Editors' Notebook

The Trump administration's efforts to reshape the federal government reminds me of watching a rocket launch. It's all systems go to right-size and consolidate what the president calls a bloated bureaucracy. But the recent proposal to reorganize the United States Department of Agriculture is sounding alarms even before the countdown starts.

Concerns immediately surfaced when Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins made the surprise announcement about the plan in July, keeping lawmakers, the ag industry and others in the dark. Her office insisted it was out of concern for the agency's workforce, but officials said they wanted employees to hear the news first directly from the secretary, "not from a leak that originated from somewhere else," noted Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden, testifying before the Senate Committee on Agriculture.

The proposal calls for relocating some 2,600 of the 4,600 Washington-based positions to five regional hubs: Fort Collins, Colorado; Indianapolis; Kansas City, Missouri; Raleigh, North Carolina; and Salt Lake City. USDA will also consolidate operations and close one of its headquarters buildings, as well as three additional offices in the D.C. area, including the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC), in Maryland. The reorganization is expected to save about $4 billion.

As a taxpayer, I fully support efforts to make the federal government work better, smarter and more efficient. But is the call for such a massive overhaul in the best interest of American agriculture? I think not, and here's why.

-- Brain drain. USDA has already seen 15,000 departures from its ranks through deferred resignations and early retirements. Many were seasoned employees with invaluable expertise and talent. The proposal will likely accelerate the departure of experienced, knowledgeable workers. Employees who remain will be required to do more with less. Many will be less experienced, further eroding the agency's ability to help those it's supposed to serve.

Vaden predicted because of the lower cost of living, "more than a majority" who receive notices to relocate will move to one of the hubs. History shows otherwise. During the first Trump administration, USDA relocated employees of the Economic Research Service (ERS) and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) from Washington to Kansas City. Reports indicated both agencies lost more than half of the employees following the move. Moreover, the Government Accountability Office found the ERS and NIFA were less productive after the move and took longer to produce economic forecasts and process grants. The proposed reorganization will further undermine agency expertise and institutional knowledge.

-- Check the math. One reason cited for the reorganization is to bring the workforce closer to the people it serves. But that's already the case. USDA has a long history of being a field-based, boots-on-the-ground department. Of the agency's approximate 100,000 employees, 90% are located outside the National Capital Region.

-- Dismantling research resources. On the chopping block is BARC, one of the largest and most comprehensive agricultural research facilities in the world, comprised of hundreds of buildings on more than 6,500 acres. It is a hub for diverse ag research, with world-renowned scientists studying crops, livestock, human nutrition and food safety, grain quality, environmental issues and more. The proposal calls for the gradual closing of the center over several years and the continuing of research elsewhere. However, there's no guarantee scientists will relocate, and invaluable collaboration across multidisciplines at one location will be lost. In addition, long-term field studies can't be moved.

A 30-day public comment period for stakeholders to solicit feedback on the proposal will end in late August, but critics are skeptical their remarks will be taken seriously.

To truly put America's farmers first, the launch of the USDA reorganization plan should be put on hold at best or scrubbed entirely until there's full confidence the agency can continue to deliver the expertise and services farmers and ranchers have come to expect and need.

**

Editor's Note: The above article was originally scheduled to appear in the September issue of Progressive Farmer magazine in the We'd Like to Mention column. DTNPF.com is posting it earlier so stakeholders, including USDA employees, members of Congress, and agricultural and nutrition partners, can have time if they wish to provide feedback before the Aug. 26 deadline by emailing reorganization@usda.gov.

DTN has been covering the subject of the USDA reorganization and the comment period, noting that -- unlike other government comment periods -- the results of this particular one will not be open to the public and is not using traditional commenting protocols.

For more on the reorganization, see here: https://www.dtnpf.com/….

Gregg Hillyer can be reached at gregg.hillyer@dtn.com

Follow him on social platform X @gregghillyer

(c) Copyright 2025 DTN, LLC. All rights reserved.