Highlights:
- Donald Trump did not deliver on his promise to expand rural access to broadband.
- Trump campaigned on expanding broadband, but as president he failed to improve rural access.
- Trump signed two executive orders that fell short when it came to getting rural Americans online.
- The Trump administration’s initiatives made it easier for broadband providers to charge consumers more and subsidized monopolies in rural areas.
- 26% of rural Americans did not have access to broadband internet plans.
- Trump campaigned on expanding broadband, but as president he failed to improve rural access.
- Donald Trump’s administration put rural hospitals in danger of closing.
- A Trump administration Medicaid rule to increase transparency would have been “crippling” to nursing homes and hospitals
- Hospitals were put in peril of closing due to the Trump administration’s Medicaid rule.
- Thirty-three rural hospitals closed under the Trump administration.
- A Trump administration Medicaid rule to increase transparency would have been “crippling” to nursing homes and hospitals
- Donald Trump’s administration issued anti-ethanol exemptions to the Renewable Fuel Standard.
- Trump approved exemptions to the Renewable Fuel Standard program for oil companies, cratering demand for renewable fuel.
- By August 2019, Trump’s Renewable Fuel Standard program exemptions drove 17 ethanol plants out of business, lost 2,500 jobs and lowered the price of corn 11%.
- Iowa leaders publicly attacked the Trump administration’s actions.
- The Trump administration announced a plan to help ethanol, but was attacked for reneging on the deal.
- Trump approved exemptions to the Renewable Fuel Standard program for oil companies, cratering demand for renewable fuel.
- After new rules were announced, farmers accused the Trump administration of reneging on the recent deal.
- Just before leaving office, Trump gave another set of waivers to oil companies.
- Corn prices were lower under Donald Trump than under Biden.
- Donald Trump opposed the Inflation Reduction Act, which increased funding for conservation programs, helped farms transition to clean energy, and created jobs for rural areas.
- In 2021, Trump opposed the Inflation Reduction Act.
- The Inflation Reduction Act was good for rural areas as it increased funding for conservation programs, helped farms transition to clean energy, and created jobs.
- Donald Trump attacked the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which invested in rural America.
- Trump tried to derail the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
- The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invested in rural America.
- The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invested funding to expand broadband for rural communities.
- The Bipartisan Infrastructure law provided funding for transportation options in rural areas to work on safer roads, bridges, and railway crossings for rural Americans.
- Donald Trump’s trade war with China hurt U.S. farmers
- Trump’s trade war with China cost U.S. farmers revenue
- Agricultural exports from the U.S. were down under the Trump administration.
- U.S. grain, dairy and livestock farmers saw a decrease in their revenue.
- Farm bankruptcies jumped to their highest in over a decade due to Trump’s trade war with China.
- Iowa farmers suffered due to Trump’s trade war.
- Trump’s trade war with China cost U.S. farmers revenue
- Donald Trump attacked the U.S. Postal Service despite rural communities’ reliance on it.
- Trump repeatedly targeted the U.S. Postal Service, which was a critical fixture in rural communities.
¶ Trump Did Not Deliver On His Promise To Expand Rural Access To Broadband
¶ Trump Campaigned On Expanding Broadband, But As President He Failed To Improve Rural Access
Trump Said That His Infrastructure Plan Would Include Expanded Access To Broadband Internet For Rural Areas. According to Bloomberg, “President Donald Trump said that expanded access to broadband internet service in rural areas will be part of the infrastructure plan he will submit to Congress, helping to bridge a digital divide that leaves small towns behind.” [Bloomberg, 6/21/17]
Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Never Happened And The President Disavowed The Idea Of The Federal Government Helping Expand 5G. According to Politico, “Trump pledged during the 2016 campaign to deliver broadband to rural Americans as part of a trillion-dollar national infrastructure package. Leaders of his 2020 reelection campaign also cited the need for rural connectivity earlier this year as they tried to pitch the Trump administration on a plan for a government intervention to spur along super-fast 5G wireless connectivity. But Trump’s big infrastructure plan went nowhere in Congress, and the president has disavowed the idea of federal meddling in 5G, preferring to let the private sector take the lead. Meanwhile, rural areas continue to heavily lag cities in internet availability and speeds.” [Politico, 8/17/19]
¶ Trump Signed Two Executive Orders That Fell Short When It Came To Getting Rural Americans Online
Trump Signed Two Executive Orders Aimed At Easing Red Tape Preventing Private Companies From Building New Internet Infrastructure. According to Vice, “Trump then introduced two executive orders, which he proceeded to sign live on stage, aimed at easing red tape preventing new internet infrastructure from being built. The first of these orders calls upon the Department of the Interior to allow private companies access to infrastructure like radio towers on government-owned land. The second is to come up with a plan to reduce the amount of government paperwork needed to get permission to build internet in rural areas.” [Vice, 1/10/18]
The Executive Orders Failed To Address The Costs Associated With Installing Fiber Across Rural Communities That Disincentivized Internet Providers From Expanding Coverage. According to Vice, “Obtuse bureaucracy can definitely slow down and increase the cost of building internet infrastructure. But on the list of reasons why rural Americans don’t have high speed internet, ‘too much paperwork’ isn’t very high up […] Folks in rural communities don’t have access to high-speed internet because it costs a lot of money to install fiber across miles of remote countryside. If, after that initial investment, a company is going to only get two or three customers using that infrastructure, as is often the case in rural areas, it doesn’t make sense financial for these companies to build. So they don’t. And efforts from Big Telecom lobbyists to prevent communities from building their own internet, either as a public utility or part of a local co-op, have sabotaged the few options these people have.” [Vice, 1/10/18]
¶ The Trump Administration’s Initiatives Made It Easier For Broadband Providers To Charge Consumers More And Subsidize Monopolies In Rural Areas
¶ 2017: The Trump Administration Repealed Net Neutrality Rules, Opening The Door For Broadband Providers To Charge Extra For Access To Certain Sites And Streaming Services
2017: Trump’s FCC Repealed Net Neutrality Rules Requiring Providers To Treat Internet Data Equally, Opening The Door For Providers To Charge More For To Access Certain Sites Or To Get Enough Bandwidth For Streaming Services. According to CNBC, “In December 2017, the FCC repealed the 2015 Open Internet Order, which required internet service providers to treat all internet traffic as equal and reinstated ISPs under a Title 1 classification that allowed them to set pricing and prioritize some types of internet traffic. […] Proponents of net neutrality have long argued that treating internet data equally is best for consumers and will increase innovation. They feared that, without neutrality, consumers would have to pay extra to their internet providers just to access certain websites or apps, or might have to pay more to get access to enough bandwidth for streaming services.” [CNBC, 3/6/19]
- CNBC: “For Example, Because Streaming Video Takes Up More Bandwidth Than Reading Text-Based Sites, Companies Could Charge More,” Including For Sites Like Netflix. According to CNBC, “Net neutrality proponents, including many large internet companies, argue that allowing ISPs to prioritize internet traffic differently may drive ISPs to charge more for various activities. For example, because streaming video takes up more bandwidth than reading text-based sites, companies could charge more. Removing the regulations may also allow ISPs to stifle services that compete with their own, including over-the-top streaming platforms such as Netflix.” [CNBC, 12/14/17]
FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel Warned That Internet Providers “Have The Technical Ability And Business Incentive To Discriminate And Manipulate Your Internet Traffic, And Now This Agency Gives Them The Legal Green Light To Go Ahead And Do So.” According to CNBC, “‘I dissent from the corrupt process that has brought us to this point, and I dissent from the contempt this agency has shown our citizens in pursuing this path today,’ FCC commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel said. ‘This decision put this Federal Communications Commission on the wrong side of history, the wrong side of the law, and the wrong side of the American public. The future of the internet is the future of everything. ... I believe it is essential that we sustain this foundation of openness, and that is why I support net neutrality.’ Rosenworcel said ISPs will get the power to block websites, throttle content and encourage pay-for-play arrangements with partners while limiting others to ‘a slow and bumpy road.’ ‘Know this: They have the technical ability and business incentive to discriminate and manipulate your internet traffic, and now this agency gives them the legal green light to go ahead and do so. This is not good. Not good for consumers, not good for business, not good for anyone who connects and creates online.’” [CNBC, 12/14/17]
¶ In April 2019, The FCC Announced A Plan To Expand Rural Broadband That Would Likely Subsidize Monopolies
April 2019: The FCC Announced A “New” $20.4 Billion Rural Digital Opportunity Fund To Expand Internet Access In Rural Areas, But The Plan Repurposed Existing Funds Designated For The Same Thing. According to Motherboard, “The FCC on Friday received a wave of largely positive press for a new broadband proposal the government claims will revolutionize telecom markets and help drive fiber and fifth-generation (5G) wireless to rural America. But industry watchers say the agency’s proposal is light on actual details, and much of the plan isn’t actually new. […] The FCC said it will also be launching a new $20.4 billion Rural Digital Opportunity Fund it promised would help connect up to four million rural homes and small businesses to high-speed broadband networks over the next decade. Roughly 20 million Americans lack access to speeds of 25 Mbps, the agency’s minimum threshold for broadband. Granted the funding isn’t actually ‘new,’ and it comes on the heels of numerous FCC attacks on programs that are supposed to help bring affordable connectivity to rural America. In a conference call with reporters Friday morning, FCC head Ajit Pai said the agency would pay for the plan by ‘repurposing’ some existing funds provided by the FCC’s Universal Service Fund (USF), already designed to help subsidize broadband availability in underserved areas. Users already pay into the program via fees imposed on their phone bills. The fund would be ‘the FCC’s single biggest step yet to close the digital divide,’ the agency said.” [Motherboard, 4/12/19]
- Senior VP Of Public Knowledge Harold Feld: “This Is Really Just Like Slapping ‘New And Improved!’ On The Same Package.” According to Motherboard, “Harold Feld, Senior VP of consumer group Public Knowledge, told Motherboard in an email that the FCC’s ‘new’ plan doesn’t appear to offer much that’s actually new, and repurposing USF funds as proposed could prove legally problematic. ‘It is hard to see how you can do this given that broadband is a Title I information service and USF is restricted to Title II telecommunications,’ Feld said, referring to the FCC’s decision to roll back Title II classification of ISPs with its net neutrality repeal. Feld said the FCC could find the money from its existing taxpayer-backed Connect America Fund, but that would largely be more of a new coat of paint than an entirely new program. ‘This is really just like slapping ‘new and Improved!’ on the same package,’ Feld said.” [Motherboard, 4/12/19]
Critics Pointed Out The Plan Could Result In The Federal Government Subsidizing Internet Provider Monopolies In Rural Areas. According to Motherboard, “The Electronic Frontier Foundation said that while it supported the idea of broader broadband availability, it had some skepticism regarding FCC motivation and implementation, and told Motherboard it was concerned the program could just wind up padding monopoly revenues instead of building better, more open broadband networks. ‘We have very little detail here though but it looks like the FCC is suggesting the government should spend $20 billion to fund gigabit fiber monopolies for rural Americans. That would be a gigantic mistake,’ EFF lawyer Ernesto Falcon told Motherboard in an email. ‘Rather, if the government is going to invest a huge amount of money into connecting rural Americans, it should approach it as an open access infrastructure rather than subsidizing a single ISP’s profits,’ Falcon said. ‘That way, rural markets that are only going to be able to sustain one network can have the benefits of competition and all of the various ISPs that serve rural markets can mutually benefit.’” [Motherboard, 4/12/19]
¶ Twenty-Six Percent Of Rural Americans Did Not Have Access To Broadband Internet Plans
According to the American Prospect, “America’s internet deficit is predominantly confined to the most rural areas and states. The FCC’s 2019 Broadband Deployment Report states that 26 percent of rural Americans, as compared to 1.7 percent of urban areas, do not have access to broadband internet plans.” [American Prospect, 10/2/20]
¶ The Trump Administration’s Actions Put Rural Hospitals In Danger Of Closing
¶ A Trump Administration Medicaid Rule To Increase Transparency Would Have Been “Crippling” To Nursing Homes And Hospitals
Hospitals, Governors, And Medical Professionals Argued That A New, Complex Trump Administration Medicaid Proposal Would Be “Crippling” To Nursing Homes And Hospitals. According to the Orlando Sentinel, “But Florida Medicaid director Beth Kidder wrote to federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Seema Verma last month and asserted that a proposal meant to increase transparency related to supplemental Medicaid payments would be ‘crippling.’ ‘It is abundantly clear the CMS (the federal agency) has not sufficiently assessed the substantial consequences this proposed rule would have on both the providers serving and the recipients relying on Medicaid program services that would be impacted by a myriad of the draft positions,’ Kidder wrote in her Jan. 31 letter. ‘While we are unable to calculate the specific impact to all our state programs based on the existing ambiguities in the proposed rule, it is clear that the impact would be immediate and crippling,’ Kidder added.” [Orlando Sentinel, 2/12/20]
Kidder Estimated That The Proposed Changes Meant To Increase Transparency Would Jeopardize $660 Million In Medicaid Funding For Florida’s Nursing-Home Industry. According to the Orlando Sentinel, “But in a letter to Verma, the Florida Health Care Association estimated the proposed changes could jeopardize $660 million in Medicaid funding for the state’s nursing-home industry.” [Orlando Sentinel, 2/12/20]
¶ Hospitals Were Put In Peril Of Closing Due To The Trump Administration’s Medicaid Rule
Hospitals Were Put In Peril Of Closing According To One Estimate Which Stated That The Rule Could Reduce Medicaid Spending By 6% To 8%, Or Up To $49 Billion A Year. According to Pew, “By one estimate, the rule could reduce Medicaid spending by 6% to 8%, or $37 billion to $49 billion a year. That analysis, prepared by Manatt Health for the American Hospital Association, also estimated that the rule could deprive hospitals of 13% to 17% of the federal Medicaid payments they now receive, or between $23 billion and $31 billion a year. That reduction, policy analysts and advocates say, could put hospitals in peril of closing, particularly rural hospitals that already are shuttering at unprecedented rates. ‘It’s a killer,’ said John Henderson, CEO and president of the Texas Organization of Rural and Community Hospitals, of the rule. Twenty-one of the 107 rural hospitals that have closed in the United States since 2012 were in Texas, more than any other state. ‘They can’t take another punch.’ Nursing home officials also say they fear closures if the rule is implemented.” [Pew Trusts, 2/28/20]
¶ Thirty-Three Rural Hospitals Closed Under The Trump Administration
Thirty-Three Rural Hospital Closed Under The Trump Administration. According to the University of North Carolina Cecil G. Sheps Center For Health Services Research, there were 33 complete rural hospital closures between 2017 and 2020. A complete closure means the health care facilities no longer provide health care services. [University of North Carolina Cecil G. Sheps Center For Health Services Research, accessed 10/3/23]
¶ The Trump Administration Issued Anti-Ethanol Exemptions To The Renewable Fuel Standard
¶ Trump Approved Exemptions To The Renewable Fuel Standard Program For Oil Companies, Cratering Demand For Renewable Fuel
¶ Refiners Were Able To Apply For Exemptions To The RFS In Certain Cases Of Financial Harm
Refiners Could Apply For Exemptions To The Renewable Fuel Standard Program For Cases Of Financial Harm. According to Reuters, “Under the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard, refiners must blend billions of gallons of biofuels like corn-based ethanol into their fuel mix, or buy credits from those that do. Refiners can apply for exemptions if they can prove the obligations would cause them financial harm. The Trump administration has dramatically ramped up the number of such exemptions granted to the industry - angering biofuel producers.” [Reuters, 1/11/21]
¶ Reuters: The Trump Administration “Dramatically Ramped Up” Exemptions To The Renewable Fuel Standard Program
Reuters: Trump Administration “Dramatically Ramped Up The Number Of Such Exemptions Granted To The Industry.” According to Reuters, “Under the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard, refiners must blend billions of gallons of biofuels like corn-based ethanol into their fuel mix, or buy credits from those that do. Refiners can apply for exemptions if they can prove the obligations would cause them financial harm. The Trump administration has dramatically ramped up the number of such exemptions granted to the industry - angering biofuel producers.” [Reuters, 1/11/21]
¶ 2017 – 2019: The Trump Administration Granted 85 Refineries Exemptions To The Renewable Fuel Standard Program
2017 – 2019: The Trump Administration Granted 85 Refineries A Pass From Buying Renewable Fuels. According to the Des Moines Register, “Since taking office, the Trump administration has granted 85 refineries a pass from buying 4 billion gallons of renewable fuel, killing demand for 1.4 billion bushels of corn used to make it, Bowdish said.” [Des Moines Register, 8/24/19]
¶ 2016 – 2018: GAO: The EPA Granted “Nearly All” Of The Exemptions Refineries Applied For
Government Accountability Office: EPA Granted “Nearly All” Of Renewable Fuel Standard Program Exemptions Refineries Applied For From 2016-2018. According to Politico Pro, “The small refiner exemptions have become an increasingly contentious part of the RFS in recent years. The Trump administration significantly increased use of the waivers, but the Biden administration stopped issuing them altogether. For 2016 through 2018, EPA granted ‘nearly all’ of the exemptions for which refineries applied, GAO found. But the agency this year denied all petitions for 2019 through 2021.” [Politico Pro, 11/3/22]
¶ The Trump-Granted Exemptions Included Big Oil
Trump EPA Granted Waivers To Chevron And Exxon. According to NBC News, “The waivers have extended to giant oil corporations such as Chevron and Exxon. As a result, more than one dozen ethanol plants have shut down or halted production across the country this year.” [NBC News, 8/29/19]
¶ Ethanol Giant Poet Blamed The Oil Industry And Highlighted The Hypocrisy Of The Trump Administration
Poet: “Oil Is Making Billions Of Dollars, Yet Still Using EPA To Stop Biofuels Growth By Handing Out Hardship Waivers To Some Of The Wealthiest Companies In The World, In Contradiction With President Trump’s Public Comments.” According to a press release by Poet, “EPA’s mismanagement of SREs has created an artificial cap on domestic demand for ethanol and driven RIN values to near-zero, which weakens the incentive for retailers to offer higher blends. Oil is making billions of dollars, yet still using EPA to stop biofuels growth by handing out hardship waivers to some of the wealthiest companies in the world, in contradiction with President Trump’s public comments. So far, the EPA has cut biofuels demand by 4 billion gallons and reduced demand for corn by 1.4 billion bushels, causing severe damage in rural America.” [Poet, 8/20/19]
- 2019: Poet Was The Largest Ethanol Producer In The United States. According to the Des Moines Register, “Poet, the nation’s largest ethanol producer, said this week it will close an Indiana plant and ratchet back production at half its other plants, with the biggest cuts happening in Iowa and Ohio.” [Des Moines Register, 8/24/19]
¶ Trump Waivers Did Not Reassign Production Targets To Other Refiners
Trump Waivers Did Not Reassign Affected Output To Other Refineries. According to the Washington Post, “Unlike similar Obama administration waivers, the latest EPA actions did not reassign the affected output to other refineries, thus reducing the total amount produced. In the month after the announcement, the price of corn dropped 14 percent. The normally tame Iowa Corn Growers’ Association issued a statement accusing the president of breaking his promise to back ethanol and said farmers were ‘fed up.’” [Washington Post, 10/1/19]
¶ By August 2019, Trump’s Renewable Fuel Standard Program Exemptions Drove 17 Ethanol Plants Out Of Business, Lost 2,500 Jobs And Lowered The Price Of Corn 11 Percent
The Exemptions Lowered Ethanol Demand By 4 Billion Gallons And Killed Demand For 1.4 Billion Bushels Of Corn. According to the Des Moines Register, “Since taking office, the Trump administration has granted 85 refineries a pass from buying 4 billion gallons of renewable fuel, killing demand for 1.4 billion bushels of corn used to make it, Bowdish said.” [Des Moines Register, 8/24/19]
¶ Renewable Fuel Standard Program Exemptions Caused 17 Ethanol Plants To Close
2019: Trump Renewable Fuel Standard Program Small Refinery Exemptions Drove 17 Ethanol Plants To Close. According to CNBC, “The Trump administration appears to be moving toward a deal to placate ethanol interests who have blamed the president’s deregulatory push for forcing the closing of 17 ethanol plants. It’s a deal where the administration is trying to do damage control and balance the demands of farmers and oil companies, two of Donald Trump’s most loyal constituencies. […] The rules at issue are called small refinery exemptions, which the Trump administration has expanded at the behest of oil companies and to the consternation of ethanol interests. The exemptions let so-called small gasoline refineries — including some owned by oil giants Exxon Mobil and Chevron —out of their obligations to produce ethanol under the renewable fuel standards rules approved by Congress in 2005 and 2007 to address climate change.” [CNBC, 9/23/19]
- Largest Ethanol Producer In The Country, Poet, Said It Planned To Close An Indiana Plant And Reduce Production At Half Of Its Plants. According to the Des Moines Register, “Poet, the nation’s largest ethanol producer, said this week it will close an Indiana plant and ratchet back production at half its other plants, with the biggest cuts happening in Iowa and Ohio.” [Des Moines Register, 8/24/19]
¶ Ethanol Plant Closures Led To 2,500 Lost Jobs
The Renewable Fuels Association Said That By August 2019, 2,500 Jobs Were Lost By Ethanol Plant Closures. According to NBC News, “As a result of the waivers, ethanol and corn prices have decreased 12 and 11 percent respectively, which could result in ‘a staggering $10 billion transfer of wealth from the agriculture and biofuel sectors to the oil industry,’ the Renewable Fuels Association, a trade organization, said in a statement last week. The organization also said that the waivers have reduced ethanol productions by 2.6 billion gallons and more than 2,500 jobs have been lost by recent closures.” [NBC News, 8/29/19]
¶ The Price Of Corn Was Down 11 Percent, And The Price Of Ethanol Was Down 12 Percent
By August 2019, Waivers Decreased Ethanol And Corn Prices By 12 And 11 Percent, Respectively. According to NBC News, “As a result of the waivers, ethanol and corn prices have decreased 12 and 11 percent respectively, which could result in ‘a staggering $10 billion transfer of wealth from the agriculture and biofuel sectors to the oil industry,’ the Renewable Fuels Association, a trade organization, said in a statement last week. The organization also said that the waivers have reduced ethanol productions by 2.6 billion gallons and more than 2,500 jobs have been lost by recent closures.” [NBC News, 8/29/19]
- 2019: Corn Was Roughly A Third Of All U.S. Crop Production. According to NBC News, “Corn makes up roughly one-third of crop produced in the U.S. and over the past several decades its production has steadily risen, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forty percent of total corn use in the U.S. is tied to growing ethanol production, according to the agency. And Iowa is among the top corn-producing states.” [NBC News, 8/29/19]
- 2019: 40 Percent Of Corn Grown In The U.S. Was Tied To Ethanol Production. According to NBC News, “Corn makes up roughly one-third of crop produced in the U.S. and over the past several decades its production has steadily risen, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forty percent of total corn use in the U.S. is tied to growing ethanol production, according to the agency. And Iowa is among the top corn-producing states.” [NBC News, 8/29/19]
¶ Iowa Leaders Publicly Attacked The Trump Administration’s Actions
2019 Des Moines Register Headline: “A Slap In The Face”: Trump's Ethanol Waivers Are Sparking Rebellion In Farm Country [Des Moines Register, 8/25/19]
¶ Sen. Chuck Grassley and Gov. Reynolds Criticized Said The Trump Administration For The Exemptions
Grassley: The Trump Administration “Screwed Us When They Issued 31 Waivers Compared To Less Than 10 Waivers In All The Obama Years.” According to NBC News, “Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, an ally of the president, also excoriated the administration over the waivers. ‘They screwed us when they issued 31 waivers compared to less than 10 waivers in all the Obama years,’ he told Iowa Public Television's ‘Iowa Press’ earlier this month.” [NBC News, 8/29/19]
- Grassley: “What's Bad Isn't The Waiver. It's That It's Being Granted To People Who Really Aren't (Experiencing) Hardship.” According to NBC News, “Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, an ally of the president, also excoriated the administration over the waivers. ‘They screwed us when they issued 31 waivers compared to less than 10 waivers in all the Obama years,’ he told Iowa Public Television's ‘Iowa Press’ earlier this month. ‘What's bad isn't the waiver. It's that it's being granted to people who really aren't (experiencing) hardship.’” [NBC News, 8/29/19]
Reynolds Wrote To Trump Administration EPA Administrator That EPA’s “Actions Are A Clear Violation Of The President's Commitment To Iowa Farmers And Renewable Fuel Producers.” According to the Des Moines Register, “And Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds, expressing ‘profound disappointment,’ wrote EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler that his agency's ‘actions are a clear violation of the president's commitment to Iowa farmers and renewable fuel producers across the heartland.’” [Des Moines Register, 8/25/19]
¶ The Iowa Corn Growers Association President And Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy CEO Also Criticized The Exemptions And Trump
Iowa Corn Growers Association President: “The Exemptions Are Ridiculous And A Slap In The Face To Farmers.” According to the Des Moines Register, “‘The exemptions are ridiculous and a slap in the face to farmers,’ said Curt Mether, president of the Iowa Corn Growers Association and a western Iowa farmer.” [Des Moines Register, 8/24/19]
Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy CEO: “Deeply Disappointing” That Trump Did Not Heed Calls To Curtail Small Refinery Exemptions To The Renewable Fuel Standard Program. According to the Des Moines Register, “Farmers and ethanol leaders warned Trump that the small refinery exemptions could reverse E15 gains, advice the president didn't appear to take. ‘It was deeply disappointing,’ said Mike Jerke, CEO of Southwest Iowa Renewable Energy in Council Bluffs.” [Des Moines Register, 8/24/19]
¶ The Trump Administration Announced A Plan To Help Ethanol, But Was Attacked For Reneging ON The Deal
¶ The Trump Administration Said It Would Produce Rules To Increase Ethanol Demand
October 2019: The Trump White House Sought To Broker A Compromise Between Ethanol Advocates And The Oil Industry. According to the Washington Post, “But Democrats flipped two of the state’s congressional seats in the 2018 midterm election, and Barack Obama won Iowa twice, so Republicans are attentive to any signs of eroding support. In recent days, amid a rising impeachment furor, the White House has scrambled to midwife a compromise between ethanol advocates and the oil industry.” [Washington Post, 10/1/19]
October 2019: The Trump Administration Said It Would Promulgate Rules To Increase Ethanol Demand. According to the New York Times, “And last week, after a flurry of pressure from senators and criticism from agricultural groups, the Trump administration relented, saying that it would put forth rules designed to increase ethanol demand. The decision, which was cheered in a Corn Belt that has also been battered this year by tariffs and floods, underscored the importance of the rural Midwest to Mr. Trump’s re-election hopes and gave a boost to farmers at the end of a difficult growing season.” [New York Times, 10/17/19]
¶ After New Rules Were Announced, Farmers Accused The Trump Administration Of Reneging On The Recent Deal
Trump’s EPA Proposed Formula For Determining Biofuel Standards Based On Average Of Projections Instead Of Actual Number Of Gallons For Which Small Refineries Were Exempted. According to The Hill, “The formula proposed by the agency for determining how many gallons other refineries would have to blend into their fuels would be based on an average of government projections rather than the actual number of gallons for which small refineries previously received waivers.” [The Hill, 10/6/19]
Iowa Farmers And Ethanol Producers Accused The Trump Administration Of Reneging On The Deal Struck 11 Days Prior. According to The Hill, “Iowa farmers and ethanol producers are livid over the latest iteration of the Trump administration’s ethanol proposal, saying the president has reneged on a deal struck just 11 days before. President Trump’s latest ethanol proposal, announced earlier this month, was designed to boost the product, promising a mechanism for ensuring large refineries add the gallons of the biofuel that smaller refineries were excused from adding to their fuel. But farm and ethanol groups say the additional details released Tuesday by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) were never part of the package they discussed with the White House.” [The Hill, 10/6/19]
¶ Just Before Leaving Office, Trump Gave Another Set Of Waivers To Oil Companies
January 2021: Trump Granted Three Waivers To Oil Refiners That Exempted Them From Biofuel Blending Obligations. According to Reuters, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Tuesday granted three waivers to oil refiners that exempt them from U.S. biofuel blending obligations, a last-minute move before President Donald Trump leaves office on Wednesday. […] The three waivers were granted to oil refiners, but it was not clear which refiners received the exemptions.” [Reuters, 1/19/21]
¶ Corn Prices Were Lower Under Trump Than They Were Under Biden
¶ The Price Of Corn Under Trump Was Lower Than It Was Under Biden
Price Of Corn Was Generally Lower Under Trump Than Under Biden. According to Macrotrends.net’s Corn Prices - 59 Year Historical Chart,
[Macrotrends, Accessed 10/31/23]
¶ Trump Opposed The Inflation Reduction Act, Which Increased Funding For Conservation Programs, Helped In Farm Transitions To Clean Energy, And Created Jobs For Rural Areas
¶ 2021: Trump Opposed The Inflation Reduction Act
¶ Trump Attacked The Inflation Reduction Act
Trump Attacked The Inflation Reduction Act In A Post To Truth Social. According to a post to Truth Social by @realDonaldTrump, “Democrats in Congress should strongly VOTE AGAINST THE BIGGEST GREEN NEW FAKE DEAL BILL IN HISTORY, which is about to be rammed down the throats of Americans. Those Dems voting against this massive tax hike will be legends - actually be able to win again. Should be called the Inflation Expansion Act. Adds 87,000 gun carrying IRS Agents to cajole and harass you and your family. Call your Democrat Congressmen & women - tell them NOT to vote for this killer. Republicans are 100% against!” [Truth Social, 8/12/22]
Trump Condemned The Inflation Reduction Act And Attacked Democrats For The “Biggest Tax Hike In History.” According to the Daily Mail, “Trump spent a good chunk of his speech slamming Democrats for the 'biggest tax hike in history' as he condemned Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act while at a Wisconsin Rally.” [Daily Mail, 8/6/22]
¶ The Inflation Reduction Act Increased Funding For Conservation Programs, Aided In Transition To Clean Energy, And Created Jobs For Rural Areas
The Inflation Reduction Act Increased Funding For Farmers To Participate In Conservation Programs. According to the Environmental Defense Fund, “U.S. Department of Agriculture conservation programs are underfunded and oversubscribed. On average, three farmers want to participate for every slot available. With the additional funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, the USDA can hold the door open wider, enabling more farmers to participate in conservation programs. These are farmers who already value conservation but need financial assistance or technical assistance to make the transition. The increased funding should get climate-smart practices on the ground quickly.” [Environmental Defense Fund, 11/22/22]
The Inflation Reduction Act Added Funds To Help Farms And Rural Electric Co-Ops Transition To Clean Energy. According to the Environmental Defense Fund, “One of the most impactful portions of the Inflation Reduction Act — for both rural economies and climate change — is a $14 billion investment in helping farms and rural electric co-ops transition to clean energy. This will create an estimated 90,000 good jobs in rural communities, which have seen thousands of jobs migrate to cities in recent decades. This won’t reverse the trend on its own, but it will jumpstart economic revitalization and opportunity. It’s also one of the largest emissions reductions opportunities in the law and will make rural electric grids more reliable and resilient.” [Environmental Defense Fund, 11/22/22]
The Transition To Clean Energy Was Estimated To Create 90,000 Jobs In Rural Communities. According to the Environmental Defense Fund, “One of the most impactful portions of the Inflation Reduction Act — for both rural economies and climate change — is a $14 billion investment in helping farms and rural electric co-ops transition to clean energy. This will create an estimated 90,000 good jobs in rural communities, which have seen thousands of jobs migrate to cities in recent decades. This won’t reverse the trend on its own, but it will jumpstart economic revitalization and opportunity. It’s also one of the largest emissions reductions opportunities in the law and will make rural electric grids more reliable and resilient.” [Environmental Defense Fund, 11/22/22]
Trump Attacked The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, Which Invested In Rural America
¶ Trump Tried To Derail The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
Trump Repeatedly Criticized The Bipartisan Negotiations Regarding The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. According to Politico, “The former president has sounded off repeatedly in the past week about the negotiations taking place between Senate Republicans and Democrats on the Hill and in the White House. He’s encouraged GOP lawmakers to abandon the talks and criticized Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for even entertaining them. Senate Republicans have said, in interviews, that they have directly asked the former president not just to tone down his criticism but to actually support the infrastructure deal. […] But Trump has made clear he is not interested in supporting any kind of Republican deal with Democrats and is hoping allies in Congress kill it.” [Politico, 7/28/21]
Trump Encouraged Republican Lawmaker To Abandon The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Talks. According to Politico, “The former president has sounded off repeatedly in the past week about the negotiations taking place between Senate Republicans and Democrats on the Hill and in the White House. He’s encouraged GOP lawmakers to abandon the talks and criticized Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) for even entertaining them. Senate Republicans have said, in interviews, that they have directly asked the former president not just to tone down his criticism but to actually support the infrastructure deal. […] But Trump has made clear he is not interested in supporting any kind of Republican deal with Democrats and is hoping allies in Congress kill it.” [Politico, 7/28/21]
¶ The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Invested In Rural America
¶ The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Invested Funding To Help Expand Broadband For Rural Communities
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Invested Funding To Help Expand Broadband For Rural Communities. According to the White House’s Website, “More than 35 percent of rural Americans and Tribal communities lack wired access to broadband at acceptable speeds. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests $65 billion to make high-speed internet available to all Americans, to bring down high-speed internet prices across the board, and to provide technical assistance to rural communities seeking to expand broadband.” [White House Website, Accessed 10/31/23]
¶ The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Invested Funding For Transportation Options In Rural Areas To Work On Safer Roads, Bridges, And Railway Crossings
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Invested Funding For Transportation Options In Rural Areas. According to the White House’s Website, “Limited access to transportation options in rural and remote areas impairs Americans’ access to jobs, basic services, and their communities. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests billions of dollars to make sure rural families can get where they need to go.” [White House Website, Accessed 10/31/23]
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Provided Funding To Work On Safer Roads, Bridges, And Railway Crossings For Rural Americans. According to the White House’s Website, “While Americans living in rural areas account for 19% of the population, they comprise nearly half of all roadway fatalities. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law will deliver safer roads, bridges, and railway crossings for rural Americans.” [White House Website, Accessed 10/31/23]
¶ The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Provided Funding To Deliver Clean, Affordable Power Which Could Help Lessen The Times Rural Communities Are Without Power After Power Outages
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Provided Funding To Deliver Clean, Affordable Power Which Could Help Lessen The Times Rural Communities Are Without Power After Power Outages. According to the White House’s Website, “Power outages cost the U.S. economy up to $70 billion each year, and rural communities can be without power for days during these outages. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding to reliably deliver clean, affordable power to more Americans, improving resilience of our grid infrastructure, and helping achieve the President’s goal of 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035.” [White House Website, Accessed 10/31/23]
¶ Trump’s Trade War With China Hurt U.S. Farmers
¶ Trump’s Trade War With China Cost U.S Farmers Revenue
U.S. Farmers Lost One Of Their Biggest Customers After China Officially Cancelled All Purchases Of U.S. Agricultural Products In Retaliation To Trump’s Trade War. According to CNBC, “U.S. farmers lost one of their biggest customers after China officially cancelled all purchases of U.S. agricultural products, a retaliatory move following President Donald Trump’s pledge to slap 10% tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese imports. China’s exit piles on to a devastating year for farmers, who have struggled through record flooding and an extreme heat wave that destroyed crop yields, and trade war escalations that have lowered prices and profits this year.” [CNBC, 8/10/19]
- Trump Pledged To Slap 10% Tariffs On $300 Billion Of Chinese Imports. According to CNBC, “U.S. farmers lost one of their biggest customers after China officially cancelled all purchases of U.S. agricultural products, a retaliatory move following President Donald Trump’s pledge to slap 10% tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese imports. China’s exit piles on to a devastating year for farmers, who have struggled through record flooding and an extreme heat wave that destroyed crop yields, and trade war escalations that have lowered prices and profits this year.” [CNBC, 8/10/19]
¶ Agricultural Exports From The U.S. Were Down Under The Trump Administration
2017: China Imported $19.5 Billion In Agricultural Goods. According to CNBC, “Agriculture exports to China dropped by more than half last year. In 2017, China imported $19.5 billion in agricultural goods, making it the second-largest buyer overall for American farmers. In 2018, that dropped to $9.2 billion as the trade war escalated, according to the United States Department of Agriculture.” [CNBC, 8/10/19]
2018: China Imported 9.2 Billion In Agricultural Goods. According to CNBC, “Agriculture exports to China dropped by more than half last year. In 2017, China imported $19.5 billion in agricultural goods, making it the second-largest buyer overall for American farmers. In 2018, that dropped to $9.2 billion as the trade war escalated, according to the United States Department of Agriculture.” [CNBC, 8/10/19]
2019: China’s Agricultural Imports From The U.S Were Down Roughly 20%. According to CNBC, “This year, China’s agricultural imports from the U.S are down roughly 20%, and U.S. grain, dairy and livestock farmers have seen their revenue evaporate as a result. Over the last 6 years, farm income has dropped 45% from $123.4 billion in 2013 to $63 billion last year, according to the USDA.” [CNBC, 8/10/19]
¶ U.S. Grain, Dairy And Livestock Farmers Saw A Decrease In Their Revenue
U.S. Grain, Dairy And Livestock Farmers Saw Their Revenue Decrease As A Result Of The Decrease In Exports To China Due To Trump’s Trade War. According to CNBC, “This year, China’s agricultural imports from the U.S are down roughly 20%, and U.S. grain, dairy and livestock farmers have seen their revenue evaporate as a result. Over the last 6 years, farm income has dropped 45% from $123.4 billion in 2013 to $63 billion last year, according to the USDA.” [CNBC, 8/10/19]
¶ Farm Bankruptcies Jumped To Their Highest In Over A Decade Due To Trump’s Trade War With China
There Was A 20% Spike In Farm Bankruptcies As Farmers Struggled Amid Trump’s Trade War With China. According to CBS News, “U.S. farms endured a spike in bankruptcies last year, climbing 20% even with financial help from Washington, D.C. American farmers have struggled amid U.S. trade talks with both Mexico and China, with soybean exports especially hit hard by retaliatory tariffs by China first imposed in 2018. The hurt in the nation's heartland prompted the White House to set aside $28 billion over the past two years for farmers caught in the crossfire of President Donald Trump's trade war. Still, despite the billions in farm aid, 595 family farms declared bankruptcy in 2019, up nearly 100 filings from the previous year and the highest count since 2011, according to data from the American Farm Bureau.” [CBS News, 1/31/20]
Trump’s White House Set Aside $28 Billion For Farmers Caught In The Crossfire Of President Donald Trump's Trade War But That But There Was Still A Farm Bankruptcy Spike. According to CBS News, “U.S. farms endured a spike in bankruptcies last year, climbing 20% even with financial help from Washington, D.C. American farmers have struggled amid U.S. trade talks with both Mexico and China, with soybean exports especially hit hard by retaliatory tariffs by China first imposed in 2018. The hurt in the nation's heartland prompted the White House to set aside $28 billion over the past two years for farmers caught in the crossfire of President Donald Trump's trade war. Still, despite the billions in farm aid, 595 family farms declared bankruptcy in 2019, up nearly 100 filings from the previous year and the highest count since 2011, according to data from the American Farm Bureau.” [CBS News, 1/31/20]
595 Family Farms Declared Bankruptcy In 2019, Up Nearly 100 Filings From The Previous Year And The Highest Count Since 2011. According to CBS News, “U.S. farms endured a spike in bankruptcies last year, climbing 20% even with financial help from Washington, D.C. American farmers have struggled amid U.S. trade talks with both Mexico and China, with soybean exports especially hit hard by retaliatory tariffs by China first imposed in 2018. The hurt in the nation's heartland prompted the White House to set aside $28 billion over the past two years for farmers caught in the crossfire of President Donald Trump's trade war. Still, despite the billions in farm aid, 595 family farms declared bankruptcy in 2019, up nearly 100 filings from the previous year and the highest count since 2011, according to data from the American Farm Bureau.” [CBS News, 1/31/20]
¶ Iowa Farmers Suffered Due To Trump’s Trade War
In Iowa The Damage To Corn, Soybean, And Hog Markets Was Estimated At Almost $1.7 Billion Due To Trump’s Trade War. According to the Center For American Progress, “Despite Trump’s promise to negotiate stronger trade deals with China, Mexico, and Canada to the benefit of farmers, his erratic approach to trade policy and the retaliatory tariffs that have been levied in response have deeply wounded the agriculture sector. […] In Iowa alone, the damage to corn, soybean, and hog markets was estimated at almost $1.7 billion.” [Center For American Progress, 10/5/20]
Trump’s Trade War With China Hurt Rural America Yet Increased His Popularity There
Trump’s Trade War Helped Trump’s Popularity In Rural America Despite Not Helping Its Economies. According to Axios, “President Trump's trade war with China didn't help the economies of rural America. It did, however, make Trump more popular in those places. Why it matters: The finding, from a fascinating new paper, suggests that the politics of China tariffs is much better than the economics. There was no direct employment boost from the policies in 2018 and 2019, but the moves still redounded to Trump's political benefit in areas most impacted by the tariffs, including in the Midwest and parts of the South.” [Axios, 2/7/24]
The Chinese Response To Trump’s Tariffs Had A Negative Effect On Employment In Rural Areas. According to Axios, “The new paper finds that the tariffs imposed on Chinese imports had no material employment impact in the period covered by the paper (through December 2019). But the paper's authors find that retaliatory measures imposed by China ‘had a consistent and significant negative employment impact’ in these regions that was only slightly offset by the aid sent to farmers. Those measures reduced employment in crop production, transportation and warehousing — among other sectors.” [Axios, 2/7/24]
Voters In Rural Areas Rewarded Trump For His Tariffs Anyway. According to Axios, “Yes, but: ‘Although the goal of bringing back jobs to the heartland remained elusive, voters in regions that had borne the economic brunt of Chinese import competition in the 1990s and 2000s were particularly likely to reward the Trump government for its tariff policy," they write. What they're saying: The results of the study suggest Trump would have a ‘political rationale’ to continue aggressive trade policies, Dorn, an economics professor at the University of Zurich, tells Axios. ‘If it is the case that tough tariff policies are sufficiently popular with the voter base, the government might really [be] tempted to make use of that measure — even if it is not a good economic policy,’ Dorn said.” [Axios, 2/7/24]
Trump Attacked The U.S. Postal Service Despite Rural Communities’ Reliance On It
¶ Trump Repeatedly Targeted The U.S. Postal Service, Which Was A Critical Fixture In Rural Communities
2018: Trump Proposed The U.S. Postal Service Be Privatized. According to the Center For American Progress, “Although the U.S. Postal Service is a critical fixture in rural communities, Trump has repeatedly targeted the agency, even proposing to privatize it in 2018. Now, the coronavirus pandemic is pushing the Postal Service to the limit, as Americans have increased their reliance on deliveries in lieu of venturing outside the house.” [Center For American Progress, 10/5/20]
Trump Threated To Veto The CARES Act If It Contained Any Aid For The U.S. Postal Service. According to the Center For American Progress, “Despite the importance of post office services, Trump threatened to veto the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act if it contained any aid to the agency. Meanwhile, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, a close Trump ally with no experience In public service, severely limited overtime for postal workers—a move that the Postal Service acknowledged would cause delays. He has also consolidated his power over the agency’s operations, recently reshuffling almost 25 top officials.” [Center For American Progress, 10/5/20]
Trump Ally Postmaster General Louis Dejoy Severely Limited Overtime For Postal Workers, A Move That Could Have Caused Delays. According to the Center For American Progress, “Despite the importance of post office services, Trump threatened to veto the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act if it contained any aid to the agency. Meanwhile, Postmaster General Louis DeJoy, a close Trump ally with no experience In public service, severely limited overtime for postal workers—a move that the Postal Service acknowledged would cause delays. He has also consolidated his power over the agency’s operations, recently reshuffling almost 25 top officials.” [Center For American Progress, 10/5/20]