
Congress, stop neglecting the farm bill. Only luck has shielded us from disaster.
From foreign actors smuggling in crop diseases to outbreaks like the bird flu, America has come dangerously close to disaster. Our luck cannot continue.
There is nothing more American than agriculture. Yet, it's often an afterthought in national security ‒ and it shouldn't be.
FBI agents have recently arrested three Chinese scientists accused of smuggling biological materials into the United States. In the first case, the boyfriend of a University of Michigan researcher is accused of concealing baggies containing a potentially devastating plant fungus in a wad of tissues in his backpack; in the second, a Chinese scientist was arrested entering the United States on suspicion of mailing biological material related to roundworms to a laboratory at the same university.
Whether the roundworm material or the version of Fusarium graminearum in the baggies could cause billions of dollars in damage to our farmers and food supply remains unclear ‒ but the fact that these biological materials entered the country through the mail and Detroit's airport should serve as a wake-up call.
Risks keep growing in food and agriculture industry
From foreign actors smuggling in crop diseases to outbreaks like the latest avian flu, the United States has come dangerously close to disaster ‒ and we've avoided it not because we were prepared, but because we have been lucky.
America is among the most food-secure nations in the world, but it's time to treat food and agriculture as critical components of our national security. The cost of not doing so is simply far too high. Today, food and agriculture contribute $1.537 trillion to U.S. gross domestic product, and the sector employs more than 22 million people.
Farming is a defining feature of our identity. But while politicians pose in front of barns, tractors and fields for campaign ads, meaningful agricultural security policy sits on the back burner as the risks keep growing.
Opinion: Many American farmers agree with spending cuts. But those policies hurt farms most.
In 2020, more than 30,000 unsolicited packages of seeds were sent from China to random American households. While the government eventually determined that these shipments were not a deliberate act of biological warfare, the next time they may be.
Pathogens, pests and invasive weeds could have easily hidden in these packages, potentially yielding devastating damage to our crops, causing billions of dollars in economic damage.
You've heard of bird flu, but what about African Swine Fever?
Before avian flu caused egg prices to go up and cows to get sick, African Swine Fever was making a home right outside of our borders. This virus is now on the island of Hispaniola, comprising Haiti and the Dominican Republic, fewer than 700 miles from the United States.
With millions of U.S. tourists visiting the island each year and hundreds of thousands of Haitian migrants fleeing due to criminal activity and insecurity, we have been lucky the virus has not found its way to the United States on the sole of someone's shoe.
African Swine Fever spreading in the United States could create losses of up to $50 billion to the U.S. pork industry. There's also plenty of evidence of 'agroterrorism' out there. In China, for example, criminal gangs have been known to spread the virus between farms for economic gain.
Opinion: Amid bird flu, farmers culled millions of chickens ‒ but USDA fired workers helping to deal with outbreak
The U.S. government needs to pay as much attention to securing food and agriculture as to other national and economic security threats. The U.S. Department of Agriculture works diligently to protect and promote the nation's agriculture from natural and accidental threats, but it operates as a trade agency, not a national security agency.
Vital USDA programs for identifying agricultural threats are historically underfunded compared with their public health counterparts. The Farm Bill, which authorizes and prioritizes policies and programs for agriculture, has not been updated since 2018. This means that programs like the National Veterinary Stockpile, which protects the nation's food supply, will continue to operate on a shoestring budget that is less than 1% of its public health counterpart.
Congress needs to modernize and approve a Farm Bill designed to protect national and economic security. As a first step, the bill should establish a senior USDA position for national and homeland security. Appointed by the president, this official can be responsible for threats to agricultural security.
Further, Congress needs to appropriately fund programs that secure U.S. agriculture. The cost of inaction far outweighs any expenditure. Our government's response to the current avian flu has already cost $1.4 billion alone ‒ response always costs more than prevention.
The USDA works tirelessly to protect our food, health, national and economic security, but today it's fighting a wildfire with a watering can. We have managed to evade an economic catastrophe, but our luck cannot continue.
Congress must prioritize and invest in agricultural security by updating and passing a Farm Bill. It is in everyone's interest.
David Stiefel serves as a director for the Global Biological Policy and Programs team at the Nuclear Threat Initiative. Before joining NTI, Stiefel held several senior roles on the National Security Council at the White House and directed the government's biopreparedness review, resulting in the 2022 National Biodefense Strategy. He also led efforts to shape U.S. government plans to strengthen the security and resilience of U.S. food and agriculture.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


UPI
9 minutes ago
- UPI
Trump cancels U.S.-Canadian trade talks over tech taxes
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney meets with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office at the White House on May 6. Trump on Friday suspended trade talks due to Canada's new Digital Services Tax. File Photo by Francis Chung/UPI | License Photo June 28 (UPI) -- President Donald Trump cited potential Canadian taxes on U.S. tech companies as his reason for ending trade talks with Canada on Friday. The tech taxes on Amazon, Google, Meta and other U.S. tech firms are due on Monday, and Trump said it is a deal-breaker. "We have just been informed that Canada ... has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American technology companies," Trump said in a Truth Social post on Friday. He called the tax a "direct and blatant attack on our country" and accused Canada of "copying the European Union, which has done the same thing." "We are hereby terminating all discussions on trade with Canada, effective immediately," Trump said. His administration in the coming week will notify Canadian officials of the tariff that it will have to pay to do business in the United States, Trump added. Trump last week attended the G7 economic trade summit hosted by Canada and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and sought common ground on trade talks, The Washington Post reported. Officials at U.S. tech firms oppose the Canadian tax, the amount of which is based on the revenues generated by Canadians' use of e-commerce sites, social media and the sales of data. All tech companies that generate more than $14.59 million from such services would be subject to the new 3% Digital Services Tax. The tax is retroactive to 2022 and could cost U.S.-based tech firms up to $3 billion, NBC News reported. Upon learning of Trump halting trade talks, Canadian officials on Friday limited U.S. steel imports and placed a 50% surcharge on steel imports that surpass the quota. Canadian Finance Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne said the surcharge will help to protect Canadian steel against what he called "unjust U.S. tariffs." He said the Canadian government is prepared to take additional actions, if necessary.


The Hill
33 minutes ago
- The Hill
Does your business have a Plan B for the Trump tariffs?
I have a client in New Jersey who manufactures industrial films. A big source of their supply comes from two Chinese companies. You would think with President Trump's tariffs they would be suffering, right? Luckily, the owner of the company (and her partner) paid attention. Going all the way back to 2023 they knew — like we all knew — that the presidential election would be tight. By mid-2024 it got even tighter. And what was then-candidate Trump saying back then? He was promising significant tax cuts but providing no answers as to how they would be funded. He was promising to overturn many of the Biden administration's regulations, from environmental to DEI to overtime pay. He was promising to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. But more importantly to my client, Trump was planning on handing down big tariffs, especially targeted at China. And they took him seriously. They're not Trump supporters, but they are pragmatists. So back in 2023 they started searching for alternative suppliers. They reached out to nonprofits like the World Trade Center Association and Small Business Development Centers, and they got help from the International Trade Administration. They traveled to India, Malaysia and Brazil. They realized that if Trump was elected, their main source of supply would be seriously threatened. They also understood that the Biden administration was no big fan of China either. You can't run a business that's dependent on such a precarious source of supply that it could be seriously disrupted by a single politician. So they took action. Unfortunately, some business owners didn't. The media has been reporting about small businesses that are now suffering because of Trump's tariffs. A steel products manufacturer in Salt Lake City says his company could be 'devastated.' A flower shop owner in California that buys products from South America laments the significant increase in her costs. Two Iowa business owners, who buy 75-80 percent of their products from overseas, are looking at a 'nightmare' holiday season. According to a CNN report, a high-end electronics manufacturer has had to cut employee hours, and a guitar seller fears the 'mass extinction' of small businesses. I feel bad for these business owners, but life isn't fair. And history repeats itself. Businesses, regardless of their size, are always at the mercy of government interventions. Today is no different. Which is why my client and her partner, having read history, took Trump's tariff warnings seriously. They're smart. And like the many other smart business people I have met, they share one common characteristic: They're always looking ahead. They always have a Plan B. They diversify. Investors know that too much reliance on one party creates risk. There's a reason the SEC requires that companies disclose in their financial statements when a customer represents more than 10 percent of their business. The flower-seller, guitar maker and electronics manufacturer all relied too heavily on foreign supply for their businesses. Fair enough — this model has, until now, worked well for them. But it's a risky model when you rely too much on one source of supply for your livelihood — particularly when you have new leaders telling you that they're going to take actions that will put that source of supply in jeopardy. Of course that's easier said than done. But, like my New Jersey client, those small-business owners should also have been looking ahead and mitigating their potential risk. My client saw the writing on the wall two years ago and took steps to prepare. And they weren't the only ones. The chief strategy officer for a robotics company, for example, said he always 'plans ahead 9-12 months' and had a 'plan B' to produce necessary hardware outside of China, where it was operating before. 'Maybe this is also a good time to say, 'Let's not put all the eggs in one basket,'' he told CNN, 'and, you know, start looking on other kind of territories that will reduce the risk for us going forward.' According to an NPR report, a Maryland business owner — a former Marine (no surprise) — has been stockpiling products for months in advance of looming tariffs, admitting that his 'warehouse was bursting.' But then there are the countless other small-business owners who just like to keep their fingers crossed and hope against hope that nothing bad will happen. That's no way to run a business, especially when there are employees with families who are relying on your decisions. So do I feel bad for those business owners suffering under Trump's tariffs? I do. But this is the game you play when you run a business. You take risks, you reap rewards. And if you don't plan ahead and diversify, you suffer the consequences. Gene Marks is founder of The Marks Group, a small-business consulting firm.


The Hill
39 minutes ago
- The Hill
Updated Senate bill slashes wind and solar incentives – and adds a new tax
An updated draft of the Senate's megabill text slashes tax incentives for wind and solar energy – and adds a new tax on future wind and solar projects. The initial draft released by Senate Republicans earlier this month cut the credit for any wind and solar projects that did not 'begin construction' by certain dates, while the latest version bases incentives on when projects actually begin producing electricity — a much higher bar to clear. The first draft gave any project that began construction this year full credit, any project that began construction next year 60 percent credit and any project that began construction in 2027 20 percent of the credit, before they were phased out thereafter. The new legislation instead says that the credits will only apply to facilities that begin producing electricity before the end of 2027. In addition, it imposes a new tax on some wind and solar projects that are placed in service after 2027. The projects that will be taxed if a certain percentage of the value of their components come from China. The Democrats' 2022 Inflation Reduction Act included hundreds of billions of dollars in tax credits for low-carbon energy sources, including renewable energy. These subsidies were expected to massively reduce the U.S.' planet warming emissions. The GOP's cuts to the credits are expected to severely curtail those gains. If they pass, the cuts represent a win for the party's right flank, which has pushed for major cuts to the credits, and a loss for it's more moderate wing which has called for a slower phaseout. The renewables lobby slammed the changes as hampering the sector. 'In what can only be described as 'midnight dumping,' the Senate has proposed a punitive tax hike targeting the fastest-growing sectors of our energy industry. It is astounding that the Senate would intentionally raise prices on consumers rather than encouraging economic growth and addressing the affordability crisis facing American households,' Jason Grumet, CEO of the American Clean Power Association, said in a written statement. 'These new taxes will strand hundreds of billions of dollars in current investments, threaten energy security, and undermine growth in domestic manufacturing and land hardest on rural communities who would have been the greatest beneficiaries of clean energy investment,' he added.