Making food great again

OPINION:

President-elect Donald Trump over the weekend named Brooke Rollins as his choice to “make agriculture great again.”

From her roots in a Texas farm town, she has a shot at refocusing the Department of Agriculture on what matters — but what’s good for farmers may conflict with other aspects of the incoming administration’s objectives.

Watch for the USDA’s obsession with diversity, equity and inclusion to go away. The department has been doling out assistance to drought-stricken growers not based on their need, but on the color of their skin. A federal judge temporarily paused the unconstitutional practice in June after various conservative groups sued to stop it. 

Ms. Rollins founded the America First Policy Institute after she led the White House Domestic Policy Council, so it’s safe to assume her priority will be restoring America’s historic status as a global agricultural powerhouse.

No other country shares as much of its bounty with the rest of the world. When Mr. Trump left office, U.S. farmers were selling $136 billion more in agricultural products overseas than were imported. That changed not long after President Biden moved into the White House.

The one-two punch of new federal regulations and “Bidenomics” has taken its toll. According to the USDA, the average farm saw expenses rise 40%, and exports went into free fall in 2022. America’s customers abroad struggled to afford our produce for the same reason consumers here began suffering supermarket sticker shock. 

So far this year, the agricultural trade deficit is $31 billion — and rising.

Freeing farmers from USDA red tape and offering substantial tax relief will help restore America’s export supremacy, but what’s best in economic terms may create tension with the make America healthy agenda of the new health czar.

If confirmed as secretary of health and human services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will force policymakers to defend their assumptions about what makes the country stronger. That’s bad news for the pharmaceutical industry, but good for the public.

Mr. Kennedy also wants to go after overly processed foods that are making Americans fat. At age 70, he’s in better shape than many men half his age. That’s quite an upgrade from an administration whose most prominent public health figure is a man sporting a dress with admiral’s stripes.

But the erstwhile Democrat and presidential candidate is also a well-known critic of the very agricultural technology responsible for allowing the United States to outproduce the rest of the world in crops such as corn. He prefers old-school organic techniques over genetic engineering and chemistry to kill harvest-destroying bugs and weeds.

Without technology, it takes 20% to 50% more land to grow the same amount of food. Consequently, keeping costs low and remaining self-sufficient — feeding a nation of 338 million — requires modern techniques.

Americans also love junk food. It’s hard to imagine Mr. Trump ever surrendering his Big Mac for a bowl of celery and some carrots. So, it’s hard to see how he would make progress in this area beyond setting a positive example.

That might be enough. Mr. Kennedy is challenging assumptions and asking questions that haven’t been asked before. This tees up the possibility of opening the sort of intelligent debates not seen since the other side began slapping the “dangerous misinformation” label on anything with which it disagreed.

Returning to open discussion of important issues might be the healthiest change of all.