The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has released details of its latest reorganization plans and, while expected, let there be no doubt that USDA is going to drastically change under the Trump administration. What’s in store? The downsizing program includes massive job cuts, the closure of some USDA offices to reduce “layers of bureaucracy” as Secretary Brooke Rollins stated, and a slew of new rules and regulations resulting from President Trump’s “big, beautiful” tax bill, including changes to the USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), that will impact food retailers’ bottom line.
At press time, the tax bill was still in flux between the Senate and House versions which left a lot of the proposed departmental changes somewhat in limbo within the USDA mega bureaucracy. Republicans are pushing to finalize a bill and Democrats are opposing it but that’s par for the game these days. However, Democrats voiced their immediate reaction to changes within USDA by questioning the thousands of job cuts and how the huge agency will be able to continue to deliver services without deterioration. The opposition party cited a report that 16,000 USDA staffers, which is about 16 percent of the agency’s workforce, have already accepted offers to leave and more job cuts are planned.
Job Cuts Impact Fed Workers
I understand the need to seek as many operational efficiencies as possible within USDA. Those in the retail food and general merchandise business do that every day, week, and month of the year. But we do it methodically, unlike what has occurred in the current administration. The Washington Post reported that when Trump took office in January, 2025, 2.4 million people worked for the federal government. At press time, the president and Elon Musk have so far hacked off roughly 6 percent of the federal workforce. All of this simply has to be devastating and a morale buster for federal employees. I sympathize with them. As for me, I’m happy Musk is gone.
Former President Bill Clinton had it right in the 1990s when he was in office and launched his “Reinventing Government” initiative. Over the span of seven years, Clinton’s initiative saw the elimination of roughly 400,000 federal jobs – a 17 percent cut – mostly through voluntary buyouts and attrition, according to a recent Washington Post article. Trump could learn a thing or two by following Clinton’s playbook for a do over of the federal bureaucracy.
Front-of-Package Nutritional Labeling Update
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is delaying implementation of a rule and comment period that would require food companies to print a new nutritional label panel on packages. The label panel is often referred to as the “Nutrition Info Box.” The extension of the comment period expires on July 15, 2025. I wrote about the proposed new product labels three months ago. You may recall that the proposed new labels would provide information on saturated fat, sodium, and added sugar content in a new simple format showing whether the food has “Low,” “Med” or “High” levels of these nutrients. It complements the FDA’s well-known, present Nutrition Facts label, which gives consumers more detailed information about the nutrients in their food on the back labels of products.
“The 60-day additional comment period extension allows adequate time for interested parties to submit comments while also not significantly delaying rulemaking on the important issues in the proposed rule,” according to the FDA announcement. Comments on the proposed rule can be submitted electronically to http://www.regulations.gov.
The proposed rule, when finalized, would require most food manufacturers to add a Nutrition Info Box to the front of most packaged food products three years after the final rule’s effective date.
SNAP Costs Shift To States
Republicans are still hell-bent on shifting some of the SNAP costs to the states. Many states are saying they cannot afford to foot the bill and that the needy will suffer as fewer food stamps are disbursed. Retailers can also anticipate that fewer food stamps will end up in their cash tills. Since SNAP was created in its current form 50 years ago, the federal government has paid the full cost of benefits and split administrative costs 50-50 with states. Republicans want to change that formula.
“If we want to make SNAP more efficient, we should pass a bipartisan farm bill, not cut benefits from families, veterans and seniors,” said ranking House agriculture Democrat member Angie Craig. “The Republican proposal would not generate any cost savings – it would merely pass the buck from the federal government to the states and take food away from innocent people in the process.” At press time, House Republicans were still assessing alternative ways to fund SNAP as there is no existing infrastructure for states to pay for SNAP benefits. And such a move would significantly strain state budgets or force states to pick and choose who to take food away from.
Food trade associations are not idly sitting ‘round as they have mounted a major lobbying effort on the Hill to convince lawmakers that cutting SNAP benefits is not the way to go. FMI – the Food Industry Association and the National Grocer’s Association are just two of the major trade groups lobbying this issue. Leslie Sarasin, FMI’s president, said, “Improving SNAP’s efficiency and integrity is a shared goal. But we must not confuse reform with rollback. Policymakers should focus on strengthening the program – simplifying access, promoting employment and training opportunities and prosecuting criminals who try to steal SNAP benefits from those who need them most.” We will see how all this unfolds in the current tax bill legislation.
FDA Launches New Review Program To Keep Food Supply Safe
The FDA has taken a major new step to increase transparency and ensure the safety of chemicals in our food supply by launching a stronger, more systematic review process for food chemicals already on the market. Under the leadership of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Martin Makary, the FDA will roll out several key actions over the coming months to include an evidence-based prioritization scheme for reviewing existing chemicals.
Until now, the FDA has conducted post-market chemical reviews on a case-by-case basis, often in response to citizen petitions or new scientific evidence. The new framework will be proactive, science-based, and built for long-term impact and is part of a larger initiative to improve food chemical oversight.
FDA Authorizes Natural Dyes
The FDA has approved three new natural food color additives – galdieria extract blue, calcium phosphate, and butterfly pea flower extract – for use in products like yogurt, beverages, pretzels, candies, and even ready-to-eat chicken, offering manufacturers more plant and mineral-based choices. The change is effective immediately and reflects the FDA’s broader shift away from petroleum-based synthetic dyes.
HHS Secretary Kennedy said, “For too long, our food system has relied on synthetic, petroleum-based dyes that offer no nutritional value and pose unnecessary health risks. We are removing these dyes and approving safe, natural alternatives to protect families and support healthier choices.”
Status Of Cultivated Meat Bans
According to Meatingplace News, Montana will become the fourth state in the U.S. where cultivated meat cannot be manufactured or commercialized after the state’s governor Greg Gianforte signed legislation that effectively bans such products. Establishments such as retail food stores making or selling cultivated meat would also face suspended licenses. The law takes effect October 1, 2025.
Florida became the first state to pass such a ban in 2024, with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signing the bill into law on May 1, 2025. Alabama followed with its own law shortly thereafter, while Mississippi’s ban was made law in March. Indiana and Nebraska are expected to enact similar laws during their upcoming state legislative sessions. As I said once before in my commentary about bans of cultivated meat products, you think politicians in these states are scared about a little competition in the meat department?
Barry Scher is associated with the public policy firm of PolicySolutions LLC and can be reached at [email protected].
