DOGE cuts and tariffs impact a small family farm in Kansas

The JET Facebook page photos give a glimpse into the farm's 
community focus. Their Facebook fans named the frog, 'Potter.'

As the new administration shifts agriculture and trade market tactics, small family farmers Jacob and Jennifer Thomas from northwestern Kansas struggle to keep their operation, JET Produce and Meats, afloat.

"The young couple took a 10% hit when the Trump administration abruptly cut $1 billion from two programs that supplied local produce and meat to schools and food banks," report Annie Gowen and Ricky Carioti of The Washington Post. "There have been other blows, too."

Cuts to Department of Agriculture funding have left the Thomases unsure of their farm's future. "They plowed up a spot for a new greenhouse only to learn that another grant for $8,000 would never come," Gowen and Carioti write. "They worry that 2,000 chrysanthemum cuttings ordered from Canada will be ensnared in the countries’ tariff dispute."

Despite the beating Kansas farmers took during Trump's first-term trade war, many voted for Trump in 2024. For some, their loyalty is teetering. The Post reports, "The consequences of his administration’s wide-ranging cuts and uncertainty over tariffs have already had a profound impact on this hilly corner of northeast Kansas."

For the most part, the Thomas family has preferred to focus on farming, not politics, but the recent cuts and confusion have made that stance impossible. "The first big blow of 2025 came right after Trump’s inauguration, when the president issued an executive order pausing billions of dollars in federal grants," Gowen and Carioti write. "The whole episode stung, particularly since they got little response when they asked for help from the Kansans in Congress."

Other USDA funding the Thomases had been relying on has been rearranged or cut, leaving them even more uncertain about their farm's future. Jacob told the Post, "Historically if you got a government contract, we’re golden, because the government always pays. . . .Today I don’t feel that way. For the first time in my life, I don’t trust the government is going to follow through on their word.”

Policy director for Rural Democracy Initiative warns of budget bill’s ‘devastating’ impacts

Members of the 119th House applaud the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. (The Hill video reel photo)

After weeks of wrangling, the U.S. House of Representatives passed President Donald Trump's "one big, beautiful bill" on May 22. The bill, which has moved to the U.S. Senate, includes massive spending cuts to support tax cut extensions and additional tax cuts.

Michael Chameides, the communications and policy director for the Rural Democracy Initiative, in an opinion piece published in Iowa's Times-Republican, points out six ways the bill could hurt rural residents. He writes, "I’ve been hearing from rural leaders across the country about the devastating impacts this bill would have. . . .The good news is it’s not too late. But there’s little time to spare." 

Here are the six concerns Chameides cited:

1. The bill "guts" rural health care. "It would take health care away from 13.8 million Americans and increase the cost for millions more. In some states, 50% of rural children get healthcare from Medicaid. Millions more rely on access to clinics and hospitals that would likely close because of these cuts."

2. It cuts federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program spending. "More than 15% of families in small towns and rural areas rely on this support to feed their families."

(The Department of Agriculture canceled "about $660 million in funding this year for the Local Food for Schools program, which is active in 40 U.S. states," reports Aimee Picchi of CBS News. The cuts were announced in March and have left schools and farmers scrambling.)

3. The bill shifts more costs onto state and local governments. "Slashing federal funding to states would create new burdens for rural states that are already struggling to provide critical public services like health care, transportation, and emergency response services to local communities."

4. It takes away local land control. "Landowners have fought to stop the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines by passing bans and moratoria. . . .This bill would overrule state and local laws and ordinances. . . and deprive residents of a fair opportunity to evaluate the adverse impacts of pipelines."

5. The bill phases out clean energy and infrastructure spending, including tax credits. "It would also take away $262 million in funding for energy efficiency and conservation grants as well as transportation infrastructure. . . .Ending these tax credits will increase household energy costs, which are already higher in many rural communities."

6. The bill favors bigger agribusiness companies and mega-farms. "Leaders in Congress are using the budget reconciliation process to give big farms a $50 billion windfall. Add the heightened pressures and instability caused by the Trump administration’s erratic trade policy and more family farmers would lose their farms — while Big Ag consolidates more of the market."

Chameides calls on rural residents and businesses to speak up: “Lawmakers have already heard from the giant corporations who helped write the bill. Now they need to hear from the rest of us. It’s up to us to alert our communities and tell our lawmakers: Don’t sell rural America out to big corporations and the wealthy.”

A longer version of the Times-Republican op-ed was originally published by Barn Raiser. To learn more about what could happen to the bill in the Senate, click here. 

Conservation pays off for Oklahoma farmers: clean streams, healthy cattle, lower costs and visiting eagles

Horse Creek Cove, Grand Lake, Oklahoma.
 (grandlake.com photo)

Making the tough decision to protect private property water sources helped Oklahoma farmers address contamination, produce healthier livestock and save money. "A big part of the solution was simple: Give cows clean drinking water and keep them out of the streams," reports Cara Buckley of The New York Times. "About 100 Oklahoman streams once polluted by runoff predominantly from farmland have been restored to health. That’s more than in any other state, according to the Environmental Protection Agency."

The choice to restrict farm animals from streams took farmers like Grant Victor, who wanted to clean up his property's creek, even if it meant breaking with ranching tradition. Buckley writes, "Working with a conservation program, he installed fencing around Horse Creek, creating a protective riparian buffer, even though it meant keeping his animals off 220 acres, about 6% of his family’s land."

He waited and nature did not disappoint. "The benefits of a healthier waterway exceeded his hopes," Buckley reports. "Within just a couple of years, the banks were transformed into verdant corridors of grasses and shrubs. Wildlife appeared, including white-tailed deer, bobcats, coyotes and bald eagles that return each year to a sprawling nest to rear their young."

But that's not all. Victor was rewarded with healthier cattle. Buckley adds, "Victor installed pipes and wells in the pastures, allowing his cattle to drink water unsullied by sediment and their own waste. They put on more weight and suffered fewer respiratory ailments, and that resulted in lower veterinary bills."

Other Oklahoma farmers have adopted methods that support nature while increasing farming profits. Steve Glasgow, a recently retired Oklahoma state resource conservationist, "estimates that nearly a third of Oklahoma’s crop farmers employ conservation practices, up from roughly one-fifth 25 years ago. . . . Conservation practices can also increase yields and reduce labor and fuel costs."

Victor knows some of his neighboring farmers remain conservation skeptics and scoff at his choices but he's OK with that. He told Buckley, "I’m sure at the coffee shop, they were all laughing at me. . . . My dad always taught me there’s some things you can’t afford to do and there’s other things you can’t afford not to do. This was one of the things I couldn’t afford not to do."

Rural communities lack resources, plans for dealing with the homeless

They may be harder to spot than their urban counterparts, but thousands of rural folks don't have a place to call home. 

"Rural America has nearly 29 million homes, but experts say that’s not enough to house the roughly 46 million people who live there," reports Kristi Eaton for Barn Raiser. A Housing Assistance Council report that analyzed data from 2010 to 2023 concluded that “rural America is losing affordable housing at an alarming rate, fueling a growing housing crisis." A lack of affordable rural rental property is adding to the problem.

Even when rural residents find a home, high mortgage or monthly rental costs can take up a big percentage of their income. Eaton explains, "The report found that over 5.6 million people, or about a quarter of rural households, pay more than 30% of their monthly income on housing costs, and less than half of rural homeowners own their houses outright."

With rural housing in short supply and home ownership or rental costs beyond the reach of many, rural homelessness has become more prevalent and its solutions harder to come by. Liam Niemeyer of the Kentucky Lantern shares the story of Mallie Luken as an example of what homelessness can look like in rural America. 

Neimeyer begins Luken's story as many homeless stories begin -- with the local police attempting to manage homelessness without needed resources. He writes, "Pastor Jennifer Banks was still a relative newcomer to this Western Kentucky town on the night in September when she watched through a security camera as a police officer brought a woman in a wheelchair to the church and 'dumped her in our parking lot.'"

Pastor Banks recognized the woman. Banks had met Luken the day before at an Arby's parking lot where she'd given Luken a plate of food and they prayed together. Now police were bringing her to her church's parking lot. Banks told Neimeyer, “I had to leave her there [in the Arbys's parking lot] because I didn’t have anywhere for her to go. And then the next day was when they dumped her in our parking lot."

Luken and her faithful dog, Blaze.
(Photo by Austin Anthony, Ky. Lantern)

Luken hadn't planned on being homeless or sleeping in parking lots. Neimeyer explains, "Luken, 70, a widow, was down to her last few dollars. She had asked her former pastor to drive her from the nearby county where she was living to Muhlenberg County because she remembered an old ad for the Central Inn, a motel in Central City, and thought she could afford a night there."

Luken didn't make it to the Central Inn and ended up sleeping in parking lots, despite several people knowing she didn't have a place to stay. Neimeyer reports, "Banks’ community was ill-prepared to respond to that kind of housing emergency. That realization has served as a catalyst for the Bankses and others in Muhlenberg County who want to fill gaps they see in services and housing. They have met resistance and support. . ."

To read more about Luken's story and how Muhlenberg County is grappling with homelessness services, click here.

Battle over four-day school week, teacher shortages is fought in rural school district

Parent Jason Breckenridge testified to stop the Florence-Carlton 
shift to a four-day school week. (The Hechinger Report photo)

Facing ongoing teacher shortages, rural Montana school districts have offered a four-day school week as a recruitment and retention tool since 2005. Most Montana schools accepted the shortened schedule without controversy, but the Florence-Carlton district became a loud exception. Community discussions about the change became fierce faceoffs about educational achievement, convenience and priorities, reports Alex Mitchell for The Hechinger Report, which covers education.

"There were standing-room-only public meetings with community members threatening not to support future budget levies. Parents filed two formal complaints," Mitchell writes. "One family sued. Some are transferring their children to districts miles away next year or will take on homeschooling out of concern their kids would otherwise fall behind."

The battle over the fifth day of school highlights a "larger divide and uncertainty around the four-day school week, even as districts in Montana and across the country continue to march toward it," Mitchell explains. "A three-part study from the University of Montana painted a grim picture of the four-day school week’s outcomes for both students and their schools."

Bill McCaw, one of the study's authors, told Mitchell, "When I look at the news reporting and schools [that] are considering the four-day, there’s all these reasons, pros and cons. Student achievement is never part of the conversation. Day care, convenience, longer vacation — all that’s being discussed. But not student achievement.”

The parent who sued the district, Jason Breckenridge, didn't want his kids to be part of an educational experiment. "He felt the school district disregarded the negative aspects of the shortened week," Mitchell adds. "Virginia Mahn, a Florence-Carlton parent and graduate, brought a complaint against the school board, alleging district leaders failed to meet their required responsibility of ensuring a quality education."

The University of Montana's study wasn't the only one to call out student learning deficits linked to four-day school weeks. Mitchell writes, "In 2014, Tim Tharp, then a doctoral student at the University of Montana, assembled academic results of all of the state’s schools from 2006, when the four-day school week was first adopted, to 2013. He found that students in four-day schools had lower test scores than peers who attended school five days a week."

Tharp told Mitchell, “If you look back at it logically, it only makes sense. After a certain period of time, you’re losing days, weeks, months of instruction over the course of years. . . . The absolute best thing would be for the students to not only go 180 days, but [for the districts to] even consider making it longer.” Mitchell adds, "Tharp concedes his opinion is unpopular among friends and colleagues."

"A community survey showing that of parents and community members who responded, 51% favored a shift to a four-day school week," Mitchell reports. "The five-person board approved the model 3-to-1 in January, with one abstention. Starting this fall, the school day will be lengthened by 45 minutes, and schools will be closed on Fridays."

Buying only U.S.A.-made goods can be 'next to impossible,' but some Americans find ways to get close to the goal

Many items are no longer made in the U.S.A. (Adobe Stock photo)

Even when consumers want to buy purely American-made products, it can be tough, if not impossible, to get everything on the list. "Many Americans say they want to buy domestic products, but global supply chains built over decades of outsourcing have made it challenging," report Natasha Khan and Rachel Louise Ensign of The Wall Street Journal. "No matter how committed these shoppers are, some products just aren’t made-in-U.S.A."

Domestic-only shoppers are tenacious about their choices and often face uphill battles to get U.S.A.-made products. "Dianna Huff has been on a decade-long quest to buy only 'Made in America' goods," Khan and Ensign write. "She recalls crawling inside her fridge in search of a manufacturer’s label only to see the tiny words 'Made in Mexico,' and returning a bathroom scale because, despite the assurance that the company made products in its U.S. facilities, it didn’t."

Huff was able to purchase linens and socks made in the U.S.; however, "for things such as her phone, glasses and weed whacker, it was next to impossible," the Journal reports. "Manufacturers moved production overseas where labor costs were much lower, spurred in part by free-trade agreements."

While many Americans would prefer to purchase U.S.A.-made products, their higher costs can be a deterrent. Khan and Ensign add, "In a May Morning Consult survey of about 1,000 U.S. adults, more than half said they intentionally bought domestically produced goods at least sometimes, but only 11% of those who were willing to pay more for U.S. goods could stomach a price increase greater than 15%."

Scouring for American-made goods has become hobby for some folks. "Anne Collins took up buying domestic after she retired," the Journal reports. To help others, she founded a Facebook group that promotes not shopping in China. She's taught group members how to sleuth for hard to find domestic products, such as, "mops, foil pans and artificial flowers."

Rural homeownership history includes Sears catalog homes. Thousands still stand today.

Modern reproduction of Sears catalog house in Battle Ground,
Indiana. (Photo by Rosemary Thornton, Wikimedia via the Yonder)

Beginning in the early 1900s, many rural Americans built their homes with construction kits from Sears, the former catalog sales giant. "Between 1908 and 1942, Sears sold some 70,000 customizable home kits across the country through the company’s Modern Home catalog," reports Pat Raia of The Daily Yonder.

Sears kit homes were particularly popular in the Midwest, including "Illinois, Ohio and Missouri, and almost all of them were located in rural or suburban areas," Raia writes. While the build-your-own-home kit appealed to consumers who wanted to save on labor costs, purchasing everything from one source was especially convenient for rural customers who could live long distances from construction suppliers.

The Sears catalog offered kits that included "a sketch of the house, a floor plan, and a basic cost that ranged from $360 to more than $2,000," Raia writes. Once purchased, Sears would send an initial "boxcar containing pieces to get the kit home buyer started. Subsequent deliveries would contain materials for each remaining phase of the construction."

The kits served a dual economic function, providing a path for homeownership and boosting the local economies. Sears Homes Chicagoland blogger Lara Solonickne told Raia, "Many customers had help building the houses from local carpenters and other tradesmen. By the early 1930s, few customers were building the homes by themselves."

Despite being built in stages by people with varying degrees of home construction expertise, many Sears-kit homes are still standing. Raia adds, "Judith Chabot, a researcher who authenticates Sears kit homes, said that there are more than 18,668 on the National List of Sears kit homes still standing around the U.S., and there are likely even more."

While kit-built homes may lack some conveniences newer homes offer, today's purchasers choose them for their unique history and sound construction.

North Carolina’s losses from Hurricane Helene offer lessons on emergency planning for inland communities

Hurricane Helene pummeled counties across six
states. (Adobe Stock photo)

 

Despite weather reports giving starkly accurate descriptions of the extreme risks Hurricane Helene posed as it barreled through North Carolina toward Yancey County, many of the county's residents remained unaware of the imminent danger. Jennifer Berry Hawes and Mollie Simon of ProPublica report, "The highest per capita death toll occurred in Yancey County, a rural expanse in the rugged Black Mountains devastated by flash flooding and landslides."

Yancey County residents were in Helene's violent path but didn't know it. ProPublica reports, "No one in Yancey received evacuation orders — and many, including those living in high-risk areas and caring for young children and frail older people, didn’t flee because they didn’t see clearer signs of urgency from the county."

Helene's wrath left at least 230 people dead across six states. Its trail of destruction in Yancey County left the community in ruin, families with untold losses, and a list of hard-won lessons. If storms can "make trees grow deeper roots," ProPublica has five takeaways to help regions prepare before extreme weather strikes again.

Even if your community is inland, develop storm warning education and planning. If there are internal barriers to evacuations, discussions can happen before an emergency. "Yancey’s emergency manager, Jeff Howell, told us he doubted the county commissioners would support issuing orders or that local residents would heed them given the area’s culture of self-reliance and disdain for government mandates, especially regarding property rights," ProPublica reports. "But some Yancey residents said they would have left or at least prepared better."

Use direct and honest disaster messaging across all possible channels. "With Helene closing in, officials in rural Yancey were among those who used less-direct wording. In Facebook posts, they asked residents to 'please prepare to move to higher ground as soon as you are able,'" Hawes and Simon write. "In one post, they softened the message, adding, 'This information is not to frighten anyone.' Many [Yancey survivors] told us that in retrospect they were looking for clearer directives from their leaders."

When it comes to training local emergency managers, consider following the lead of other states. "North Carolina does not require training for local emergency managers," Hawes and Simon add. "Florida recently enacted a law mandating minimum training, experience and education for its counties’ emergency managers starting in 2026. Georgia requires its emergency managers to get the state’s emergency management certification within six months."

Build landslide awareness, even if mapping hasn't been completed. "North Carolina began examining landslide risks by county, but powerful interests stood in the way," Hawes and Simon explain. "More than 20 years ago, North Carolina legislators passed a law requiring that landslide hazards be mapped across 19 mountain counties." When real estate and land developers pushed against the mapping program, lawmakers cut its funding and staff.

Ask for a 360 review. North Carolina hasn't issued any foundational review of "lessons learned" from Helene. "As North Carolina figures out how to direct millions of dollars in rebuilding aid, there has so far been no state inquiry into the preparedness of local areas — or what could better equip them for the next unprecedented storm," ProPublica reports. For now, the state seems more focused on rebuilding.

Hurricane season officially begins June 1. Experts are planning for an active Atlantic.

NOAA experts predict a busy hurricane season that isn't as extreme as 2024.

Hurricane season 2025 officially begins June 1 and forecasters expect another active season in the Atlantic. Current predictions estimate "a 60% chance of an 'above-normal' hurricane season, with between 13 to 19 named storms," reports Emily Mae Czachor of CBS News. "Six to 10 of those are expected to strengthen into hurricanes, and three to five could become major hurricanes."

While this year's season is marked by warm ocean temperatures, they aren't as warm as last year, so forecasters "don’t think it will be as chaotic as 2024, the third-costliest season on record as it spawned killer storms Beryl, Helene and Milton," reports Seth Borenstein of The Associated Press.

Atlantic hurricane seasons have been labeled as "above normal" since 1995, "with nearly half of those considered 'hyperactive,' according to NOAA," Borenstein writes. "Last year started with a record early Category 5 hurricane in Beryl but then had a lull during the early part of peak storm season from mid-August to mid-October. But then six storms, including Helene and Milton, formed in just two weeks."

Warmer ocean temperatures are the primary catalyst for hurricanes. Kristen Corbosiero, a University at Albany tropical meteorology professor, told Borenstein, "Warmer ocean water, warmer atmosphere above it can hold more moisture, more fuel for storms.” Even with a calmer season overall, one massively destructive storm can cause havoc across a region.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been hit by deep staffing cuts from the Department of Government Efficiency, but its acting administrator, Laura Grimm, told reporters, "The hurricane center is fully staffed up and we’re ready to go. We are making this a top priority for this administration."

The Atlantic hurricane season officially runs through Nov. 30.

Analysis: Local newspapers survive or close for different reasons

Local news can help residents hold elected officials 
accountable. (Photo by J. Mone, AP via Converation CC)

Beginning around 2005, community newspapers across the U.S. faced unprecedented financial stresses, which over time forced more than a third to close. While their closures have left communities in vulnerable "news deserts," they aren't random. Instead, the reasons smaller newspapers often close fall into a recognizable pattern. In her piece for The Conversation, Abby Youran Qin "identifies key drivers − ranging from racial disparity to market forces − that determine which towns lose their papers and which ones beat the odds."

Although local papers exist to serve their communities, they still need profits to keep the doors open. That is why some neighborhoods still have a paper. Qin explains, "Local newspapers survive where affluent subscribers and deep-pocketed advertisers cluster. That means wealthy white suburbs keep their watchdogs, while low-income and diverse communities lose theirs."

When poorer neighborhoods lose their paper and their investigative reporters, residents become more vulnerable to social power abuse. Qin writes, "Poor and racially diverse communities often face the harshest policing and interact more with street-level bureaucrats than wealthier citizens. That makes them more vulnerable to government corruption and misconduct."

Community newspapers often fail to serve their entire audience in equal ways. For instance, if everyone who worked at a local paper was white, would black events and happenings be equally covered? Over time, a pattern of bias in some news organizations caused racially diverse neighborhoods to distrust, dislike and not subscribe to the local paper.

"Diverse neighborhoods get hit twice. First, their local papers inadequately represent them," Qin explains. "Then, when people understandably turn away, subscriptions drop, advertisers pull back and the outlets shut down, leaving whole communities without a voice."

The structure of "market-dependent journalism," has also caused community newspapers to close, even when an area's population is growing. "The catch lies in who is moving in: Population growth saves papers only when it comes with wealth," Qin writes. "The news gap experienced by fast-growing communities may persist where local journalism depends primarily on traditional advertising and subscription revenues rather than diversified revenue sources such as grants and philanthropic donations."

Smaller newspapers are more likely to survive together. "In an era of decline, my analyses reveal a counterintuitive truth: Your town’s paper actually has better odds when nearby communities keep theirs," Qin adds. "Resilient local journalism clusters together. . . .When regional businesses support multiple outlets, the entire news ecosystem becomes more sustainable."

Letting go of partisan slants can help a community paper survive. "It turns out that there’s no significant link between a county’s partisan makeup and its ability to keep newspapers," Qin writes. Large subscribing bases and corporate advertisers often keep bigger newspapers afloat. Party affiliation isn't what drives their revenue.

Choosing to push politics left or right doesn't serve a local paper's interests. Qin explains, "But local journalism’s survival hinges on practical factors such as money and market size. Saving local news isn’t a left vs. right debate − it’s a community issue that requires nonpartisan solutions."