The Assault on America's Food Security: How Cutting $360 Million in Agricultural Funding Threatens Our Nation's Resilience

The Unraveling of Critical Food Infrastructure

In a move that strikes at the heart of American food security and rural economic development, the Trump administration earlier this year terminated a $360 million Biden-era program that supported 13 food business centers across the United States. This program, established in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, was designed specifically to bolster rural development and build stronger food-supply networks to prevent the catastrophic food shortages and supply chain disruptions that plagued the nation during the health crisis.

The Southwest Regional Food Business Center, serving California, Arizona, Nevada, and Utah, was among the casualties of this funding elimination. The University of Nevada, Reno Extension lost $3 million in federal funding—including direct grants to farmers and food businesses—when the program was cut three years ahead of its scheduled completion. This represents more than half of the $5 million initially awarded to Nevada through the local food program, creating immediate and severe consequences for the state’s agricultural community.

Tangible Impacts and Achievements

The program’s two-year run created foundational infrastructure that significantly strengthened Nevada’s local food system. According to Staci Emm, the Nevada state leader for the region’s food business center, the Southwest Regional Food Business Center helped 170 Nevada businesses increase food production capacity and provided nearly $350,000 in direct grants to 18 farmers and food businesses in the state. The impacts were widespread, reaching every congressional district in Nevada, with the majority of capacity building funds—more than $212,000—going to Congressional District 2, which covers nine counties in northern Nevada.

In Clark County alone, 37 small and mid-sized food and farm businesses received technical assistance including marketing, startup help, networking, and grant application support. These businesses were awarded more than $90,000 in capacity building funding. Approximately 80% of direct funds helped small and mid-sized food and farm businesses in Nevada pay for processing, packaging, and labeling equipment that will expand their reach and market for years to come. Another 30% of direct funding went to improving transportation systems in Nevada for home-grown produce and meats.

One of the most significant achievements was the establishment of the first State Meat Inspection Program through the Nevada Department of Agriculture with assistance from the Southwest Regional Food Business Center. This program reduces wait times and expands market access for local producers to reach local markets—a critical development given that Nevada only has four USDA-inspected slaughter facilities located in the state, all in the Northwestern region, forcing many producers to travel over 250 miles to process their animals.

The Human Element: Success Stories and Community Impact

The program’s success is perhaps best exemplified through stories like that of Ryan Avila, founder of CattleBros Steak and Seafood. Avila was able to scale his business with the center’s help by launching a marketing plan with website subscriptions, upgrading packaging, and streamlining logistics. After participating in a 10-week virtual course hosted by the University of Nevada, Reno Extension through the Southwest Regional Food Business Center, Avila was awarded $10,000 in funding to capitalize on the training provided. As Avila noted, “These funds help level the playing field for small, independent businesses like ours.”

The center’s arrival was particularly fortuitous for a state challenged by high food insecurity, vast geographic distribution, and fragmented infrastructure. Local farmers struggle to compete with large out-of-state producers who offset long-distance transportation costs through economies of scale. Yet having a local supply of produce is crucial for the state’s food security, with both consumers and restaurants increasingly seeking more fruits and vegetables produced locally.

The Grave Consequences of Political short-Sightedness

The elimination of this program represents more than just budget cuts—it signifies a dangerous disregard for the lessons we should have learned from the COVID-19 pandemic. During the health crisis, nearly 30% of households in Nevada experienced food insecurity compared with 21% nationally, with underserved communities being hit hardest. The pandemic exposed the profound fragility of our regional food systems and left many Nevadans vulnerable to hunger. As Staci Emm astutely observed, “I think if covid didn’t teach us anything else, it taught us that we need to have some type of support within our local food system.”

This funding cut is particularly egregious because it targets programs that were demonstrably working. The Southwest Regional Food Business Center built collaborations across four states, and as Emm noted, “those partnerships don’t just go away because the money went away.” The infrastructure, relationships, and systems built during the program’s brief existence represent precisely the type of investment in community resilience that government should be supporting, not eliminating.

The Broader Implications for Democracy and Governance

What makes this funding elimination so troubling from a democratic perspective is the arbitrary nature of the decision-making process. Programs that were delivering measurable results, creating jobs, supporting small businesses, and strengthening food security were terminated without apparent consideration of their demonstrated effectiveness. This represents a failure of governance at the most fundamental level—the protection of citizens’ basic security and well-being.

The fact that university extension teams are now scrambling to submit grant applications to cover the technical assistance funding they lost—with no guarantee of success until potentially 2026—demonstrates the instability that such capricious policy decisions create. Emm and her team worked around the clock to submit applications for over $6 million to keep their programs going, but this diversion of resources from actual program delivery to grant writing represents a tremendous waste of expertise and effort.

The Path Forward: Recommitting to Food Sovereignty

As a nation committed to liberty and freedom, we must recognize that true freedom includes freedom from hunger and food insecurity. The arbitrary termination of successful agricultural programs undermines the very principles of good governance and responsible stewardship of public resources. Programs like the Southwest Regional Food Business Center represent exactly the type of public-private partnership that should be celebrated and expanded, not eliminated.

The resilience of our food systems is not a partisan issue—it is a fundamental requirement for national security and community well-being. We must demand that our elected officials support policies that strengthen local food infrastructure, provide stability for farmers and ranchers, and ensure that all Americans have access to safe, nutritious, and affordable food regardless of external shocks to our global supply chains.

The team at the University of Nevada, Reno Extension deserves commendation for their determination to build on what the program started despite the funding challenges. Their commitment to finding alternative funding sources and maintaining the partnerships built during the program’s operation demonstrates the kind of resilience that government programs should be fostering nationwide.

In conclusion, the elimination of this $360 million program represents a profound failure of vision and leadership. At a time when we should be investing more heavily in local food security and agricultural resilience, we are instead tearing down the limited progress we’ve made. This is not just poor policy—it is a betrayal of the lessons we learned during the pandemic and a threat to the very security of our food supply. As citizens committed to democracy and good governance, we must demand better from our elected officials and insist that food security be treated as the national priority it truly is.