job losses of up to 1.5 million positions in Canada and significant GDP contractions for both Canada and the U.S.

Legal and Trade Agreement Implications

The proposed tariffs would likely violate provisions of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). This could lead to legal challenges and potentially undermine the agreement.

Responses from Canada and Mexico

Both countries have expressed concern about the tariff threats. Canada has indicated it would consider a “robust” response, potentially involving retaliation in sectors such as energy and critical minerals.

Global Trade Implications

These tariffs, combined with proposed tariffs on China and other countries, could significantly reshape global trade patterns and potentially trigger retaliatory measures from affected nations.

Trump Orders Comprehensive Trade Policy Overhaul

President Trump has ordered an expansive investigation into America’s trade policy, divided into three critical areas, with recommendations due by April 2025.

The investigations aim to address trade imbalances and unfair practices, focusing on trade deficits, currency manipulation, and counterfeiting. Key areas under review include:

The USMCA and other trade agreements.
Anti-dumping duties and discriminatory taxes.
The potential establishment of an External Revenue Service (ERS) to collect trade-related revenues.

Of note: While Trump has announced this intention, the actual implementation of these tariffs remains uncertain and may be subject to change or negotiation in the coming weeks.

Trumps Signs Several Executive Orders

President Donald Trump signed several executive orders on stage at a rally in Washington, D.C.'s Capital One Arena on Monday, immediately following inauguration. It marked a dramatic and public start to his administration.

Hours after being sworn in, Trump rescinded 78 executive actions from the Biden era, froze federal hiring (excluding the military), and initiated a regulatory freeze to halt bureaucratic rulemaking.

He also ordered federal agencies to address cost-of-living concerns, formally withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Accord, gave TikTok another 75 days before being banned; withdrew the United States from the World Health Organization, and ordered an end to birthright citizenship (if it makes it through court).

Paused Spending in Inflation Reduction Act

He also ordered federal agencies to “immediately pause” the spending of money from the Inflation Reduction Act , Biden’s signature climate law that provided billions of dollars in subsidies to clean energy and other climate initiatives.

In the directive, Trump included an executive order that mandates agencies to review grants, loans and other payments associated with the IRA.

Other Executive Orders and New Directives

Trump signed many executive orders an d announced new directives , including:

America First priorities
Detailed the America First Trade Policy
Unleashing American Energy
Temporary withdrawal of all areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing and review of the federal government’s leasing and permitting practices for wind projects .
Declaring a national emergency at the southern border of the United States, triggering the use of Pentagon resources and personnel that will be deployed and used to build the border wall.
Declaring a national energy emergency
Withdrew the U.S. from the World Health Organization
Re-evaluating and realigning U.S. foreign aid
Emergency price relief for American families and defeating the cost-of-living crisis
Reversed dozens of Biden-era orders, including a sweeping measure to regulate artificial intelligence.
“Department of Government Efficiency” aimed at spending cuts and regulatory reform
Putting people over fish : Stopping radical environmentalism to provide water to Southern California ( link ).
Tapped new leadership and acting heads who will guide regulatory and enforcement priorities

Trump Meets with Congressional Leaders

House and Senate Republican leadership will meet with President Donald Trump at the White House today. The list includes Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.), Senate GOP Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.).

This is an important gathering to discuss the new administration’s legislative agenda. This meeting is likely to focus on coordinating efforts to implement Trump’s policy agenda, including issues such as immigration reform, tax policy, energy initiatives, potential budget cuts and spending reductions. Also likely to be discussed: budget reconciliation strategy and the debt limit.

There’s a sense of urgency among Republicans to make progress quickly:

The first 18 months are seen as critical for implementing major changes
There’s pressure to show early victories to the American people
Trump needs to move fast because he can’t run for re-election

Potential challenges. The leaders may discuss obstacles to their agenda:

The slim Republican majority in the House
Potential divisions within the party on certain issues
The need for Democratic support on some legislation due to Senate rules

Upcoming deadlines. Important deadlines that may be addressed include:

A March 14 government funding deadline
The need to raise the debt ceiling by early summer

From Early Executive Orders to Delaying Tariffs Against China, Here's What to Expect as Trump Takes Office

Mon, 20 Jan 2025 14:49:42 GMT

This week is mostly about President Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 47th president, with a flurry of executive orders and illegal immigrant deportations expected soon.

President Donald Trump and Senator JD Vance were sworn into office inside the Capitol Rotunda, avoiding the dangerously cold temperatures forecast for Washington, D.C. The entire ceremony, including prayers and speeches, will take place indoors, according to Trump’s announcement on Truth Social.

This marks the first indoor inauguration due to weather since Ronald Reagan’s second term in 1985, and the second such event in history, following James Monroe’s indoor inauguration due to a snowstorm.

Mexico’s Slim and Cervantes to Attend Inauguration; Sheinbaum Left Out

Billionaire Carlos Slim, Mexico’s wealthiest man with a net worth nearing $100 billion, will attend Donald Trump’s inauguration as the 47th president of the United States in Washington, D.C. He will be joined by Francisco Cervantes, president of Mexico’s influential Business Coordinating Council (CCE), who confirmed plans to begin talks with high-ranking U.S. officials during the event.

Notably absent from the invitation list is Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. Mexico will be officially represented by Ambassador Esteban Moctezuma. The Trump administration’s policies, including a planned 25% tariff on Mexican exports and mass deportation operations, are expected to pose significant challenges to Mexico.

Slim expressed confidence that the Mexican economy would navigate these challenges effectively, emphasizing its complementary relationship with the U.S. economy. Meanwhile, Sheinbaum’s government has signaled readiness to implement reciprocal tariffs and address deportation logistics if needed.

World leaders, including Argentina’s Javier Milei and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele, are also set to make history by attending a U.S. presidential inauguration.

Early Executive Orders: A Preview

Stephen Miller, Trump’s top domestic policy adviser, briefed Republican lawmakers Sunday on an ambitious slate of executive orders planned for the early days of the administration. These orders, many of which Trump had campaigned on, will focus on government reform, energy policy, and immigration. While details remain fluid, key areas discussed:

Government reform: Streamlining federal hiring and dismissal processes, targeting DEI initiatives, and reforming rules for Schedule F employees.
Energy policy: Halting climate-related spending, accelerating energy infrastructure projects, expanding drilling — including in the Arctic — and repealing electric vehicle mandates. Also: declare a national emergency related to energy.
Immigration: Declaring cartels as terrorist organizations, reinstating strict border policies like “Remain in Mexico,” declare an emergency at the U.S./Mexico border, which will allow Trump to deploy military forces to the border, and ending “catch and release.”

Miller cautioned that these orders are still under development, with specific details yet to be finalized. Miller, a key architect of Trump’s immigration policies, is expected to play a significant role in shaping and implementing these executive orders. Miller’s involvement suggests a continuation of the hardline approach to immigration that characterized Trump’s first term.

Trump to Delay Tariffs on China, Signals Shift Toward Negotiation

President-elect Donald Trump is not expected to impose China-specific tariffs on his first day in office, signaling a strategic shift toward engagement with Beijing rather than reigniting a trade war.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the decision reflects Trump’s desire to begin his second term in a negotiating mode, with hopes of striking a new deal with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

During his first term, Trump brokered a “Phase 1” trade deal with China, but many of Beijing’s commitments to purchase U.S. goods were not fully realized. While plans are underway for a memorandum directing federal agencies to review trade policies with China, Canada, and Mexico, the approach appears more measured than the aggressive tariff rhetoric from Trump’s campaign.

However, sources caution that Trump’s strategy could shift, given his history of abrupt decisions. His swearing-in ceremony is scheduled for midday Monday in Washington.

Trump to Declare National Energy Emergency to Boost Domestic Production

President-elect Donald Trump will declare a national energy emergency after his inauguration on Monday to lower energy costs, an incoming White House official announced.

The emergency declaration is expected to “unlock a variety of different authorities” to enhance natural resource production, though specific measures were not disclosed.

The official emphasized the importance of energy independence in the context of the U.S./China AI race, highlighting the need for domestic energy to power advanced technology. Additionally, Trump plans to sign an executive order to accelerate energy production in Alaska, citing its geostrategic significance and potential for LNG exports to the Asia-Pacific region.

Focus on Deregulation

President-elect Donald Trump plans to start one of the most sweeping deregulatory drives in U.S. history. Border czar Tom Homan says the incoming administration is assessing plans to launch post-inauguration immigration raids in Chicago after plans leaked in news reports about plans for a large-scale immigration raid in Chicago Tuesday.

Trump has outlined a sweeping array of 31 major policy initiatives for his second term, according to the Washington Post. These include moves on immigration, such as mass deportations, reinstating a travel ban, and ending birthright citizenship. He also plans significant economic shifts, like imposing high tariffs on imports, cutting taxes, and promoting cryptocurrency. The list, according to the WaPo:

1. Immigration

Mass Deportations: Pledges to implement the largest deportation operation in U.S. history, including undocumented workers.
‘Remain in Mexico’ Program: Plans to reinstate policies requiring asylum seekers to wait in Mexico.
Travel Ban: Intends to reimpose restrictions on travelers from several majority-Muslim countries.
Birthright Citizenship: Proposes ending automatic citizenship for children of noncitizens.
Punish Sanctuary Cities: Plans to cut federal funding to cities refusing to cooperate with deportations.
Death Penalty for Migrants: Advocates for automatic death sentences for migrants who kill U.S. citizens.
Border Wall: Plans to complete construction of the U.S./Mexico border wall.

2. Economy

Tariffs: Proposes imposing tariffs on all imports and higher rates on goods from China, Mexico, and Canada.
Inflation: Vows to lower prices, including energy and gas costs.
Tax Cuts: Promises extensive tax reductions, potentially adding to the national debt.
Eliminate Taxes on Tips and Overtime: Suggests removing taxes on certain income sources.
Cryptocurrency: Aims to make the U.S. a global leader in cryptocurrency by adopting industry-friendly policies.

3. Education

Abolish Education Department: Proposes dismantling the department, redirecting its responsibilities elsewhere.
Punish Schools Over Content: Plans to cut federal funding for schools promoting “critical race theory” or “radical gender ideology.”
Transgender Policies: Seeks to ban trans athletes from women’s sports and revoke inclusive school policies.
School Vouchers: Advocates for taxpayer-funded school-choice programs.

4. Environment

Rollback of Regulations: Plans to remove policies addressing climate change and protecting species.
Oil and Gas Expansion: Proposes increasing domestic production and exports of fossil fuels.
Paris Climate Agreement: Intends to withdraw the U.S. from this global pact.

5. Healthcare

Lower Costs: Pledges to reduce healthcare and prescription drug expenses.
Preserve Social Security and Medicare: Promises to maintain these programs while cutting waste.
Abortion Laws: Plans to leave decisions on abortion to state legislatures.
Free IVF: Proposes covering in vitro fertilization costs.

6. Democracy and Governance

Retaliation Against Rivals: Suggests acting against political enemies and media outlets.
Reshape Federal Workforce: Plans mass job cuts, reduce union power, and make civil servants “at-will” employees.
Voting Requirements: Proposes stricter voter ID and citizenship proof, ending mail-in and early voting.
Pardon Jan. 6 Defendants: Pledges to pardon individuals charged in the Capitol riot.

7. Defense and Foreign Policy

Isolationism: Advocates for “America First” policies, including shutting out imports and withdrawing from international conflicts.
End Wars in Ukraine and Middle East: Claims he would end these conflicts quickly, potentially conceding to adversaries.
Military Diversity Policies: Plans to reverse diversity initiatives and restrict women in combat roles.
Strike Mexican Cartels: Proposes military action against cartels operating in Mexico.

These policies reflect significant shifts across numerous domains and have raised concerns about their feasibility and broader implications.

It’s also key to note Trump will meet with House and Senate GOP leadership at the White House on Tuesday.

Vance, Han Discuss Trade and Fentanyl Ahead of Inauguration

Vice President-elect JD Vance met with Chinese Vice President Han Zheng in Washington to discuss trade and the fentanyl crisis, a day before Donald Trump’s second presidential inauguration.

The meeting follows a call on Friday between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, which addressed similar topics, including TikTok. Han is expected to attend Monday’s inaugural ceremony, relocated indoors due to subfreezing temperatures in the capital. it will be the first time a high-ranking Chinese official attends a U.S. presidential inauguration. The Vance/Han meeting represents the most substantial individual engagement for Vance since securing his election victory alongside Trump last year.

Of note: Han also met billionaire Elon Musk and other U.S. business figures, underscoring Beijing’s efforts to set a positive tone in ties with the US before President-elect Donald Trump returns to office.

TikTok Returns After Brief U.S. Shutdown Amid Uncertainty

TikTok has reappeared in the United States following a temporary shutdown that began late Saturday night, Jan. 18. The app was blocked due to a federal law mandating that its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, divest its U.S. operations. Service began to be restored on Sunday, January 19, driven by two key developments: (1) President-elect Donald Trump’s intervention: Trump announced plans to issue an executive order on his inauguration day, Jan.20, to delay the ban’s implementation.

He emphasized the need for negotiations to protect national security and suggested the possibility of a joint venture granting the U.S. a 50% ownership stake in TikTok’s operations. (2) TikTok’s agreement with service providers: TikTok confirmed service restoration through agreements with its service providers.

The company thanked President-elect Trump for providing “necessary clarity and assurance.” While the app is back online, its future remains uncertain, contingent on the Trump administration’s actions and potential negotiations with ByteDance.

Biden Issues Pre-emptive Pardons on Final Day in Office

Outgoing President Joe Biden issued pardons to members and staff of the Jan. 6 select committee. including GOP Reps. Liz Cheney of Wyoming, Adam Kinzinger of Illinois; and Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), as well as police officers who testified before it.

The pardons also extended to Gen. Mark Milley, former chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

In a statement, Biden emphasized that the pardons “should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing.”

Your Next Read:

Treasury Nominee Bessent Defends Trump Policies in Testimony; Promises to Press China to Resume Ag Purchases in Phase 1 Agreement

Top Takeaways from Zeldin’s Confirmation Hearing for EPA Lead and the Impact On Ag

Fri, 17 Jan 2025 13:36:44 GMT

President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lee Zeldin, underwent hours of testimony Thursday, commenting on everything from year-round E15, the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) and the controversial WOTUS rule. When pressed about climate and environmental policies, Zeldin stated he believes climate change is real.

During the hearing, Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-Neb.) asked Zeldin to ensure access to year-round E15, but he did not make a definitive commitment, responding cautiously. Zeldin stated that while he couldn’t prejudge the outcomes of any processes, he acknowledged the importance of the issue to Sen. Ricketts and President Trump.

His exact words were: “Senator, while I can’t prejudge outcome of processes to follow across the board, I know how important this issue is to you and I know how important this is to President Trump.”

Despite this non-committal response, leaders of ethanol industry groups, including the American Coalition for Ethanol and Growth Energy, expressed appreciation for Zeldin’s commitment to doing his part to ensure nationwide availability of year-round E15.

Zeldin’s Stance on Ethanol
Zeldin’s stance on ethanol has been a point of interest, given his previous opposition to ethanol usage mandates during his time in Congress. Zeldin was asked about upholding legal deadlines for new Renewable Volume Obligations (RVO) standards, which are part of the RFS program.

Ricketts criticized the Biden administration for setting RVOs below industry production levels and not meeting the law’s deadlines. Zeldin expressed his commitment to implementing the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) as written by Congress.

He stated, “If confirmed, I commit to you that I will faithfully execute the law as written by Congress.” This statement was seen as an attempt to reassure senators from agricultural states who are concerned about the EPA’s implementation of biofuel policies.

Zeldin addressed his past opposition to ethanol usage mandates. He acknowledged that his views on the issue have evolved since his time in Congress.

Zeldin stated, “My position has evolved. I’m not in the same place I was years ago.”

He explained that his perspective has changed due to conversations he’s had with farmers, producers, and others in the industry. Zeldin emphasized that he now has a better understanding of the importance of ethanol to rural economies and energy security.

To further illustrate his evolving stance, Zeldin mentioned that he has visited ethanol plants and spoken with industry stakeholders.

He said, “I’ve learned a lot more about ethanol. I’ve visited plants. I’ve talked to a lot of people in the industry.”

WOTUS Rule Opposition
The EPA nominee has been vocal about his opposition to the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. He expressed strong criticism of the Biden administration’s decision to reinstate and expand the WOTUS rule. Zeldin argued that the WOTUS rule represents federal overreach and places an undue burden on farmers, landowners, and local governments.

He stated that the rule would negatively impact agriculture, construction, and other industries by expanding federal authority over water bodies and wetlands. The congressman emphasized that the expanded definition of WOTUS would lead to increased regulations and permitting requirements for activities on private property. He contended that this expansion of federal control would hinder economic growth and development in rural areas.

In his statement, Zeldin called for the repeal of the WOTUS rule, advocating for a more limited interpretation of federal jurisdiction over water bodies. He supported efforts to restrict the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority in implementing the rule, arguing that states should have more control over their water resources.

Zeldin’s position on WOTUS aligns with many Republican lawmakers who view the rule as an example of government overreach and excessive environmental regulation. His statements reflect a broader debate about the balance between environmental protection and economic development in water resource management.

Zeldin’s Criticism of EPA Staff
Zeldin made notable comments regarding EPA staff. He criticized EPA employees for what he described as their attempts to undermine the Trump administration’s policies.

Specifically, Zeldin accused some EPA staff members of leaking information to the media and actively working against the administration’s agenda. He expressed concern that these actions were hindering the implementation of policies and creating unnecessary obstacles for the agency’s leadership. The congressman’s remarks were part of a broader discussion on government accountability and the role of career civil servants in executing administration directives.

Zeldin emphasized the importance of loyalty to the current administration’s goals, regardless of personal political beliefs.

Climate Change and Climate Policies
As for his position on climate change, the hearing showed the political dynamics and implications surrounding the issue considering President-elect Donald Trump’s stance, particularly as seen through an exchange involving Zeldin with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.). Sanders emphasized the existential threat of climate change, framing it as a matter transcending politics. Whitehouse voiced concern about Zeldin’s ability to resist fossil fuel industry influence.

Zeldin stated, “I believe that climate change is real,” marking a departure from previous EPA leaders during the first Trump administration and from President-elect Trump, who has previously labeled climate change a “hoax.”

Regarding EPA’s role in regulating carbon dioxide emissions, Zeldin referenced a 2007 Supreme Court decision, noting that while the ruling grants the EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gases, it does not mandate such action. He emphasized that the agency is “authorized, not required” to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

When pressed on specific climate policies, such as reducing reliance on fossil fuels, Zeldin refrained from committing to particular actions. He expressed a desire to collaborate with scientists and policymakers, stating, “I don’t sit before you as a scientist.”

In response to inquiries about campaign donations from fossil fuel companies, Zeldin asserted that financial contributions would not influence his decisions, emphasizing his commitment to impartiality in his role as EPA Administrator.

Of note:
Throughout the hearing, Zeldin underscored the importance of protecting the environment without hindering economic development. He stated, “We can, and we must, protect our precious environment without suffocating the economy.”

Economists React to Zeldin’s Nomination

December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound )

In the December Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor and prior to this week’s hearing, Farm Journal asked economists about what Zeldin’s past stance on ag issues could mean if he’s approved as the next EPA adminstrator.

Based on Zeldin’s track record, 60% of economists said they don’t think Zeldin’s policies will be positive for agriculture. 40% said they do think his policies will be good for agriculture.

In the survey, economists said:

“I expect there to be fewer new regulations in the Trump Administration. This is positive for agriculture.”
“I imagine many of the tax credits for new demand (either low carbon fuels or carbon programs) will be on the table to be cut.”
“He generally is not a fan of the RFS. My guess is that he will impact the RFS only marginally.”
“A deregulatory agenda could be positive for many farmers, but Zeldin has a record that is not favorable toward biofuels. How he (and the President) will address biofuel issues is unclear--in the first Trump administration, there were many large disputes between pro-biofuel and pro-fossil fuel interests.”
“His track record is negative toward liquid biofuels, which is a big part of our domestic demand.”

Related News:

Trump Taps Lee Zeldin to Lead EPA; What Does It Signal for Agriculture?

Trump Taps Lee Zeldin to Lead EPA; What Does It Signal for Agriculture?

Tue, 12 Nov 2024 15:36:34 GMT

President-elect Donald Trump has selected former New York congressman Lee Zeldin to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in his upcoming administration. This appointment signals a potential shift in environmental policy and regulatory approach. Here are the key points about this nomination:

• Zeldin is a former Republican congressman who represented New York’s 1st congressional district from 2015 to 2023.
• He lacks extensive experience in environmental policy, having not served on committees with direct oversight of environmental issues during his time in Congress.
• Zeldin has a lifetime score of only 14% from the League of Conservation Voters, indicating a record of frequently voting against environmental legislation.

Trump stated that Zeldin would “ensure fair and swift deregulatory decisions” to “unleash the power of American businesses.” The administration aims to maintain “the highest environmental standards, including the cleanest air and water on the planet” while pursuing deregulation.

Zeldin is expected to focus on restoring “U.S. energy dominance” and revitalizing the auto industry.

He may be tasked with rolling back several Biden administration environmental regulations, particularly those targeting power plant pollution and vehicle emissions. There are plans to end the pause on constructing new natural gas export terminals and potentially withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.

Zeldin joined Trump and Sen.-elect Dave McCormick in Pennsylvania for a roundtable on agriculture during Trump’s campaign in September. Zeldin praised Trump for addressing the “threat” of foreign entities buying U.S. agricultural land and highlighted Trump’s trade policies, including the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which prioritized American farmers and strengthened supply chain resiliency.

Of note to the biofuels sector, In November 2015, Zeldin and several other members of Congress sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy expressing concerns about the proposed 2016 Renewable Volume Obligations (RVOs) under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. The lawmakers worried that the proposed 2016 RVOs would require blending more ethanol than could be absorbed by the E10 gasoline market, effectively “breaking through” the blend wall. There were concerns that exceeding the blend wall could drive up the price of E10 gasoline for consumers. Ultimately, the EPA did finalize 2016 RVOs that were lower than originally proposed in the RFS statute, but still represented an increase over previous years. The agency attempted to balance the competing interests and technical constraints in the fuel market.

Meanwhile, discussions are underway about possibly relocating the EPA headquarters outside of Washington, D.C.

Environmental advocates criticized the nomination, viewing it as a potential regression in environmental policy. Zeldin’s record includes opposition to several climate-related bills and support for increased fossil fuel production.

Zeldin’s appointment as EPA Administrator will require Senate confirmation.

How the Supreme Court's Big Decision to Overturn the Chevron Doctrine Could Impact Agriculture

Mon, 01 Jul 2024 17:11:47 GMT

On Friday, the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 ruling along ideological lines, overturned Chevron and handed authority back to Congress and the courts. Overturning the doctrine is a significant ruling that limits federal regulatory power.

The Chevron doctrine, established in 1984, had directed courts to defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous laws.

The decision was split along ideological lines, with the conservative majority voting to overturn Chevron. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, called the Chevron framework “unworkable” and said the court was ending “our 40-year misadventure with Chevron deference.”

The Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron doctrine is expected to have far-reaching implications for federal regulations across various sectors, including environmental protection, public health, workplace safety and consumer protections. It impacts the power of federal agencies, such as EPA, to issue regulations. The Chevron doctrine previously allowed agencies to interpret vague laws. This change provides opponents a clearer legal path to challenge regulations, potentially forcing agencies to be more cautious in drafting rules.

Environmental regulators, such as EPA, will face tougher judicial challenges. The decision is expected to slow down the regulatory process, requiring more time to craft, weigh comments and finalize rules. Many environmental rules stem from old laws with few modern amendments, adding to the uncertainty.

Mixed Reaction After Decision

Proponents of overturning Chevron argue it will reduce the power of unelected bureaucrats and increase accountability.

Critics warn the decision could lead to legal and administrative chaos, making it harder for agencies to respond to new challenges and implement regulations.

The ag and energy sectors are already asking how this ruling could impact energy and environmental regulations — both existing and new. Biofuel interests are wondering if this will impact the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. Given that EPA has more leeway to set RFS levels without the mandates in law, it could. But the RFS levels have been challenged before and the resolution takes a long time, so it really doesn’t affect the mandates, i.e., the 2023 standards included 250 million gallons to meet a court remand of the 2016 standards.

Possible Impact on Agriculture Regulations and Farm Bill

USDA and EPA will no longer have the broad authority to interpret ambiguous statutes. This change is expected to limit their ability to create and enforce regulations without explicit congressional authorization. For instance, regulations related to farm subsidies, crop insurance, and environmental practices, including the Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, will now face closer judicial scrutiny.

Farm subsidies and crop insurance: Agencies will need clear statutory authority to implement or modify programs related to farm subsidies and crop insurance ... could lead to fewer regulatory changes ... unless explicitly directed by Congress.

Environmental practices: Regulations under the Clean Water Act and other environmental laws will be more challenging to enforce if they rely on ambiguous statutory language. This could affect rules aimed at protecting wetlands and managing agricultural runoff.

Animal welfare standards: The ruling could impact regulations like those via the Packers & Stockyards Act, which aim to ensure fair competition and treatment in livestock markets.

Support from agricultural groups. They argue that it restores a balance of power by ensuring that unelected bureaucrats cannot impose regulations beyond what Congress has explicitly authorized.

Impact on the farm bill. The ruling puts pressure on Congress to draft more precise and detailed legislation. This is particularly relevant for the new farm bill, as lawmakers will need to ensure that the statutory language is clear to avoid judicial challenges and ensure effective implementation by federal agencies.

The decision is expected to increase accountability within the legislative and executive branches. Congress will need to be more explicit in its directives, and federal agencies will be limited to implementing laws as written, without broad interpretative leeway.

Potential for legal challenges. With the Chevron deference overturned, there may be an increase in legal challenges to existing and new regulations. Courts will now play a more significant role in interpreting agricultural laws, which could lead to a more stable regulatory environment but also more litigation as stakeholders seek judicial clarification on ambiguous statutes.

Opportunity to review prior cases? The conservative Republican Study Committee (RSC) said House committees “have an opportunity to review any regulatory action that was justified by Chevron deference toward agency interpretation.” The RSC views the overturning of Chevron as a way to “reclaim congressional authority” and roll back what they see as executive overreach. The committee’s memo encouraged its members to “scour Biden-era regulatory actions and highlight any that should be considered for judicial review post-Chevron.” This indicates a specific focus on reviewing and potentially challenging regulations implemented during the Biden administration.

Bottom line: This ruling represents a significant shift in administrative law and is likely to have broad impacts on how federal agencies interpret and implement laws passed by Congress. It may lead to more challenges of agency regulations in court and could potentially slow down or complicate the regulatory process across various sectors of government.

How Farmer Protests Across Europe Played a Role in the Recent EU Elections

Thu, 13 Jun 2024 20:59:23 GMT

Farmer protests across Europe are heating up again leading up to the elections in Europe, and the outcome of the European Parliament elections over the weekend sent a clear message. One agricultural economist says it’s not just frustrations from farmers that fueled the election results. It’s also EU voters who are worried about the cost of environmental reforms.

The issue has been brewing for the past year, with farmer protests showing the frustration.

“Things have been slowly coming to the boil over the last 12 months or so. But really, the origins of all this are traceable back to when the last European Commission came into place, which was in 2019,” says Trevor Donnellan, who is the head of economics at the Rural Economy Research Centre based in Ireland.

After the 2019 election, and the Green Party become more dominant, the push to fast-track climate policies and regulation was swift.

“European environmental policy around agriculture is significant. That’s the first thing people in the us need to understand, and it is becoming more significant,” he says. Regulation around things like greenhouse gas emissions is becoming an issue regulation around water quality, the usage of fertilizers, what we do with animal waste, these are all becoming more serious issues.”

Related Story: Why Farmers Are Protesting In Europe

In Donnellan’s own country of Ireland, agriculture is required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2030. He says for a country that has a large dairy and beef production footprint, that could require farmers to reduce their herd size to reach such a lofty goal.

In the Netherlands, environmental policy has already forced livestock producers to get rid of animals, even pushing some farmers out of business.

Those increased regulations are what propelled farmer protests over the past year. The scene drew international attention with farmers using tractors to block traffic on major highways across Europe, to even protesting outside the parliament, and it’s those protests that sent a loud message ahead of the elections.

“The protests, I think, have been significant in making politicians and the general public aware of the importance of taking into account the farmer perspective in setting all these regulations,” says Donnellan.

Related Story: Exploring the Root Causes of Global Farmer Protests Against Ag Policies

That message was apparently on the minds of voters this past weekend as the 27-nation bloc’s parliament membership shifted to the right. The surge by Nationalist and Populist parties will make it much harder for the assembly to approve legislation on issues ranging from climate change to agriculture policy.

“When we look at it in terms of what it might mean, for agriculture, the kind of political perspective in this new parliament has moved a little bit further to the right, which probably is a little bit more aligned with the interests of farmers. And farming is very important. In the context of the European Union, it’s one of the reasons why the European Union was created in the first place,” Donnellan explains.

He says that could mean less of an emphasis on green issues than what the EU has seen dominate policy the past 5 year.

“Looking at it from an agricultural point of view, it could mean that the pace of change in terms of pushing the environmental regulation could maybe slow down a little bit, or there might be a little bit of a rethink on some aspects of it. But it’s probably a parliament that might be a little bit more sympathetic to the concerns of farmers than the one that has just come to an end,” he adds.

Related Story: Will Europe’s Farmer Protests Make Their Way To The U.S.?

While it’s not clear exactly what will happen with EU climate policy in the years ahead, Donnellan says what’s happening in Europe is setting an example for the rest of the world.

“That might sound a little bit grand, but that’s kind of the thinking behind this politically in that Europe will demonstrate to the rest of the world what’s achievable in terms of having an more environmentally compliant economy, including in agriculture, and that the rest of the world should potentially follow suit from a policy perspective in the future,” he says.

Farmers Are Now Being Offered $1,000 Per Acre or More to Lease Their Land For Solar

Wed, 08 May 2024 19:57:37 GMT

The push to add solar energy is gaining traction across the U.S., and it’s coming with sticker shock on just how much solar companies are willing to pay farmers to lease their ground. A survey of farmers shows the majority of farmers are being offered more than $1,000 per acre by companies for solar leasing, and that could also drive up the price of cash rental rates.

The Biden administration has a goal of a net-zero electric grid by 2035, with solar and battery-powered energy as three vehicles to get there. As the administration works to accelerate their “clean energy” plan across the U.S., land is in high demand, especially for future solar projects.

Michael Langemeier, an agricultural economist with Purdue University, says the Ag Economy Barometer is revealing the sticker shock of solar leasing rates. The survey of 400 agricultural producers, is now asking farmers how many had actively engaged in discussions with any companies about leasing farmland you own for solar installation, and the response was surprising.

“It was 19% who said they have engaged in discussions, and so think about that, that’s a huge percentage of the survey respondents have actually engaged in someone about leases. That doesn’t mean they’ve signed a thing, but that means that they’ve actually been approached,” says Langemeier.

(Farm Journal)

The April survey showed a noticeable uptick in the percentage of farmers who reported having a discussion with a company about it in the last 6 months. In April, 19% of farmers said they’ve had discussions, up from 12% in March.

The bigger surprise may be in the high rates solar companies are offering farmers.

58% say the rates were over $1,000 per acre
30% say the rates they were offered ranged from $,1000 to $1,250 per acre
28% say rates were more than $1,200 per acre.

With expanding renewable energy installations such as wind and solar, The Top Producer Podcast host Paul Neiffer asked David Muth of Peoples Company Capital Markets , the Investment platform for Peoples Company, how those land uses change long term land values.

“This is for the entire U.S.,” he adds. “That’s a high rate even for the eastern Corn Belt where our cash rates are much higher, but think about what even a $750 rate would mean in the Great Plains where the cash rents are much, much lower. And so what you’re having here is these solar lease rates that are multiples of the current cash rent rates.”

(Farm Journal)

Langemeier says as farmers and land owners are offered high leasing rates for solar, he thinks the push for solar will then spill over to other cash rents.

“That’s going to put upward pressure on cash rents, and it’s probably going to put upward pressure on land values, given that it’s local,” he says. “And so it probably impacts a fairly local area, depending on whether your area has solar leasing or not, but it certainly has pretty wide ramifications on what’s going on in agriculture.”

How Do Wind, Solar, Renewable Energy Effect Land Values?

With a price tag of more than $1,000 per acre, t’s enticing for farmers who are staring at crop prices below their cost of production. The April Ag Economists Monthly Monitor survey released this week showed farmer sentiments are dropping. The survey, which is conducted by Purdue University and the CME group, fell 15 points from March to 99.

Purdue says it was the weakest farmer sentiment reading since June of 2022 and the lowest current condition rating since May of 2020 as both the current condition index and the future expectations index saw a drop.

“People became less optimistic about what was taking place on their farms today, and they’re also starting to show some evidence of being some concerns about where we’re headed here over the course of the next year,” says Jim Mintert, director of the Center for Commercial Agriculture at Purdue University.

Purdue economists say farmers are concerned about their current financial situation and expectations for weak financial performance in the year ahead were the driving forces behind the fall-off in farmer sentiment. The April Barometer survey was conducted from April 8 through April 12, 2024.