Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
    • Reason TV
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • Just Asking Questions
    • Free Media
    • The Reason Interview
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Print Subscription
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Free Trade

Agriculture Secretary Rollins Promised Tariffs Would Help American Farmers. Now She Says They Need a Bailout.

The bailout would simply redistribute wealth from American businesses and consumers to farmers. Here's a better idea: end the tariffs.

Eric Boehm | 9.26.2025 12:23 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins speaking to reporters | Samuel Corum - Pool via CNP / MEGA / Newscom/RSSIL/Newscom
United States Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins speaks to reporters in front of the West Wing of the White House. (Samuel Corum - Pool via CNP / MEGA / Newscom/RSSIL/Newscom)

For months, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has been one of the Trump administration's loudest cheerleaders for tariffs.

That has always been a bit surprising, since the tariffs imposed during President Donald Trump's first term were anything but good news for farmers. When China reduced its purchases of American agricultural output (soybeans in particular), American farmers were suddenly left with crops they couldn't sell. In an attempt to smooth things over, the Trump administration authorized a $28 billion bailout in 2018.

Despite that recent history, Rollins has spent months insisting that this time it will be different.

In an interview with Fox News in April, just a week after Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff announcement, Rollins praised the president as the "ultimate dealmaker."

The tariffs, she said, would "completely realign the American economy around putting America first" and would open more markets to American farm products.

Two months later, she was still pushing the same message. Trump's tariffs were going to level the playing field for American farmers and ranchers, she told Bloomberg. She posted that interview on Twitter and wrote that "America has been taken advantage of for too long on the world stage! [Trump's] tariffs are finally shifting this dynamic, putting our [agriculture] products and farmers & ranchers first."

But something funny (and very predictable) happened on the way to all that tariff-driven prosperity that Rollins promised. American farmers are once again bearing the brunt of the tariffs.

"The consequences are already rippling through the economy. Prices for fertilizers, tractors and farm equipment are rising. John Deere, the nation's largest farm machinery maker, said last month tariffs on steel and aluminum would cost the company $600 million this year," CNBC reported earlier this month.

Caleb Ragland, president of the American Soybean Association, said last month that "farmers are standing at a trade and financial precipice" as they face "extreme financial stress" due to the trade war. Soybeans are America's largest agricultural export, but retaliatory tariffs imposed by China are now making South American-grown soybeans more competitive, and American farmers are having a tough time finding buyers.

Is that enough to make Rollins reconsider her views on tariffs? No. But it is getting her to suggest even more bad policy.

Earlier this week, Rollins told the Financial Times that the Trump administration is preparing another bailout for farmers harmed by the tariffs and trade war.

"There may be circumstances under which we will be very seriously looking to and announcing a package soon," Rollins said. She added that funds for the bailout would be drawn from tariff revenue.

On Thursday, Trump seemingly confirmed those plans. "We're going to make sure that our farmers are in great shape, because we're taking in a lot of money," the president told reporters in the Oval Office.

The details remain unclear, but such a bailout would merely redistribute tax dollars paid by American consumers and businesses to those farmers. Like any government bailout, it is likely to help those with the best connections and resources, rather than those most harmed. That's exactly what happened during Trump's first-term farm bailout.

The quick switcheroo from tariff cheerleader to farm bailout advocate ought to raise a big question about Rollins' qualifications to continue being the secretary of agriculture. Was she shamelessly lying when she promised that tariffs would benefit American farmers, or was she so incompetent that she failed to foresee the obvious consequences of the administration's policies?

It has to be one or the other.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: Amazon Is Being Forced To Pay $2.5 Billion for Making It Easier To Sign Up for Prime

Eric Boehm is a reporter at Reason.

Free TradeTariffsAgricultureFarmingFarm SubsidiesDepartment of AgricultureTrump AdministrationBailouts
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (35)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Chumby   2 months ago

    EB;dr

    1. 5.56   2 months ago

      Heck yeah, stick that head deeper in the sand til you choke, right-wing failure.

      You guys really thought your pathetic CK whining would bring the big revolution, huh, you fucking losers? 😀

      Guess being out-of-touch makes it hard to predict the future. No go expire, nobody needs you, youre dead weight and we're really sick of you and your perpetual victim mentality.

      1. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

        Keep talking. Democrats like you are terrorists or aid and abet them. Soon you will be in a cage, or a landfill.

        1. 5.56   2 months ago

          Nothing else expected from the right.

      2. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

        "...Guess being out-of-touch makes it hard to predict the future..."

        Last election showed asswipes like you were certainly "out of touch", not to say fucking TDS-addled slimy piles of shit.

        1. 5.56   2 months ago

          You guys are working very hard to make the same mistake.

  2. Quicktown Brix   2 months ago

    Well at least someone will get rich from the tariffs.

  3. Stupid Government Tricks   2 months ago

    He's going to replace the income tax with tariff taxes. But tariffs aren't taxes and aren't paid by Americans and don't raise prices. But farmers are paying too much for the imports they used because those dastardly foreigners are raising their prices. So he'll use some of the tariffs to subsidize farmers even more than before, so now farmers won't have to raise their prices, which was certainly not due to higher prices in their supplies.

  4. Sometimes a Great Notion   2 months ago

    No bailouts, fuck you welfare farmers sucking at the tit of government - demand Congress repeal all of these unconstitutional taxes or live with the consequences of putting the power to tax into one man's small hands.

    1. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

      Most farmers would be happy to give up the subsidies if you democrats would leave the, alone.

      And where the fuck do you think your food comes from?

  5. Uncle Jay   2 months ago

    How about...?

    No tariffs?
    No Department of Agriculture?
    No bailouts?

    ...or am I asking for the earth, moon and stars here?

    1. Stupid Government Tricks   2 months ago

      May as well go for the whole galaxy and wish for no government. I'd be happy, but it won't happen.

      1. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

        Right! Total anarchy has succeeded at least as often as communism, right, TDS addled slimy pile of shit for brains?
        Fuck off and die, shitstain

  6. Benitacanova   2 months ago

    Easy. Stop growing soy. Stick to taters.

    1. Chumby   2 months ago

      That could spudder out of control.

      1. 5.56   2 months ago

        Hahahahaha youre so funny with your fucking stupid puns, hahahaha, good god you dumbfuck conservatives just cant stop failing and pretending theres something useful about you.

        1. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

          Shrill crap like that makes you look like and gen bigger retard.

          Did you know that?

    2. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

      They might really take a mashing in the market.

  7. MollyGodiva   2 months ago

    Zero bailouts for the farmers. They voted for this and thus they need to accept and rejoice in it.

    1. Chumby   2 months ago

      Should the farmers be sent to denazification facilities?

      1. scotterbee   2 months ago

        He said zero bailouts, faggot.

      2. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

        Tony doesn’t understand where food comes from.

        1. Lester75   2 months ago

          No bailouts. If you don't like the price increases caused by tariffs, vote against those who support tariffs which drive price increases.

    2. Kungpowderfinger   2 months ago

      Farm Aid heroes like Willie Nelson, Neil Young, and John Mellencamp are going to be surprised to hear that they support DJT.

  8. TJJ2000   2 months ago

    Well here a much better idea....
    PAY DOWN THE F'EN DEBT!

    It's truly amazing how the national debt can be at $225,000 / each working citizen and everyone in D.C. is still clamoring to spend MORE $.

  9. windycityattorney   2 months ago

    Is it possible that all these idiot pro tariff officials didn't take into account the very real possibility that other countries would institute retaliatory tariffs in response? Or they would simply go somewhere else? While our domestic manufacturers would still need lots of things [steel, aluminum, wood, whatever] from those same countries that were now going to be cost prohibitive?

    I never understood starting these trade wars and disputes with literally every single country on the planet. Friendly countries/enemies...all treated equally like shit. Various trade agreements previously negotiated mere toilet paper.

    Doesn't build a lot of trust and destroys whatever previous good will was previously built.

    1. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

      His has been explained to you. Either you’re lying, or too stupid to understand and remember. Possibly both.

  10. Kungpowderfinger   2 months ago

    It’s true, “American Farmers” never required government bailouts until OrangeHitler’s tariffs.

  11. Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment   2 months ago

    How about farmers, like every other industrial activity, be left to suffer the occasional bad year and plan their finances to allow for such?
    Oh, and we were assured by the staff here at Reason that there would be no farm-workers available for the harvest, so it all seems to work out, right?

    1. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

      Getting rid of onerous democrat agriculture regulations would help a lot. Getting rid of democrats will help even more.

  12. Doug Heffernan   2 months ago

    Rollins said Farmers need to stop relying “on a country that isn’t aligned with our values” (referring to China) as a major agriculture purchaser.

    China bought 52 percent of all American soybean exports last year. Rollins said that the United States would develop more international markets for its crops through trade deals.

    It seems unlikely that forsaking the Chinese market and trying to replace it with other buyers will be possible. The inverse is also unlikely.

    1. SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad   2 months ago

      They don’t necessarily have to grow soybeans.

  13. Widhalm19   2 months ago

    Here's an idea ... all you pathetic fucking urbanites whining about the price of food ... grow your own food and raise your own meat. Why do you think it's called agricultural-based civilization jackasses? Fuck your farmers and ranchers and disrupt the constant flow of food and you effete urban weasels will be killing each other over a cup of rice.

    1. Lester75   2 months ago

      Without the tax revenue generated by cities, the farmers wouldn't have much state or federal aid at all. At least they could feed themselves. Here's an example:

      https://minnesotareformer.com/2023/12/04/twin-cities-metro-sends-money-to-rural-counties/

  14. Butler T. Reynolds   2 months ago

    Trump is as Trump does.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Trump Pardoned Gobble and Waddle. He Should Pardon More Deserving People, Too.

Billy Binion | 11.27.2025 8:00 AM

Uncle Sam Makes Thanksgiving Worse

Christian Britschgi | 11.27.2025 7:30 AM

Thankfully, We Don't Have To Spend As Much of Our Incomes on Food As Our Ancestors Did

Ronald Bailey | 11.27.2025 6:30 AM

Archives: December 2025

Reason Staff | From the December 2025 issue

Brickbat: What Is This Breathalyzer You Speak of?

Charles Oliver | 11.27.2025 4:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS Add Reason to Google

© 2025 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300
Take Reason's short survey for a chance to win $300