SENATE AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, & FORESTRY COMMITTEE HEARING
For questions on the note below, please contact the Delta Strategy Group team.
On April 8, the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry held a hearing to examine the following nominations for the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA):
- Stephen Vaden for Deputy Secretary of Agriculture
- Tyler Clarkson for General Counsel of the Department of Agriculture
Key Takeaways
The following is a summary of the main topics explored in the hearing, with further details in the Discussion section below.
- Bipartisan concerns underscored the serious economic pressures on U.S. agriculture, with Senators stressing the need to equip producers with the tools to navigate a complex global economy. Chairman Boozman (R-AR) highlighted that producers are operating at a loss and face significant economic uncertainty, emphasized that the industry need reassurance that USDA is advocating for them. Ranking Member Klobuchar (D-MN) noted that input costs, adverse weather, and market instability are compounding stress on producers, particularly small-scale farmers who are less able to absorb financial shocks.
- On tariff barriers and market access, Vaden discussed how trade barriers, particularly non-tariff barriers like false phytosanitary standards, pose serious obstacles to U.S. agricultural exports. He advocated for a more aggressive approach to opening new markets and combating foreign protectionism, noting that behind-the-scenes regulatory barriers are often more damaging to American producers than tariffs. Senator Moran (R-KS) underscored the importance of balancing trade enforcement with economic stability for farmers, advocating for a trade policy that results in greater long-term opportunities rather than prolonged uncertainty.
- Ranking Member Klobuchar and Vaden discussed how the U.S. needs to move away from defense and toward offense when it comes to agricultural trade measures and the Administration’s approach to tariffs, highlighting retaliatory tariffs from key trading partners as a major headwind for U.S. agricultural exports. Vaden emphasized the need to open new markets for U.S. agricultural products, citing a structural trade deficit in agriculture and the importance of reducing trade barriers. He highlighted the importance of ensuring that producers’ high productivity does not become detrimental by undercutting prices or financial stability.
- Vaden affirmed that USDA operates under Congressional authority, not independently, and committed to maintaining regular communication with Congress on any Department reorganizations or policy developments. Clarkson emphasized the Office of the General Counsel’s (OGC) responsibility to provide timely and responsive technical assistance during legislative drafting, especially for the Farm Bill. He noted that while the OGC does not make policy, it plays a vital role in providing certainty to producers and helps align USDA actions with the Administration’s deregulatory agenda, helping to promote technological innovation, alongside regulatory and legal clarity.
Opening Statements and Testimony
Chairman John Boozman (R-AR)
Producers are struggling to keep up, let alone make a profit in this current economic climate. They are losing money with every acre. While the President has imposed tariffs designed to address unfair practices and market manipulation by our trading partners to level the playing field, it remains to be seen how these will impact agriculture, causing much unease beyond the economic uncertainty of farmers and ranchers are experiencing our producers want to know that USDA is in their corner advocating for their needs. USDA quickly distributed the Economic Assistance Congress approved at the end of last year, and while implementation has gone relatively smoothly, we continue to be in contact with USDA to make sure implementation of the Emergency Commodity Assistance program is following congressional intent.
Ranking Member Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
As expected, key trading partners for U.S. agriculture exports have announced retaliatory tariffs following the tariff rollout last week. That is a huge headwind coming the way or already here for things like soybean future prices, in addition to the headwinds of input costs and weather among other things producers have had to deal with. For some smaller producers, this could be the thing that puts them over. It is easier for bigger operations to absorb things, but this has been very hard for them too. Our producers need certainty, supported by strong leadership at the USDA and protection of critical farm loan programs, ag research, and nutrition programs. There are many concerns about the policies being put in place by the Trump Administration, whether it is cutting funding to emergency food providers, tariff implementation, or chaos across the board. It is more important than ever that USDA stands up for the people that it looks out for.
Stephen Vaden, Nominee for Deputy Secretary of Agriculture
Low commodity prices are harmful to the futures of rural communities, and agriculture is dealing with a structural trade deficit. The only way out is to open new markets for American producers to sell their crops. We must take opportunities to remove trade barriers hindering market access for U.S. producers. Our producers are the most efficient for a reason; they are not afraid of technological progress that has allowed them to produce more food and fiber from a shrinking agricultural footprint. We must ensure their productivity is not turned into a weapon against them that harms their financial futures.
Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN)
There are real and significant challenges facing U.S. agriculture, highlighting the need to equip our producers with tools necessary to succeed in an increasingly complex global marketplace.
Tyler Clarkson, Nominee for General Counsel of the Department of Agriculture
Secretary Rollins has laid out an ambitious agenda to implement her vision for USDA. Too often many take this country’s healthy, affordable, and abundant food supply for granted, and this blessing faces many challenges. Dynamic consumer preferences, foreign market access, regulatory uncertainty, access to credit, and weather are just a few of the challenges facing our agriculture sector. Congress has equipped USDA with tools to stand alongside farmers and producers in the face of such turbulence. While the OGC does not set policy, it can play a substantial role in advising the Secretary and USDA’s mission areas on available legal authorities to respond to these adversities, helping contribute to a sense of regulatory certainty and playing an outsized role in rulemaking efforts. We must ensure we achieve the President’s policy goals while at the same time fortifying final rulemaking against inevitable challenges. OGC’s close involvement on major rulemaking creates the best possible conditions for the President’s deregulatory agenda that will free our farmers from unnecessary or anachronistic regulatory burdens. It will incentivize advances in agriculture technology, including precision agriculture and biotechnology, best positioning our farmers and producers to compete.
Discussion
Chairman Boozman (R-AR): How do you view OGC’s role in providing technical assistance as the Committee drafts legislation like the Farm Bill? Do you commit to providing timely technical assistance to all members of the Committee? Clarkson: I will provide prompt technical assistance to the Committee in all instances because it is an important responsibility, particularly in a Farm Bill year.
Chairman Boozman (R-AR): Do you anticipate any future reorganizations to maximize USDA’s efficiency, and if so, will you commit to working with and communicating with Congress as those actions are considered? Vaden: We need to be communicating with Congress on a regular basis, whether it is about reorganizations, policy matters, or anything else, because we carry out the will of Congress. USDA has no independent authority separate from Congress. It is not established by the Constitution; it is a creature of statute. You have my word that we will be in constant communication about initiatives.
Chairman Boozman (R-AR): How do you foresee the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright impacting USDA, including the provision of technical assistance in drafting the next Farm Bill? Clarkson: I think Loper Bright puts additional stress on the language; agencies will have less deference from the judiciary with respect to agency expertise. This means that when we proceed with rulemaking, we must be all the more precise in closely adhering to the statutory text. With respect to technical assistance, it becomes even more important that we provide comprehensive and responsive support to equip Congress to write clear, intelligible statutes. These statutes should give us proper guidance and direct us in a way that is sustainable in court.
Ranking Member Klobuchar (D-MN): Are current tariffs, in the context of the “trade, not aid” approach, harming farmers? Do you have any ideas for how we can approach this? Vaden: In a more general sense, our farmers face a number of trade barriers. Historically, when we talk about trade policy, people have often focused on manufacturing. However, if we are going to fight for America’s economy, there are some battles that need to be fought on behalf of our producers as well. While tariffs are often the headline, what blocks so many American agricultural products from entering other countries are phony phytosanitary concerns or other welfare issues regarding American products. Our farmers produce the finest goods available in the world, and we produce them in quantities that no one else can match. This is protectionism by another name. We need to be on the offensive when it comes to American agriculture because we will be judged on how many new markets we have opened for our producers where they could not previously sell.
Ranking Member Klobuchar (D-MN): Will you commit to ensuring that USDA provides a complete and accurate list of programs and activities affected by the funding freeze and updates the Committee at least every other week? Since the word’s ethanol, biofuel, and aviation fuel were included on the list of programs affected by the funding freeze, do you believe that research on biofuel, ethanol, and aviation fuel is woke ideology? Vaden: We need to be in communication with both sides of the aisle as agriculture is historically bipartisan and I want that to continue. I do not believe it is, and USDA supports biofuels and sustainable or synthetic aviation fuel and will work with the Committee; Clarkson: I will absolutely follow the law.
Senator McConnell (R-KY): Where do the recent tariffs leave agriculture? Vaden: USDA has a statutory responsibility, with Congress charging the Secretary and Department with informing the Administration about the effect of items under consideration on the economy of rural America. I will be a voice within the Administration, letting them know where there are opportunities that they can do more to take advantage of opportunity areas.
Senator Van Hoeven (R-SD): Do you agree we must be prepared for unexpected challenges, such as those addressed by the Market Facilitation Program, and that the CCC must remain a ready and reliable tool to support our farmers? Vaden: I served on the CCC Board during the President’s first term and know there are many other agencies that would love to have a version of the CCC. Many of the FSA programs are funded under the auspices of the CCC, and it is these funds that help ensure farmers can remain on the farm and even pass it on to the next generation. I am quite well aware of how important this funding mechanism is, as well as the importance of being prepared for challenges; Clarkson: The CCC is an excellent tool for the Secretary, and with that power comes the responsibility to work collaboratively and openly with Congress on substantial matters where the CCC may take action.
Senator Van Hoeven (R-SD): Do you agree that key priorities for the Farm Bill should include enhancing crop insurance to make it more affordable, both at the enterprise level and through the Supplemental Coverage Option, and updating reference prices in the countercyclical safety net? Vaden: The farm safety net needs to reflect the actual cost of production. Currently, it does not come anywhere close to that and needs to be updated; Clarkson: I agree and look forward to leveraging the resources of OGC to ensure that you have all the technical assistance needed.
Senator Luján (D-NM): Do you believe that USDA should honor agreements it has signed, such as the $15 million grant announced last year for water conservation, and award those funds immediately? Vaden: I am not familiar with the particular provisions of the grants cited, but USDA should follow the law.
Senator Tuberville (R-AL): Do you commit to ensuring that USDA and USTR work together to advance the President’s agenda to reduce trade barriers and prioritize market access for American farmers? Vaden: Absolutely. Oftentimes, the barriers that are actually keeping us out of the market are not formal tariffs or taxes, but regulatory barriers that keep our products out. The products grown by American farmers are produced with the best technology and the best scientific advancements. There should be no concerns from international purchasers that if they are buying American products, they are receiving anything less than the best.
Senator Welch (D-VT): During your previous tenure in the General Counsel’s office, did you privatize or streamline how farm loans were handled? Can you explain what changes you made and how you viewed those changes as beneficial? Vaden: OGC only takes over when the agency, usually the FSA in this case, has determined that the efforts either have not been successful or would not be successful. OGC does not make the initial determination to resolve the defaulted loan; the loan is referred to the OGC after the agency has determined that the steps suggested either have not worked, will not work, or if there is a decision made by the Agency that further efforts would be futile.
Senator Marshall (R-KS): How can you help defend the crop protection and precision agriculture tools that farmers and ranchers rely on? Are you committed to ensuring that regulatory guardrails remain flexible enough to give farmers access to these tools while still maintaining a focus on conservation? Vaden: Those things link conservation with the scientific advancements and chemicals that make that possible. The toolkit for a farmer includes the amazing chemicals provided to clear the land so that planting can occur. If you take those chemicals away, you are removing a tool from the farmer’s toolkit and requiring him to revert to antiquated practices. This is bad for soil health and threatens work done by the Natural Resources Conservation Service to instill best practices on farms. The EPA is quite prescriptive, and they are prescriptive for a reason.
Senator Marshall (R-KS): Do you believe the previous Administration’s use of the CCC for Green New Deal-type initiatives was legal? How can we ensure the CCC is used strictly for its intended purpose of supporting farmers rather than advancing special interests? Clarkson: I do think that the prior Administration’s use of the CCC required quite a bit of legal creativity that strained the statutory text and practice in a manner that I do not anticipate mirroring.
Senator Marshall (R-KS): What actions will you take to decrease the international trade deficit, and how will you promote and strengthen domestic demand for agricultural products? Vaden: Product promotion, which involves a salesmanship activity. The Secretary has committed to visiting six countries this year to promote more agricultural exports. No one else is going to sell our products; we have to sell them. We have to keep track of foreign trade barriers, whether they are tariff-related or non-tariff-related. We need to remind the Administration’s trade team that, as they work on new trade deals and stand up for other American industries, they also need to stand up for American agriculture and oppose efforts to keep our farmers’ products out of international markets.
Senator Warnock (D-GA): Is market uncertainty brought about by tariffs helpful or hurtful for our farmers? What will you do to make sure farmers are not harmed by the trade war? Vaden: Market uncertainty is not helpful for anyone, but the question is how long it goes on. the market’s adjusting to the current situation. For any market participant, they want to know the price that they are going to get at the time they wish to sell. That is what makes agriculture so unique; when the farmer plants his crop in the field, they do not know what price they are going to get, making a bet on the future. As the Secretary has publicly stated, she is going to monitor the situation and is aware of the programs referenced, which were run through the CCC during the President’s first term. If there is a need to step in, she is committed to doing so. For now, we wait and see what happens.
Senator Fischer (R-NE): What is USDA’s role in the agricultural research ecosystem, and how we can improve the Agricultural Research Service (ARS)? Vaden: Our research, economic, and education mission area is vital to the future of agriculture. It is essential that this research be laser-focused on the needs of those engaged in production agriculture. That is the key constituency we serve, and that should be the focus of research. This applies not only to ARS but also to the Economic Research Service and all other agency components within the research mission area.
Senator Schiff (D-CA): If a tariff relief fund is reestablished, how can we ensure equitable distribution of resources so that specialty crop farmers can benefit? What do you think accounted for the low participation by specialty crop farmers in the previous fund, and were there structural barriers in the program that limited their access? Vaden: USDA must keep in mind that we are in favor of all parties, regardless of the type of crop they are growing, whether it is a traditional row crop or a specialty crop. We should support all of them because we want all of them to succeed. Regarding your question about prior programs, anything I say would be speculative. However, one thing comes to mind in particular: there are many traditional agricultural programs available to row crop farmers. They are very knowledgeable and accustomed to interacting with USDA and the FSA county offices. In contrast, there are fewer such programs available for specialty crop farmers, who may not be as familiar with how to sign up or how the FSA process works, indicating a need for education, especially when opportunities for funding arise.