May, 13 2024, 09:39am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Kyle Ann Sebastian
ksebastian@ucsusa.org
ksebastian@ucsusa.org
Lobbying to Influence Legislation Including Farm Bill Tops $500 Million
Congress Should Write Next Food and Farm Bill with Needs of Communities, Not Big Corporations, at the Center
From almost the moment the 2018 food and farm bill was signed into law, agribusinesses and industry groups have spent more than half a billion dollars lobbying on issues that include the next food and farm bill, according to new research by the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). The UCS report, released today, shows that over the same timeframe, from 2019 through 2023, those corporations and industry associations donated $3.4 million dollars to the campaign coffers of three key food and farm bill architects. What’s in the trillion-dollar piece of legislation will shape the country’s food and farm system for the next five years.
“Agribusiness interests spent a huge sum of money—$523 million dollars—lobbying Congress over the past five years,” said Karen Perry Stillerman, deputy director of the Food and Environment Program at UCS and co-author of the report. “This is an industry that regularly spends more money lobbying Congress than either Big Oil or defense contractors, and for understandable reasons. The food and farm bill has the power to transform our food and farm system, and agribusiness and industry groups know this. They started lobbying from almost the moment the last farm bill was enacted, showing that these groups are always working to influence this legislation in their favor.”
The UCS analysis aggregated quarterly lobbying reports that name the food and farm bill among the issues on which registered firms and organizations lobbied. Activity picked up approaching the September 30, 2023 expiration of the food and farm bill, with spending in 2023 accounting for more than half of the five-year total. The analysis found that 561 companies, industry associations, other special interest groups and advocacy organizations reported lobbying on the food and farm bill during this period, with top spenders including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Crystal Sugar Company, the American Farm Bureau Federation and Koch Industries.
The American Farm Bureau Federation, which has denied the science of climate change, worked to water down requirements for corporations to report their climate emissions, and counts millions of non-farmer customers of state-based insurance businesses as “members,” along with its state-based affiliates, spent $15.7 million on lobbying over the five-year period the UCS report analyzed.
There’s no question that Big Ag is seeking to curry favor with lawmakers through its lobbying efforts and campaign donations.
“The agriculture industry remains stubbornly exempt from most environmental regulation, a status quo that industry players like the Farm Bureau have worked hard to maintain,” said Dr. Omanjana Goswami, interdisciplinary scientist in the Food and Environment Program at UCS and report co-author. “That should be cause for concern when agriculture was responsible for more than nine percent of U.S. heat-trapping emissions in 2022, and runoff from agriculture is the leading source of pollution of the nation’s rivers and streams.”
The report calls on the members of Congress who are writing the food and farm bill to prioritize the needs of constituents without the resources or political connections to extensively lobby lawmakers: small and midsize farmers; Black, brown and Indigenous farmers; and food and farmworkers.
“A pay-to-play food and farm bill that prioritizes corporate profits is bad for the health of people, our environment and farm communities,” said Stillerman. “The next food and farm bill should rise to today’s challenges by making agriculture part of the climate solution, creating a level playing field for small and midsize farmers, and investing in the health of workers and rural communities.”
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
LATEST NEWS
Million-Dollar Ad Blitz Targets Senate Dems Who Voted for 'Trump Loyalist Judges'
"This isn’t normal," said the president of the group behind the ad campaign. "If Senate Democrats don’t take a stand and strongly oppose these judicial nominees who have disqualified themselves—we will."
Dec 03, 2025
The progressive advocacy group Demand Justice on Wednesday launched a seven-figure advertising campaign targeting three members of the Senate Democratic caucus who have voted to confirm President Donald Trump's lifetime judicial nominees, enabling the ongoing right-wing takeover of the nation's courts.
The first series of ads will target Sens. Maggie Hassan (D-NH), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), and Angus King (D-Maine), three of the 16 members of the Senate Democratic caucus who have voted to confirm at least one Trump judge this year. Other Senate Democrats who have voted with Republicans in support of at least one Trump judicial pick include Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Adam Schiff of California, and Chris Coons of Delaware.
"It is outrageous that Senate Democrats are voting to confirm Trump’s judicial nominees who refuse to tell the truth about January 6th and the 2020 election,” Josh Orton, the president of Demand Justice, said in a statement. “This isn’t normal. If Senate Democrats don’t take a stand and strongly oppose these judicial nominees who have disqualified themselves—we will. And we won’t let up.”
The group's campaign will also include a national cable TV ad buy and "coordinated digital rollout across key battleground states" naming and shaming Democrats who support "Trump loyalist judges" even as the lawmakers condemn the president's authoritarian assault on democracy.
Watch the Demand Justice ad targeting Maggie Hassan, who on Tuesday voted to confirm Lindsey Ann Freeman, Trump's nominee to the US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina:
Freeman, like other Trump judicial picks, refused during her confirmation process to say directly that the president lost the 2020 election.
"President Biden was certified as the winner of the 2020 presidential election and served as the 46th President of the United States," Freeman wrote in response to questions from Durbin, who ultimately voted in favor of her confirmation.
In a report released last month, Demand Justice analyzed Trump judicial picks' written responses to senators' questions. The analysis shows that "nominees' responses appear nearly identical, with many nominees using verbatim phrasing, repeating key words, and, overall, using unusual and evasive language that’s almost entirely outside the normal, historical, and common lexicon used to describe such events."
"Every nominee provided near-identical phrasing to avoid a direct answer about the 2020 election, instead referencing the results of the congressional 'certification' process, or answering by noting that President Biden 'served' as president," the report notes. "And 21 of 27 nominees provided extremely similar responses in regard to January 6, often describing what transpired as a 'political issue' and refusing to comment further."
Orton of Demand Justice said that "it is unprecedented for lifetime nominees to the federal bench to provide dishonest and misleading answers about historical facts—and it is deeply concerning that Trump’s nominees are parroting such strikingly similar language, the president’s own language, to avoid telling the truth."
That more than a dozen Senate Democrats still voted to confirm at least one of those nominees is "simply unacceptable," said Orton.
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Yikes’: New Jobs Data Further Undermines Trump Fiction of Thriving Economy
"The booming job market exists only in Donald Trump's demented head," said economist Dean Baker.
Dec 03, 2025
Economists on Wednesday expressed significant concerns after new data from global payroll processing firm ADP estimated that the US economy lost 32,000 jobs last month.
As reported by CNBC, small businesses bore the brunt of the job losses, as firms with fewer than 50 employees shed a total of 120,000 jobs, more than offsetting the 90,000 in job gains reported by firms with 50 or more employees.
The loss of 32,000 jobs in November marked a major miss for economists' consensus estimate of 40,000 jobs added on the month, and CNBC noted that the total number of jobs lost according to ADP data "was the biggest drop since March 2023."
Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, noted in a post on X that the job losses recorded by ADP were widespread across the US economy.
"Yikes," she wrote in reaction to the report. "Most industries were doing layoffs. The only ones still are hiring are hospitality and healthcare."
Long also said the disparity between small and large businesses in terms of job growth was more evidence that the US is experiencing a "K-shaped" economy in which those at the top of the economic ladder thrive, even as everyone else struggles.
"Larger companies are still hiring," she explained. "Smaller firms (under 50 workers) are doing the layoffs. It's been a very tough year for small biz due to tariffs and more selective spending from lower and middle-class consumers."
Kevin Gordon, head of macro research and strategy at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, observed that ADP hasn't reported such a big drop in small-business employment since October 2020, when the US economy was suffering through the peak of the Covid-19 pandemic.
Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative, cautioned against reading too much into ADP data, although he added that "in the absence of up to date government payrolls, all other signs point to a further deteriorating labor market."
Charlie Bilello, chief market strategist at financial planner Creative Planning, argued that the ADP jobs numbers were part of a negative three-month trend in which the US economy lost an estimated 4,000 jobs per month, which he said was "the first three-month decline since the 2020 recession."
Bilello added that "a year ago, we were adding over 200,000 jobs per month."
Diane Swonk, chief economist at accounting firm KPMG, argued that the ADP report showed job losses in the US economy were "broad based" and "were accompanied by a cooling of wage gains" for workers who still have jobs or are switching from one job to another.
"Those with a job are clinging on, while those without are left wanting," she explained.
Dean Baker, senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, argued that the ADP report blows up President Donald Trump's spin about the health of the US economy.
"The booming job market exists only in Donald Trump's demented head," he wrote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Pope Leo Presses Trump to End Military Escalation Against Venezuela
"So often, who suffers in these situations is the people, not the authorities," the first American pope said as another regime change war looms.
Dec 03, 2025
Amid escalating threats from the White House in recent days, Pope Leo XIV pleaded for President Donald Trump to pursue diplomacy with Venezuela rather than another regime change war.
"It is better to search for ways of dialogue, or perhaps pressure, including economic pressure," said the first American pope as he returned to Rome from Lebanon.
Since September, the Trump administration has launched airstrikes against at least 22 boats mostly in the Southern Caribbean that have extrajudicially killed at least 83 people. While the administration has claimed these people are "narcoterrorists" from Venezuela, it has provided no evidence to support this.
Trump said he had ordered the closing of Venezuela’s airspace on Saturday, which has left many observers holding their breath in expectation of military action against the South American nation.
As Reuters reported Monday, Trump also offered safe passage to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro last month if he left the country, suggesting that regime change is the administration’s ultimate goal.
"On one hand, it seems there was a call between the two presidents," said the pope, referring to that ultimatum from Trump last month. "On the other hand, there is the danger, there is the possibility there will be some activity, some [military] operation."
"The voices that come from the United States, they change with a certain frequency," Leo added.
The pope has been a frequent critic of the Trump administration’s policies since he was elected earlier this year, with harsh rebukes issued towards the White House's attacks on immigrants.
While the pope did not denounce the idea of US-imposed regime change in Venezuela entirely, he said it should search for other means "if that is what they want to do in the United States.”
The US has notably already applied a great deal of "economic pressure" to Venezuela, via a regime of crippling sanctions that are considered one of the major causes of the nation's economic instability in recent years.
On Tuesday, Abigail Hall, a senior fellow at the Independent Institute, warned that "a US invasion, however framed, would impose steep costs on both nations."
"For the United States, an attempt at regime change in Venezuela would likely be another foray into failed foreign policy, with all the costs that go with it," she said. "A destabilized Venezuela could also trigger another wave of migration across the region, straining neighboring countries and potentially reaching US shores."
"For Venezuelans, the costs would be even greater," she added. "Beyond the immediate human toll of conflict, the long-term costs are incalculable. Even if Maduro were removed, a chaotic transition could destroy prospects for rebuilding Venezuela’s institutions, economy, and civil society."
Amid Trump's latest series of threats, Pope Leo echoed this warning aboard the papal plane. He said Venezuela's bishops are "looking for ways to calm the situation" and pursue "the good of the people, because so often who suffers in these situations is the people, not the authorities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


