After Two Years, Trump’s USDA Is Making Good on Promises (to Agribusiness)

February 26, 2019 | 4:20 pm
Lance Cheung
188bet金宝搏app

This week, Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue is set to appear before Congress for the first time in a year. When he testifies on the state of the rural economy at ahearingof the House agriculture committee, he’ll have a lot to answer for. Over the last year—Perdue’s second at the helm of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA)—he has been busy sidelining science and undermining the nation’s health on behalf of the Big Food and Big Ag industries.

Oh, and the state of the rural economy? That’s not looking so great under Perdue’s and the president’s watch either.

Let’s start with the economic news. Agriculture reporter Chris Claytonsummarized itthis way:

In a forecast released last week, USDA sees net cash income for agriculture remaining relatively flat over the next decade as expenses steadily rise and income for crops and livestock fails to keep pace. The Minneapolis Federal Reserve highlighted farmers’ economic stress in an update last week, suggesting more farm operations are at risk of “throwing in the towel.”

Yikes. Indeed,farm bankruptcies are on the rise(subscription). And while farm income has beenmostly declining since 2013,Trump administration’s shenanigans—a tax cut that wasvastly oversold, atrade war that grinds on, and a lengthy and pointless government shutdown at the very time farmersneeded the USDA’s services—certainlyaren’t helping. Repeated insistence of the administration’s devotion to farmers and their livelihoods rings hollow.

So yes, Secretary Perdue should have to answer tough questions about the farm economy. But there are other pressing issues—for farmers and eaters—that the House agriculture committee should ask him about as well. For example:

SCHOOL LUNCHES: Why is Perdue making them less healthy? Who does that serve?Earlier this week, Secretary Perdue gave a speech at the School Nutrition Association’s annual legislative conference. Hiscomments on school lunch “flexibility”were applauded there, but don’t be fooled—it’s not about helping kindly lunch ladies better serve our kids. This industry-backed association (as wedocumentedback in 2015) happilysupported Perdue’s recent rollbackof science-based rules on salt, whole grains, and sugar-sweetened milk in school meals. The milk rollback, in particular, is a cleargift to Big Dairy(a deep-pocketed industry that undercuts small dairy farmers and very muchwants to sell more milk). Meanwhile, two of Perdue’s predecessors recentlypenned an op-edhighlighting how watered-down nutrition standards contribute to a diet-related health crisis that威胁我们的国家安全and our future. (But no big deal, right?)

DIETARY GUIDELINES: Why is Perdue stacking the expert committee and short-changing the science-based process of developing nutrition advice?Last week, theUSDA announcedthe composition of a 20-member expert advisory committee that will consider the state of nutrition science and make recommendations to Perdue and the secretary of health and human services. It’s the science-based heart of theprocess of updatingthe federal Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which influences how millions of Americans eat and offers an opportunity to improve public health. But the new panel appears to be more heavily industry-influenced than usual, withmembersconnected to the meat, infant formula, and soda industries. Comments this week by Perdue indicate he is taking a“both sides” approachto nutrition science. Moreover,other recent commentssuggest that the process—which is already months behind schedule and not previously expected to be completed until well into 2020—might be rushed to generate final 2020 guidelines by the end of this year. Why?

https://twitter.com/hbottemiller/status/1100194749921792000

FOOD STAMPS: Why is Perdue circumventing Congress to take food off people’s plates?At this week’s hearing, Perdue will be face-to-face with the House agriculture committee, whichjust in December votedresoundinglyagainsta major shakeup of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). But on the very same day as that vote, Perdue announced that his USDA would propose a new rule that would undermine the program in a slightly different way, but witha similar result: some 750,000 unemployed or underemployed adults would lose SNAP benefits when the rule is fully implemented in fiscal year 2020. Why was this rule proposed immediately afterCongress approved a billthat intentionally removed similar provisions?

USDA RESEARCH: Why is Perdue sidelining and politicizing science in his own department?We’ve written about Perdue’s ill-conceived proposal, announced last August, toreorganize and relocatetwo of the USDA’s four research agencies, the Economic Research Service and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture. The move would undulypoliticize important USDA research, and is not backed by any publicly-available cost-benefit analysis. It has been opposed by more than1,100 scientists,former USDA officials,agencies’ scientific staff, andmembers of Congresswho hold the department’s pursestrings. Meanwhile, in another recent and related end-around, Perdue circumvented Congress by appointing Scott Hutchins—previouslynominated to be USDA chief scientistbut not yet been confirmed by the Senate as required by law—to the next-highest-ranking position,deputy under secretary of REE, a role that doesn’t require Senate confirmation. Why is any of this necessary, and who does it serve?

I’ll be watching tomorrow to see what Perdue is asked—and what he says—about these and other issues. Hopefully, tomorrow’s hearing is just the beginning of Congress taking up its constitutional duty to provide a check on the USDA andhold Secretary Perdue accountableto the public interest.