Beth Ford: A Storm Is Gathering in American Agriculture
'Ten million,' was his swift answer. The correct answer is 24,000 dairy farmers and 400,000 growers. And according to our internal estimates these figures will soon fall to just 21,000 and 300,000, respectively.
In total, we have only 28% of the farms we had 90 years ago.
This summer, I've been spending time out on farms across the country. And as they step toward the harvest season, I celebrate their joy and anticipation of seeing the rewards of their hard work. But this year, I also heard concern—a somber, but realistic caution about a gathering storm with no true safe harbor.
Grain farmers today are facing the most challenging economics since 2009. Food security is national security. Trade lanes are shifting. Interest rates are high. Commodity prices are eroding. Labor is insufficient and inaccessible, and there is no certainty of a new Farm Bill, or the safety net it traditionally provides. Some of these factors are not new, but the complexity of the combination of issues, and the speed with which they are accelerating, is. It's not just one thing. It's all the things. Farm bankruptcies have roughly doubled, compared to last year.
Not only do these factors affect farmers, but also their communities. A little over five years ago, I wrote that farmers are in crisis and America isn't paying attention. In doing so, I highlighted market turmoil and natural disasters, and the direct effect on those who put food on our tables and importantly, the communities in which they live and work.
Some things have remained stubbornly the same for the food system and the communities that support it. In 2024, net farm income, a key measure of profitability, declined by $8.2 billion—representing a 5.6% decrease, following a 19.4% drop in 2023. On top of that, the median farm income earned by farm households is estimated to be negative $328 in 2025. Think of that—a year of sweat and effort to lose $328. Most estimates indicate that less than 5% of farms will be profitable this year, for the third year in a row. In fact, nearly 90% of farm families need to rely on off farm income to keep their operations viable and to feed their own families.
Labor availability and immigration issues are exacerbating those challenges. In addition, evolving trade policy has removed some traditional markets at the exact moment Brazil's exports are strengthening and China is marching toward food self-sufficiency. Weather continues to be an issue as floods, windstorms, and fires dominate the headlines regularly.
Technology can help, but despite the bipartisan 2021 infrastructure bill, broadband is still not as accessible in rural communities as it needs to be. Twenty percent of rural residents don't have access to broadband. No technology means little access to healthcare and new job creation.
Also, automating farm operations has never been more expensive. Next year will mark the single most expensive crop planted in U.S. history. Commodity grain prices continue to be down, and crop input costs are up—and continue to increase. Farmers saved and invested four years ago when the commodity markets fueled some profit and there was some assistance for natural disaster relief. Now, those reserves have been exhausted for many.
As private equity firms have become financial buyers of farmland, consolidation trends are changing. In Iowa alone, 20 million of its 30 million acres of farmland are set to transition. When farms are owned by firms, not families, communities wither. Contract farming does not plant community roots.
And farmers are aging. There are more farmers 75-and-older than under the age of 35. As a farmer-owned cooperative, we see many of our members working hard to keep their farms in the family.
While the consumer may not yet see the full impact of the gathering storm clouds facing U.S. Agriculture, they need to pay attention.
I often say we must focus on policy, not politics. This is not political, it's practical. The issues are decades in the making. The American food system has historically been stable, safe, and affordable. The farmer has been shouldering the greatest risks in the food value chain and the burden is getting unbearably heavy with no end in sight.
What can we do? We need a robust trade agenda that opens market access for U.S. products. We need immigration reform that provides both border security and solves our labor challenges. And we need a new Farm Bill to provide certainty to America's farmers in this volatile time. These are the big drivers and of course, there are additional ways to assist.
Farmers are resilient, stoic, and pragmatic. By the way, 20% of the U.S. population lives in rural America and they comprise 44% of the military. Service is deeply ingrained in the farm community.
We must pay attention to the gathering storm before it's too late.
That's what I tell my kids around our dinner table.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
a minute ago
- New York Post
US keeping lofty EU car tariffs until levies on American goods lowered — as large economies lock in trade deal
The US will keep higher tariffs on European carmakers in place until the EU lowers tariffs on American goods — as two of the world's largest economies on Thursday finally locked in a framework trade deal hammered out last month. The two sides fired off a joint statement listing the commitments made after President Trump and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the deal on July 27 following months of negotiations. Washington will make moves to reduce the current 27.5% US tariffs on European cars and car parts once Brussels introduces the legislation needed to enact the promised tariff cuts on US goods, they said in a joint statement. Advertisement The current tariff that the US puts on European cars and car parts is 27.5%. AFP via Getty Images As a result, carmakers could see relief from the current tariffs within 'hopefully weeks,' a senior administration official told Reuters. 'As soon as they're able to introduce that legislation — and I don't mean pass it and fully implement it, but really introduce it — then we will be in a position to provide that relief. And I will say that both sides are very interested in moving quickly,' the official said. It wasn't immediately clear when Brussels would start the legislative process. Advertisement As part of the framework deal, the EU also pledged to eliminate tariffs on all US industrial goods and to provide preferential market access for a wide range of US seafood and agricultural goods. The US agreed to apply a 15% US tariff on most EU imports, including autos, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors and lumber. The joint statement was 'a play to hold each other accountable' and ensure that both sides carried out the pledges announced last month, the admin official said. Advertisement 'We are trying to sequence with the European Union to make sure that … they feel sufficient pressure to obtain the mandate they need to begin the legislative process for reducing their tariffs, as they've promised,' the official said. 'We're confident that they'll do that. It's just good for all parties to make sure that everyone's on the same page and taking actions around the same time.' With Post wires
Engadget
a minute ago
- Engadget
China reportedly discouraged purchase of NVIDIA AI chips due to 'insulting' Lutnick statements
Chinese regulators reportedly dissuaded local companies from purchasing NVIDIA's H20 chips, because they found certain statements by US commerce secretary Howard Lutnick "insulting." According to the Financial Times , the Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC), the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) and the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) teamed up to intensify their efforts to push the use of homegrown chips following Lutnick's remarks in an interview with CNBC . The US, if you'll recall, blocked NVIDIA from selling its H20 chips to China back in April out of concern that the Chinese military would use them to develop AI technology. When the US government reversed its decision in July and allowed the company to start shipping its chips to China, Lutnick told CNBC : "We don't sell them our best stuff, not our second best stuff, not even our third best. The fourth one down, we want to keep China using it... The idea is the Chinese are more than capable of building their own. You want to keep one step ahead of what they can build, so they keep buying our chips. You want to sell the Chinese enough that their developers get addicted to the American technology stack. That's the thinking." To note, a previous Times report stated that the government allowed NVIDIA to ship its products to China again after agreeing to hand over 15 percent of its profits. As a response to Lutnick's remarks, the Times says Chinese authorities sought ways to prevent local companies from buying H20 chips. CAC issued an informal notice instructing China's biggest tech firms, such as ByteDance and Alibaba, to stop new orders for H20 chips until the government is done conducting a national security review. The companies are compelled to comply, because they could face substantial fines from the CAC if they don't. Meanwhile, NDRC also issued an informal notice, asking local tech companies not to purchase any NVIDIA chip. Reuters recently reported that NVIDIA is developing a new chip for the Chinese market that's more powerful than the H20, perhaps driven in part by China's move to discourage its purchase. It will be based on the company's Blackwell architecture, but will only be capable of half the computing power of NVIDIA's Blackwell Ultra GPUs. Their regulatory and export approval aren't guaranteed, but the president previously implied that he was aware of the project and said he expects NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang to talk to him about it. If you buy something through a link in this article, we may earn commission.
The Hill
a minute ago
- The Hill
Hegseth is right to restore the Reconciliation Memorial
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has announced plans to return the Arlington Confederate Memorial, otherwise known as the Reconciliation Memorial, to the Confederate portion of Arlington National Cemetery. This drew a rebuke from retired Army General Ty Seidule, former vice-chair of the Naming Commission, the body Congress created to review Confederate iconography within the Defense Department. 'By ordering the monument back,' Seidule wrote in The Hill recently , 'Hegseth is subverting Congress and the will of the American people.' Those are bold words from the general, who describes himself as a student of 'Confederate commemoration.' Well, I am the great-grandson of a Confederate soldier. My great-grandfather's family included five Confederate cavalrymen and one infantryman. I'm an American person and I applaud Hegseth's action. Members of the Naming Commission have been misleading the American people, pretending they had a popular mandate to act that simply never existed. To hear them tell it — those few who are willing speak publicly, that is — Congress wholeheartedly endorses their work. But the commission's creation was not by public acclaim or popular legislation. Rather, it was an obscure proposal, buried deep within the fiscal 2021 National Defense Authorization Act — the behemoth bill authorizing all U.S. military operations. On Feb. 7, 2024, commission members held a seminar at Hamilton College in New York. One declared that Congress had given the commission's work overwhelming support. ' In voting to override ' President Trump's lame-duck veto of that bill, 'bipartisan supermajorities of 81 senators and 322 representatives declared it was time to try to end Confederate commemorations. Two years later, in 2022, with the midterm election in full swing, about the same number if not more welcomed the Naming Commission's report, endorsed its recommendations and greenlit the Defense Department to move out.' The commission's final report proclaims: 'In passing the 2021 William M. 'Mac' Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act, the United States Congress determined that Confederates and the Confederacy no longer warrant commemoration through Department of Defense assets.' But if Congress enthusiastically endorses the commission's recommendations, its judgements, and its sweeping opinion of its mandate, it sure has an odd way of showing it. In reality, the Naming Commission had already disbanded long before average people even realized what it was doing — that its recommendations went fa beyond just changing the names of a few Army bases. The email address for its press point-of-contact was dead by the beginning of January 2023, and the commission's website had already disappeared by April. The only commissioner who was a sitting member of Congress and the only representative of a former Confederate state — Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) — refused to answer questions about the commission's actions. His staff told me that the commission had asked members not to comment publicly on its work. Thousands of letters and emails, to hundreds of Congressional members and staffers, asking for explanations of the commission's actions (and Congress' oversight of it) have gone unanswered. In fact, it is almost impossible to find any member of Congress who wants to talk publicly about this matter. If this was Congress's specific intention in passing that much bigger defense package, then why isn't Capitol Hill trumpeting this rousing bipartisan success? Many Union veterans were unhappy when the Reconciliation Memorial was erected in 1914. But other Northerners and Southerners saw the memorial as a demonstration that two dramatically different parts of a growing nation, despite holding irreconcilable opinions on what the nation's Civil War experience meant, could reach an accommodation that both sides could live with. That would help the nation put the war's trauma behind it and build a newly united nation. To the allegation that the monument 'clearly commemorates the Confederacy and its purpose — chattel slavery,' I would quote back the prepared remarks at the dedication ceremony by Washington Garner, Commander in Chief of the Grand Army of the Republic — the leading organization for Union Civil War veterans. 'This memorial structure speaks the language of peace and good-will,' he said. 'It seems fitting that here in this place and on these grounds, once the home of Robert E. Lee, there should rest the remains of some of the gallant men who followed that great soldier even unto death. It is fitting here, in sight of the Nation's Capital, and in this vast burial plot consecrated to American valor that some of our fellow countrymen, the representatives of once-hostile armies whose unsurpassed bravery is now a common heritage and pride, should rest in undisturbed slumber.' One hundred years ago, veterans from opposing sides of our nation's most divisive and traumatic war found a way to compromise, reconcile and move forward. Two years ago, Congress' agents determined that it was not only necessary but 'the will of the American people' to undo all of that — to remove a statue from a remote part of a cemetery. Our enemies might interpret that as a sign that we are becoming an emotionally and culturally brittle people — as Osama Bin Laden once put it, 'a weak horse.' Weak horses invite attack by predators. A strong and confident nation, on the other hand, demonstrates that it can handle the complexities of its history and does not feel compelled to judge people from the past based on present-day sensibilities. Hegseth's decision to restore the Reconciliation Memorial to Arlington is a sign that the weak horses and 'woke lemmings' are no longer in charge in Washington.
