Federal agriculture grant loss is a major blow to Idaho's farmers
It was a stunning loss for Idaho's agricultural community: On April 16 the U.S. Department of Agriculture withdrew a $59 million grant from the University of Idaho's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences.
The Partnerships for Climate-Smart Communities grant was designed to help state agriculture producers develop more sustainable business practices as part of the Farmers First initiative. Before the termination, 201 Idaho producers representing 34 counties had already signed up for the program.
Federal government terminates University of Idaho climate grant for farmers
A University of Idaho press release said many of the producers had completed all the paperwork and were enrolled, others were in the final stages of enrollment.
In Idaho, agribusiness is 20 percent of the state's industrial backbone. Agribusiness includes crops, seed, dairy, livestock, wine and beer cultivation and sales. This makes agriculture the state's number one industry, followed by lumber, chemicals and paper, mining and tourism.
Overall, Idaho is the seventh largest agribusiness state in the country, led by livestock and dairy sales at more than 50 percent of all agribusiness sales. Any assistance to this large industry can only help the state grow.
Historically, this was the largest grant to UI in school history. When the new administration drew up new guidelines, the USDA withdrew the grant because Idaho's plan fell short of the requirements.
How short? The new guidelines would require the program, titled the UI Innovative Agriculture and Marketing Program, to allocate at least 65 percent of the money to go to producers. Under the withdrawn grant, UI allocated more than 50 percent of the funds to go directly to state producers. The remaining nearly 50 percent was allocated for grant management and providing technical and marketing services to the enrolled producers.
UI can reapply, but there is no guarantee one will be awarded or that the school will receive same amount of money as the original grant. The deadline for the new Advanced Markets for Producers initiative is June 20.
Innovative Agriculture and Marketing Program co-director Sanford Eigenbrode said while disappointed, the UI is in a good position to re-apply for the grant by reconfiguring the numbers to meet the new guidelines.
Why was the Partnerships for Climate-Smart Communities grant eliminated? According to the federal government, it was because it was a Biden-era program. Under the current administration, just about anything that came from the previous administration is being labeled 'bad' and being removed.
The grants were designed to help any state's agribusinesses better compete in the world marketplace. Under the Innovative Agriculture and Marketing Program, information gathered by UI faculty, staff and students provided technical support and guidance to Idaho producers, helping them make better informed decisions about their financial bottom line. Overall, the program was designed to help reduce risks to agribusinesses and help them engage in new practices.
Granted, many people say the administrative costs of such programs can be high when run through a university. Often, depending on the university and the grant, administrative costs can run as high as 50 percent or more. To better help Idaho's agribusiness community, UI and other state universities need to adjust their administrative costs so more money can flow to the intended targets, in this case, the farmers and ranchers.
But even more needs to be done. As indicated, there is no guarantee that the grant will be re-issued to Idaho. This should now be priority work for the state's congressional delegation. In Washington, D.C., Idaho's U.S. senators and House members need to engage with their staff members and the USDA to regain at least part of, if not all, the grant money. Failing to do so would mean the congressional delegation will be unsuccessfully representing their primary constituents: Idaho's very large rural and agribusiness communities.
Anyone who has lived here knows Idaho is much more than potatoes. The state's agribusinesses are vital to the state's economic well-being.
To help improve especially small agribusinesses, it is time for schools to adjust their overhead expenses and for those elected officials to truly help their constituents by fighting for a reinstatement of the Farmers First philosophy grant.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
6 hours ago
- Miami Herald
It's the Worst Time To Be an American Farmer in Decades
America's farmers are locked in a generational crisis, fending off an array of threats that could jeopardize food supplies and spell financial disaster for those often hailed as the "backbone of the nation." "They love their way of life, and they love that dirt," President Donald Trump said this week, in a somewhat off-piste response to a question on the importance of farmers. "They don't know how to do anything else, but they don't want to do anything else." But the current storm of rising debt, declining commodity prices and labor shortfalls has begun to echo the great Farm Crisis of the 1980s and may be testing the love farmers hold for their profession. Farm sector debt is expected to reach a record $561.8 billion in 2025, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, up 3.7 percent from 2024. The Kansas City Federal Reserve has attributed this primarily to increased lending for small- and mid-sized farms. This growing financial pressure has also pushed up bankruptcies. Researchers at the University of Arkansas recently found that Chapter 12 filings-specifically for farmers and family fishermen-reached 88 in the first quarter of the year, nearly doubling the previous year's figure. "Bankruptcies are on the rise and you will see many more on the auction block in the coming months especially this fall," said John Boyd, a crop and livestock farmer and founder of the National Black Farmers Association. Boyd has been farming since the early 1980s, currently growing soybeans, corn and wheat across 1,500 acres in Virginia while raising 150 head of beef cattle. He told Newsweek that 2025 marked the first time in his career that he was unable to receive an operating loan, which provides farmers working capital needed to cover daily expenses, and blamed this on the trade policies of the current administration. "I was turned down by banks for the simple fact of low commodity prices due to the president's tariffs," he said. The higher costs for foreign importers have dampened foreign demand, leading to further reductions in the price of America's agricultural exports. Corn futures, as an example, have fallen about 15 percent since the start of the year, according to TradingEconomics. "Mexico buys U.S. corn, China buys soybeans," Boyd said. "We cannot survive on low crop prices with input costs at an all-time high.I have not seen such political chaos like this, and I have been farming since 1983." A May survey by Purdue University found that a strong majority (70 percent) of U.S. farmers believe Trump's tariffs will strengthen U.S. agriculture-some telling Investigate Midwest that they will help the U.S. pressure China to boost its imports. But according to Caleb Ragland, president of American Soybean Association, the "tit-for-tat trade war"-which has still not given way to a full-fledged deal despite several weeks of negotiations-could see American soybean farmers lose out on this critical market. "Make no mistake, American soybean farmers do stand at the edge of a cliff and will suffer if tariffs are not replaced with trade agreements that reduce tariffs before our harvest this fall," Ragland said in his May testimony before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee. "American farm and ranch families need a workforce that is ready, willing and available," said Michael Marsh, president and CEO of the National Council of Agricultural Employers (NCAE). "The shortage of these workers is perhaps the most significant challenge facing U.S. agriculture." "This year, the labor shortfall in U.S. agriculture will exceed 400,000 jobs," he added. "Technology will not fill that need." The California Farm Bureau listed "access to a stable workforce" among the key challenges facing America's farmers, and pointed Newsweek to its recent statement warning that "current immigration enforcement activity has caused disruptions to farming operations." Farms have been one the key targets of the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration, raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) resulting in worker shortages and even rotting crops as the country heads into harvest season. "The president's immigration policies have hurt America's farmers," Boyd said. "Who's going to do the hard work that is required in 100-degree heat and enduring work conditions?" "A significant portion of our domestic workforce is here in unauthorized status," Marsh said. "Congress has failed since 1986 to pass meaningful agricultural labor reform. As a result of that and stepped-up efforts to remove unauthorized persons from the U.S., people on our farms and ranches are frightened." However, beyond the current enforcement actions, Marsh said the issue has been exacerbated by labor regulations, which "expanded significantly during the last administration." "For instance, in just 18 months the Biden administration issued 3,000 new pages of regulations for users of the temporary H-2A visa program," he said, referencing changes made by the Department of Labor in 2024. That, he said, has been "jeopardizing the ability of farm and ranch families to sustain the enterprise but also jeopardizing the safety and security of our people." For the consumer, the struggles of American farmers in 2025 are beyond simply a rural community crisis and carry direct repercussions at the checkout line and dinner table. "When our farmers face persistent challenges, the broader consequences can include higher food prices, fewer choices at the grocery store and reduced access to the variety and quality of food Americans have come to expect," California Farm Bureau President Shannon Douglass told Newsweek. "In the long run, it could also weaken our domestic food supply and make the U.S. more reliant on imports." For farmers, the impacts could be even more dire. "We as Black farmers are facing extinction!" said Boyd, adding that this group has "never really benefited" from the billions in subsidies paid annually by the government. The sweeping tax and spending package signed into law by Trump on July 4 frees up significant funds to support America's farmers. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" will continue commodities programs and boosts subsidies for farmers by an estimated $66.4 billion over 10 years. While a lifeline for many, analysis has shown that these benefits will be unevenly distributed, depending on the type of crops are grown, with larger farms and those in the South expected to reap the greatest benefits. "It fails to offer any meaningful support for independent farmers-who face increasing challenges from low prices, trade wars and the climate crisis-and the communities they feed," was the response of the National Family Farm Coalition, a nonprofit that advocates for small- and medium-scale family farmers and fishing communities. And to others, while subsidy programs are a step in the right direction, they fall short of addressing the structural issues plaguing U.S. agriculture. "There are provisions included in the Big Beautiful Bill that benefit farmers and ranchers," the California Farm Bureau said. "However, a comprehensive farm bill is still needed." Newsweek has reached out to the Department of Agriculture via email for comment. Related Articles Agriculture Secretary Brooke L. Rollins: A Common-Sense Plan to Strengthen America's Food Safety | OpinionTrump's Plan To Combat Bird Flu Will Ensure More Bird Flu | OpinionWoman Speechless at 'Huge' Egg Laid by Chicken-Then Sees What's InsideTrump Pressures California to Reroute Water to Farms, Cities 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Newsweek
10 hours ago
- Newsweek
It's the Worst Time To Be an American Farmer in Decades
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. America's farmers are locked in a generational crisis, fending off an array of threats that could jeopardize food supplies and spell financial disaster for those often hailed as the "backbone of the nation." "They love their way of life, and they love that dirt," President Donald Trump said this week, in a somewhat off-piste response to a question on the importance of farmers. "They don't know how to do anything else, but they don't want to do anything else." But the current storm of rising debt, declining commodity prices and labor shortfalls has begun to echo the great Farm Crisis of the 1980s and may be testing the love farmers hold for their profession. Farm sector debt is expected to reach a record $561.8 billion in 2025, according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, up 3.7 percent from 2024. The Kansas City Federal Reserve has attributed this primarily to increased lending for small- and mid-sized farms. This growing financial pressure has also pushed up bankruptcies. Researchers at the University of Arkansas recently found that Chapter 12 filings—specifically for farmers and family fishermen—reached 88 in the first quarter of the year, nearly doubling the previous year's figure. "Bankruptcies are on the rise and you will see many more on the auction block in the coming months especially this fall," said John Boyd, a crop and livestock farmer and founder of the National Black Farmers Association. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty Tariffs Putting Pressure on Crop Prices Boyd has been farming since the early 1980s, currently growing soybeans, corn and wheat across 1,500 acres in Virginia while raising 150 head of beef cattle. He told Newsweek that 2025 marked the first time in his career that he was unable to receive an operating loan, which provides farmers working capital needed to cover daily expenses, and blamed this on the trade policies of the current administration. "I was turned down by banks for the simple fact of low commodity prices due to the president's tariffs," he said. The higher costs for foreign importers have dampened foreign demand, leading to further reductions in the price of America's agricultural exports. Corn futures, as an example, have fallen about 15 percent since the start of the year, according to TradingEconomics. "Mexico buys U.S. corn, China buys soybeans," Boyd said. "We cannot survive on low crop prices with input costs at an all-time high.I have not seen such political chaos like this, and I have been farming since 1983." A May survey by Purdue University found that a strong majority (70 percent) of U.S. farmers believe Trump's tariffs will strengthen U.S. agriculture—some telling Investigate Midwest that they will help the U.S. pressure China to boost its imports. But according to Caleb Ragland, president of American Soybean Association, the "tit-for-tat trade war"—which has still not given way to a full-fledged deal despite several weeks of negotiations—could see American soybean farmers lose out on this critical market. "Make no mistake, American soybean farmers do stand at the edge of a cliff and will suffer if tariffs are not replaced with trade agreements that reduce tariffs before our harvest this fall," Ragland said in his May testimony before the U.S. Senate Finance Committee. Vanishing Farm Workforce "American farm and ranch families need a workforce that is ready, willing and available," said Michael Marsh, president and CEO of the National Council of Agricultural Employers (NCAE). "The shortage of these workers is perhaps the most significant challenge facing U.S. agriculture." "This year, the labor shortfall in U.S. agriculture will exceed 400,000 jobs," he added. "Technology will not fill that need." The California Farm Bureau listed "access to a stable workforce" among the key challenges facing America's farmers, and pointed Newsweek to its recent statement warning that "current immigration enforcement activity has caused disruptions to farming operations." Farms have been one the key targets of the administration's crackdown on illegal immigration, raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) resulting in worker shortages and even rotting crops as the country heads into harvest season. Federal agents block people protesting an ICE immigration raid at a nearby licensed cannabis farm on July 10, 2025, near Camarillo, California. Federal agents block people protesting an ICE immigration raid at a nearby licensed cannabis farm on July 10, 2025, near Camarillo, California."The president's immigration policies have hurt America's farmers," Boyd said. "Who's going to do the hard work that is required in 100-degree heat and enduring work conditions?" "A significant portion of our domestic workforce is here in unauthorized status," Marsh said. "Congress has failed since 1986 to pass meaningful agricultural labor reform. As a result of that and stepped-up efforts to remove unauthorized persons from the U.S., people on our farms and ranches are frightened." However, beyond the current enforcement actions, Marsh said the issue has been exacerbated by labor regulations, which "expanded significantly during the last administration." "For instance, in just 18 months the Biden administration issued 3,000 new pages of regulations for users of the temporary H-2A visa program," he said, referencing changes made by the Department of Labor in 2024. That, he said, has been "jeopardizing the ability of farm and ranch families to sustain the enterprise but also jeopardizing the safety and security of our people." Consequences of America's Latest Farm Crisis For the consumer, the struggles of American farmers in 2025 are beyond simply a rural community crisis and carry direct repercussions at the checkout line and dinner table. "When our farmers face persistent challenges, the broader consequences can include higher food prices, fewer choices at the grocery store and reduced access to the variety and quality of food Americans have come to expect," California Farm Bureau President Shannon Douglass told Newsweek. "In the long run, it could also weaken our domestic food supply and make the U.S. more reliant on imports." For farmers, the impacts could be even more dire. "We as Black farmers are facing extinction!" said Boyd, adding that this group has "never really benefited" from the billions in subsidies paid annually by the government. The sweeping tax and spending package signed into law by Trump on July 4 frees up significant funds to support America's farmers. The "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" will continue commodities programs and boosts subsidies for farmers by an estimated $66.4 billion over 10 years. While a lifeline for many, analysis has shown that these benefits will be unevenly distributed, depending on the type of crops are grown, with larger farms and those in the South expected to reap the greatest benefits. "It fails to offer any meaningful support for independent farmers—who face increasing challenges from low prices, trade wars and the climate crisis—and the communities they feed," was the response of the National Family Farm Coalition, a nonprofit that advocates for small- and medium-scale family farmers and fishing communities. And to others, while subsidy programs are a step in the right direction, they fall short of addressing the structural issues plaguing U.S. agriculture. "There are provisions included in the Big Beautiful Bill that benefit farmers and ranchers," the California Farm Bureau said. "However, a comprehensive farm bill is still needed." Newsweek has reached out to the Department of Agriculture via email for comment.
Newsweek
4 days ago
- Newsweek
SNAP Lawsuit Against Trump Admin Gets Clinton Judge
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton has been assigned to preside over a high-profile lawsuit brought by a coalition of states challenging the Trump administration's efforts to collect personal data from participants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). On July 29, 2025, U.S. District Judge Maxine M. Chesney, who has served in the Northern District of California since 1995 and currently holds senior status there, has been assigned to the case. Newsweek has sent email requests for comment to attorneys representing each of the twenty states, the federal agency, and attorneys for the administration. Why It Matters The lawsuit at the center of the case challenges a federal directive requiring states to turn over detailed personal information about SNAP recipients to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Filed by attorneys general from 20 states, the District of Columbia, and Kentucky, the suit argues that the USDA's demand for data—including names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and immigration status—oversteps legal boundaries and risks unauthorized sharing with other federal agencies. The plaintiffs contend the mandate violates federal privacy laws and the Administrative Procedure Act. Stock image/file photo: A woman looking a receipt while grocery shopping. Stock image/file photo: A woman looking a receipt while grocery shopping. GETTY What To Know State of California et al v. United States Department of Agriculture et al, challenges the federal mandate requiring states to provide the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) with sensitive personal information about all SNAP recipients dating back to January 2020. The legal challenge comes in response to a March 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump that directed federal agencies to expand interagency data sharing. Following that order, the USDA began requesting extensive SNAP data from state agencies, warning that noncompliance could jeopardize federal funding for state-run SNAP programs. The attorneys general claim that the USDA's actions force states into a legal and financial dilemma: either comply with what they consider an illegal federal directive or risk losing millions in SNAP funding. The lawsuit seeks to block enforcement of the USDA's demand and to prohibit the transfer of SNAP recipient data to agencies not directly involved in the program's administration, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Government Efficiency. The USDA has not yet publicly detailed its rationale for the data request or how the collected information would be used. How many People Use SNAP? Nationally, SNAP peaked at over 43 million in September 2020 and served an average of 41.7 million people per month in FY 2024. In New York, about 2.9 million people received SNAP benefits in May 2025, roughly 14.7% of the state's population. Of those, nearly 1 million were children. Nationally, more than 55 percent of SNAP recipients are in families with children. Although non-citizens are generally not eligible to receive SNAP for themselves, federal law allows them to apply on behalf of U.S. citizen children. The plaintiffs contend that the administration's policy change could disproportionately impact mixed-status families by exposing them to increased scrutiny or enforcement and that the USDA's demand for data that includes names, Social Security numbers, addresses, birth dates, and immigration status is unlawful and exceeds the agency's authority. They argue that the data could be improperly shared with other federal agencies, particularly those involved in immigration enforcement. According to the lawsuit, such a requirement violates both the Administrative Procedure Act and federal laws that restrict the use and disclosure of SNAP data. What People Are Saying New York Attorney General Letitia James said in a press release dated July 28, 2025: "Families should be able to get the food assistance they need without fearing that they will be targeted by this administration," adding: "I will not allow the SNAP benefits that millions of New Yorkers count on to be put at risk. We are suing today to stop this illegal policy and protect New Yorkers' privacy and access to food assistance." The same day, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell pointed out in a press release: "In fact, the USDA itself has described SNAP as having "one of the most rigorous quality control systems in the federal government." Adding: "Those systems do not require, and have never required, that states turn over sensitive, personally identifying information about millions of Americans without any meaningful restrictions on how that information is used or shared with other agencies." California Attorney General Rob Bonta said: "President Trump continues to weaponize private and sensitive personal information—not to root out fraud, but to create a culture of fear where people are unwilling to apply for essential services," adding: "This unprecedented demand for SNAP data violates state and federal privacy laws. California will not comply. We'll see the President in court." What Happens Next No hearings have been scheduled, and the case remains in its early stages. Judge Chesney's assignment adds a notable element to the proceedings, as the court prepares to consider arguments over federal authority, data privacy, and administrative law. The case could have significant implications for the privacy rights of SNAP recipients, particularly in the states and jurisdictions involved in the lawsuit. If the court rules in favor of the plaintiffs, it could limit the federal government's ability to collect or use personal information from individuals enrolled in federally funded food assistance programs.
