5 most chaotic food policy changes under Trump

Shutterstock

Erin DeJesus is the executive editor of Eater. These days, she finds her peace at the farmers market.

It’s been less than two months since Donald Trump took the presidential oath for the second time, and I feel as if I’ve aged an entire year since. At Eater, we’ve long reported about how government policy affects food systems and what we eat, but our newsroom conversations of late — fueled by the Trump administration’s relentless onslaught of declarations, executive orders, and spending freezes — have felt dizzying. Is a random press conference comment going to turn into an actual executive order? Are the tariffs happening or not? Will probational employees at agencies like the USDA and FDA — those impacted by cuts led by the Department of Government Efficiency — eventually get their jobs back? What is RFK Jr., the head of the Department of Health and Human Services, even talking about right now? (And those breaking news items don’t include our ongoing ears to the ground about how immigration crackdowns will impact the restaurant and farm industries.)

To keep closer track of how the administration’s decision-making is having an impact on what we eat, Civil Eats’ Food Policy Tracker has been an invaluable resource, as has Vox.com’s coverage of Trump’s First 100 Days. Here are 5 things to know about how Trump’s changes are affecting food right now (at least as of this writing on March 21 at 8 a.m. Pacific Time):

Tariffs are on for China, TBD for everyone else until April 2

Everywhere except Bravo, U.S.-Canada relations are currently at an all-time low thanks to the ping-ponging on the proposed international tariffs on imports from Canada, Mexico, and countries across the world. On March 6, the administration announced it would temporarily postpone planned tariffs to our North American neighbors until April 2, though 10 percent tariffs to Chinese imports have taken effect as scheduled. (Business owners, including Fly By Jing and U.S. winemakers, are noting the trade war is already having an effect on their bottom line.)

USDA cuts $1 billion from programs that fed schools…

Last week, Politico reported that the USDA had cut $1 billion total from two hunger assistance programs that aimed to connect local farms to their communities. The $660 million cut to the Local Food for Schools Cooperative Agreement Program will end funding for a program that helped school districts prioritize locally grown, fresh food over processed (but cheaper) options in their student meals. The cuts affect children in 40 states, and farmers must now plan for that unexpected lost revenue.

… and food banks

Meanwhile, the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, which filled a similar need for locally grown food at food banks, saw $420 million in cuts. As Grist reported, those cuts had an immediate effect on communities. One Virginia nonprofit director, whose program was forced to shutter its weekly distribution of food boxes, called the move “heartbreaking,” noting that the boxes supported “thousands of people throughout Central Appalachia” and provided guaranteed income for 40 nearby farms. And on March 19, Politico reported that an additional $500 million in funding via the Emergency Food Assistance Program might be at risk.

Big brands might have an artificial dye problem on their hands

Despite arguably more pressing issues at hand, Health and Human Services director RFK Jr. has made removing artificial dyes one of the agency’s top priorities, conducting a meeting with the heads of major processed food brands on March 10. That directive follows an FDA ban earlier this year of Red 3 — a common coloring additive in cereals, candies, and gelatin desserts — and a California state ban of Red 3 in 2023.

The USDA is canceling grants aimed at farmers and small businesses

American farmers are in crisis: new development threatens farmland, the next generation of farmers is opting out, and younger farmers are struggling to find affordable land. The administration pulling funding to organizations committed to greater equity in farming only creates a more uncertain future. Meanwhile, spending freezes and cuts to grants aimed at small businesses will lead to consequences everywhere from your local dairy aisle to your neighborhood ice cream shop.