Farmers hope Trump has their back but many voice misgivings as tariffs loom

It has been a perilous few years for the Red Fire Farm in western Massachusetts.
Since the pandemic, rising interest rates, labor and seed costs on the 200-acre produce farm have made life for owners Ryan and Sarah Voiland a spiraling challenge.
Having spent millions of dollars building their business from scratch since 2001, last year the farm's barn burned down, taking with it the store, a tractor, irrigation equipment and tools.
This year, Ryan had hoped a $125,000 grant won through the Rural Energy for America Program to build a solar canopy system, and a $40,000 allowance to distribute fall leaf litter from nearby towns across their fields, would help offset the farm's ever-increasing refrigeration and fertilizing costs.
But in January, the Trump administration froze billions of government funding dollars from Biden-era projects – including more than $2bn for 30,000 ranchers and farms such as Red Fire Farm.
'When something is signed and contracted it's just totally unfair for [the government] to rescind something that farmers are already making investments in,' he said.
'It's leaving farmers on the hook for thousands of dollars.'
That prompted Voiland to join an Earthjustice lawsuit against the US Department of Agriculture that's seeking a court order against the administration's refusal to disburse the funding.
American farmers are not unused to the impulses of Donald Trump, who in his first presidency fueled a trade war with China that ended up adversely affecting exports of US pork and soybeans. But back then, many farmers stayed afloat in large part due to a $28bn handout from the federal government.
Today, there's no sign of checks in the post for farmers.
Trump has suggested farmers are in for 'a little bit of an adjustment period' with more reciprocal tariffs on China, Mexico, Canada and European countries set to come into force on Tuesday.
This comes at a time when farming, whether at the local producer or commodity crop level, faces major challenges.
Plummeting demand from China, rising land prices and Trump's threats to cut visas for foreign farm workers have put one of the world's most productive agricultural economies in a major spin. John Deere, the machinery manufacturer, has been shedding thousands of jobs across the midwest due to falling demand fueled by farmers' economic struggles. Imports of agriculture products, which can undercut US farmers, have never been as high.
And while ranchers and farmers make up a small part of the wider US economy, its struggles could have major implications: 10% of all US workers are employed in or adjacent to agriculture.
Across the country, farming groups are beginning to voice concerns for Trump's tough tariff approach.
'Trade policies must come with real, tangible protections for the farmers directly affected,' said the National Farmers Union president, Rob Larew.
'We've heard there's a strategy in place – now we need to see it. Promises alone won't pay the bills or keep farms afloat.'
With around 20% of all US agricultural production going overseas, some agronomists fear the ructions caused by the Trump administration could put pay to relations that took decades to develop, and which in particular could ill-affect American corn and soybean farmers.
'It's been a very good relationship with Mexico. But if this tariffs situation gets out of control, I wouldn't be surprised that within five years you hear of Mexico building a deep sea port [to facilitate imports from countries other than the US],' said Jim McCormick, the co-founder of Agmarket.net, a Missouri-based agricultural marketing and consulting firm.
'The best thing you can do is build a trade relationship that works well for both countries. It works well for Mexico – they get a cheap supply of food – and it works well for the American producer – we overproduce in the United States. That is the reality – we are built to feed the world.'
In recent years, China, the world's largest importer of soybeans which until recently was largely sourced from American farmers, has developed a new trade relationship with Brazil as a direct result of the first Trump administration's trade war.
Brazil has rapidly grown its soybean crop to become the world's largest producer today, with 40% of the global share, and is the world's third-largest producer of corn. Its mild climate allows two harvests per year and it has cleared thousands of square miles of savannah and forest for crop farming.
In November, a huge port opened in Chancay, Peru, which was paid for by China in a move meant to give Beijing easier access to South American products.
'My fear is that it's going to be a lot tougher negotiating with these countries than what people think,' said McCormick. 'The first go around [in 2017] we were just battling China. Now, we're pretty much battling the world. It could get very volatile.'
Still, farmers have been widely supportive of the president. In the country's 444 agriculture-dependent counties, Trump won 77.7% of the vote in last November's presidential election, up from 73% in 2016 and 76% in 2020.
Commodity crop growers are this month set for some relief with $10bn in assistance being released through a program signed into law during the Biden administration.
'I think farmers are not exactly thrilled at the economic situation we're in right now, but they still believe he's got their back,' said McCormick, adding that whether or not tariffs go into place on 2 April will shape wider sentiment towards the White House. 'They're going to wait and see.'
On the Red Fire Farm, which employs around 75 people during the summer season on its food subscription, U-pick and wholesale operations, feelings of hope and trepidation mingle as the Voilands gear up for the 2025 growing season. Construction of a new barn is in the works, although its financial implications are worrying, says Ryan.
Another point of concern is the Trump administration's canceling of $1bn worth of local food purchase funding for food banks and schools, which hits producers such as Voiland and in-need consumers alike.
But pressure through calls and emails has helped a small conservation grant won by the Voilands and other farmers previously frozen in January be revived last month.
'I wanted to do everything possible to fight back and resist it,' said Voiland, 'both for the sake of my farm and for the general good of agriculture'.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

NBC News

24 minutes ago

• NBC News

U.K.'s Starmer says it's important to 'de-escalate the situation' after U.S. strikes on Iran

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and other European leaders are calling for a resolution after the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities while also warning that Iran should not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. NBC News' Molly Hunter reports on how other nations, including China, are responding to the 23, 2025

Daily Mirror

27 minutes ago

• Daily Mirror

'Trump let Iran make nukes he's mad about - he's at war for a Nobel Peace Prize'

If there is one disease which lies behind the constant spasms of horror with which our days our currently blighted, it is the human race's inability to remember what happened five minutes ago. Once upon a time, journalists would go to the pub, and then bed. Sometimes they'd go to bed with each other, because they'd been to the pub. But they'd wake up in the morning and go "blimey, an earthquake in Japan. I had better find a good story of my own about this". And they would have to go deeper into a story and its origins. Today they don't drink, barely know their colleagues, and wake up to emails from a 24-rolling news ecosystem that demands constant feeding. Journalists think "blimey, everyone else is ahead of me" and scramble to catch up. No-one has time to think, which is why no-one has told you that Donald Trump just bombed Iran for making nuclear weapons that Donald Trump let them make. I wish I was making this stuff up, but no-one's got time for that. It's imperative people start remembering how we got to the cliff edge, because we did it by skipping about blindfold and if we don't stop soon we're going to go right over. America gave Iran nuclear technology in 1957. The aim was 'atoms for peace', to create wealth, and allies in the Middle East. After years of the world's greatest democracy propping up a cruel monarchy, the shah fell, the mullahs arose, and Iran was in less-friendly hands. The 1980s was taken up with a war against Iraq, but in the 1990s two Gulf Wars and continued US tinkering led the mullahs to the not-entirely-mad opinion that a nuclear weapon was the best way of keeping the Great Satan at bay. Israel, quite reasonably, was less than chuffed. And as technology sped up it became imperative to find ways of stopping Iran getting a weapon that apocalyptic fundamentalists would see very little reason not to detonate, slap-bang in the middle of a resource-rich, conflict-heavy trade route. And so in 2015, six countries signed a deal with Iran. In return for checks that it wasn't building The Bomb, everyone was open for business. And for three years the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action worked. Germany, China, Russia, France, the UK, China and the US lifted economic sanctions, and every 90 days would ratify everything was non-nuclear and tickety-boo. But such a vague agreement could not withstand the arrival of Donald Trump, whose tiny hands happily dismantled everything that made Barack Obama look good. In 2018 when Benjamin Netanyahu - yes it really is all the same people - gave a speech claiming his spy agency Mossad had stolen 100,000 documents showing Iran had lied and was enriching uranium, Trump saw a 30-second clip and decided it must be true. It might have been. The other nations in the deal didn't think so. But rather than renegotiate, send in inspectors, react as any sane human might, Trump just went "nah", and pulled out of the deal. The other countries tried to keep it going. The International Atomic Energy Authority said there was no enrichment. But the US whacked the regime with sanctions, and Iran said it too would pull out unless they were lifted. They were not. In 2020 the IAEA said Iran had tripled its uranium stockpile, a year later it blocked access to inspectors, and by 2023 it had weapons-grade material. Over the same period, Iran's population suffered. A third were ground into poverty. The economic woes weakened the regime just enough to make it lash out. Iran was behind terror attacks worldwide, former Republican Guards were linked to planned assassinations of ex-Trump officials, and it faced internal protests too. Then Iran funded the October 7 massacre by Hamas. Cue Netanyahu, who was leading a rickety coalition and facing jail the moment it fell, cue the war in Gaza, cue pro-Palestine protests, and cue a lot of blaming Iran. This isn't hard to figure out or remember. It's just that the constant churn of new things to hold our attention never scrolls back to the start of the liveblog, or delves into the third page of search results. Iran is definitely run by a bunch of rotten eggs who could well have been pulling the radioactive wool over the world's eyes in return for a financial boost to stabilise their rule. But the best way of fixing that wasn't walking away from the only half-arsed deal anyone had. It was making a better deal, and if Trump had actually written his own biography rather than paying someone else to make him look good, he might have known how to do it. Trump's withdrawal was supported by Israel and Saudi Arabia, with 63% of US voters, most of the planet and his own advisers screaming at him not to. It was "a horrible one-sided deal that should have never, ever been made", he insisted. "It didn't bring peace and it never will." And so he destabilised and raised the oil price with sanctions, screwed regional trade which meant the price of wheat rose and people starved across several countries, and gave fresh targets to jihadis. Back in office for a second time, Trump wants a legacy and more than anything he wants the Nobel Peace Prize that Obama got, largely for diplomatic efforts with the Muslim world. Trump pledged to end the war in Ukraine "on day one" and it only got worse; he suggested building a golden beachside golf club in Gaza, and got laughed at. So his eye turned to Ayatollah Khameini, and the country which the US has done so much to make worse, for so long. Anyone with an ounce of realism in their body might wonder at the convenience with which the B-2 bombers and their bunker-busting payload were able to fly in unmolested, after the Israelis had suddenly switched attention from Gaza to take out the Iranian air defences a week earlier. It does seem odd that the imminent threat Netanyahu had predicted in 2018 bloomed 7 years later, 6 months after Trump returned to office and only after his other draft entries for the peace prize had evaporated. We might also ponder why the US president with the worst personal polls in history at this point in his leadership might be in want of some surgical strikes to appease his Muslim-hating base, and whether it would do him any harm if there were a couple of small terror attacks on US bases that would give an excuse to bomb the mullahs to the table. And having thought this far, we could ask ourselves how close to the edge of nuclear catastrophe Trump will allow the world to careen before he picks up the phone to "make a deal" which will be the bigliest, most beautiful peace deal of all time. And whether it will be worse than the one we used to have, before he ripped it to shreds out of petulance and exploited the disastrous consequences for the sake of vanity. With Iran alone, Trump has cost the world trillions. Now he is about to march an entire planet to the gates of hell, just so he can look good for marching everyone back again. And this plan works if he is a diplomatic genius able to unpick decades of crapola, and capable of remembering why and how it happened in the first place. But when all he watches is 24-hour rolling news, with constant updates about new stuff that isn't new at all, the best we can hope for is that the Nobel Committee gives him the prize now, just to make him stop.

Glasgow Times

32 minutes ago

• Glasgow Times

Iran launches missiles and drones at Israel in the wake of US strikes

Israel said its defence systems were operating to intercept the threat, which apparently targeted north and central areas, and told people to head to shelters. Iran described the attack as a new wave of its Operation 'True Promise 3', saying it was targeting the Israeli cities of Haifa and Tel Aviv, according to Iranian state television. There were no immediate reports of damage. The move came after the US bombed Iranian nuclear sites (Iranian Army Press Service via AP) The attack came the day after the United States inserted itself into Israel's war by attacking Iranian nuclear sites, prompting fears of a wider regional conflict. Meanwhile, a suspected Israeli air strike hit the gate of Iran's notorious Evin prison in Tehran, Iranian state television reported. Iranian media speculated the strike may have come from a drone. The report shared what appeared to be black-and-white-surveillance footage of the strike. The prison is known for holding dual nationals and Westerners often used by Iran as bargaining chips in negotiations with the West. Israel did not immediately acknowledge carrying out the strike. Earlier, the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog said 'very heavy damage' is expected at Iran's underground facility at Fordo after the US air strike this weekend. After the strike using sophisticated bunker-buster bombs, Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said in Vienna: 'Given the explosive payload utilised and the extreme vibration sensitive nature of centrifuges, very significant damage is expected to have occurred.' IAEA Director General @RafaelMGrossi addressed the Board of Governors this morning at an emergency meeting regarding the situation in Iran. — IAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency ⚛️ (@iaeaorg) June 23, 2025 He added that 'at this time, no-one, including the IAEA, is in a position to have fully assessed the underground damage at Fordo'. Iran said the US had crossed 'a very big red line' with its risky gambit to strike the three sites with missiles and 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs. On Monday, Iranian Gen Abdolrahim Mousavi, the chief of joint staff of armed forces, warned Washington its strikes had given Iranian forces a 'free hand ' to 'act against US interests and its army'. Gen Mousavi described the American attack as violating Iran's sovereignty and being tantamount to invading the country, the state-run IRNA news agency reported. In the wake of the American attacks on Iran, calls came from across the globe for de-escalation and the return to diplomacy to try and resolve the conflict. Foreign ministers remain focused on a diplomatic solution, but concerns about the war escalating are high. Any Iranian closure of the Strait of Hormuz would be extremely dangerous. My doorstep ahead of today's Foreign Affairs Council ↓ — Kaja Kallas (@kajakallas) June 23, 2025 On Monday, the European Union's top diplomat said the bloc remained 'very much focused on the diplomatic solution'. 'The concerns of retaliation and this war escalating are huge,' Kaja Kallas said at the start of a foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels where Iran has jumped to the top of the agenda. 'Especially closing of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran is something that would be extremely dangerous and not good for anybody,' Ms Kallas said, referring to a maritime route crucial for oil transport. After Sunday's attacks, Iranian officials repeated their longstanding threats of possibly closing the key shipping lane. Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi is meeting Russian President Vladimir Putin, one of Iran's key allies, in Moscow.