Farm Groups Aim to Influence MAHA, Preserve Crop Protections

Farm Groups Seek to Impact Trump’s Make America Healthy Again Initiative

As part of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiative of the Trump administration, farm groups are strategizing on ways to effect future policy recommendations expected in August.

The Food and Agriculture Climate Alliance (FACA), a coalition of 20 agricultural and conservation trade groups, released a report titled “MAHA Policy Recommendations”. This report focuses on soil health, conservation, forest management, and agricultural innovation. FACA hopes this report will serve as a guide to a healthier future, starting with soil health.

Survey by the National Corn Growers Association

A survey of over 1,000 farmers was also released by the National Corn Growers Association (NCGA). This survey revealed concerns among corn growers about potential cost increases and crop yield reductions if access to crucial herbicides like atrazine and glyphosate were lost. The MAHA Commission had previously questioned the safety of these herbicides.

NCGA stated that the next MAHA Commission report, which is anticipated to be released in August, holds significant implications, especially for President Trump’s base.

Requests of Farm Groups and Agribusinesses

In June, over 250 farm groups and agribusinesses appealed to the Trump administration for a place in the discussion as the MAHA Commission proceeds under the proposed agenda of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Recommendations of FACA’s Co-Chairs

Co-chairs of FACA from the American Farm Bureau Federation, Environmental Defense Fund, National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, and National Farmers Union underlined the necessity of these recommendations to reinforce policies, drive research, and ensure the continued access of farmers to technology.

Conservation Programs and Recommendations

The coalition proposed a series of 12 suggestions geared at modernizing and streamlining USDA conservation programs and emphasized the importance of “robust funding for financial and technical assistance” through these programs. This is to make the implementation and expansion of conservation practices more affordable and accessible, according to the group.

The coalition also highlighted the need for increased funding from the farm bill’s conservation title. This funding should be rolled into the baseline for programs like the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP), and the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP).

Technical Assistance and Approval of New Practices

FACA underscored the critical role of technical assistance to farmers, noting that about 25% of conservation funding is allocated to it. The group advocated for streamlining the approval of new practices for USDA conservation programs, citing that the current standards used by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) often hinder the adoption of new and potentially more effective practices and technologies.

The coalition gave an example, saying that “innovations in cover crop seed mixes, and planting and termination methods often require practice standard updates before they can be eligible for cost-share.”

Agricultural Innovation and Funding

FACA also called for the USDA to maintain its investment in quantifying environmental outcomes linked to conservation practices, particularly in soil health research. The coalition advocated for the adoption of precision-application technologies and suggested incentives to offset the costs and promote increased adoption among producers.

The coalition also voiced its support for the Agriculture Advanced Research and Development Authority (AGARDA), a pilot program established in the 2018 farm bill. However, over the past seven years, this project has received only minor funding from Congress.

In a statement, FACA noted, “AGARDA has the potential to deliver game-changing tools that enhance environmental sustainability, farm productivity, and long-term food security but it must be funded.”

Regulation and Biotech Products

FACA also called for a more robust, yet streamlined, regulatory process to evaluate both animal and plant biotech products. The group urged for a federal definition of biostimulants, recognizing that these are “emerging and promising tools that can conserve and replenish soil health and improve water quality.”

Finally, the coalition stressed the necessity for farmers to have continued access to a wide range of crop protection tools like insecticides, herbicides, and other inputs through a responsible regulatory process involving thorough, science-based risk assessments, including environmental and health reviews.

Findings of the NCGA Survey

In its survey, the NCGA stated that atrazine and glyphosate “have been thoroughly tested by the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory bodies and shown to be safe for their intended uses.”

President of NCGA, Illinois farmer Kenneth Hartman Jr. commented on the findings, saying, “These results are in line with what I am hearing in conversations among farmers…We are concerned that claims about herbicides in the pending MAHA recommendations could remove access to the tools we need to safely and sustainably produce a crop.”

An overwhelming 85% of respondents indicated that weeds are the top pest affecting their crops and that atrazine and glyphosate were their preferred herbicides. Glyphosate was ranked as the most important herbicide used by corn growers by a wide margin.

The NCGA has suggested that if the pesticides initially assessed were to be completely eliminated, crop yields could fall more than 70% due to pests, weeds, and diseases.

###

DTN