Brooke Rollins, Secretary of Agriculture | All-In DC

Secretary Rollins, thank you for joining me here. Can you call me Brooke? Brooke. Okay. I didn't I mean, I'm wearing a tie. There's a degree of formality. You just came from a cabinet today. I did. Food security is national security. America is the largest a exporter in the world. These farmers don't want all these checks. No one wants a handout. Exactly. No one wants a handout. $15 billion a year is spent on soda. Taxpayer dollars be spent on sugary drinks and junk food. that's making our kids sick? Absolutely not. Does that mean we shut them down? Does that mean No, of course not. Part of that was having 300 executive orders drafted and

we did it all very quietly. No one really knew it was happening. We're not here for the people to serve us like some monarchy. We're here to serve the people. I'm here in Washington DC at the US Department of Agriculture to interview the 33rd Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins. We just had an amazing conversation talking about Brook's background, the work she's doing at the USDA, the impact Doge is having, food stamps, the sentiment of the American farmer, tariff and trade, and everything in between. Really amazing conversation. Thank you to Secretary Rollins for allowing me here today. I hope you'll enjoy the conversation.

All right, besties. I think that was another epic discussion. People love the interviews. I could hear him talk for hours. Absolutely. We crush your questions in a minute. We are giving people ground truth data to underwrite your own opinion. What do you guys think? That was fun. Pal. Congrats on your first 100 days. First 100 days. Yesterday was the 100th day of President Trump and I like 70 days. But I'm President Trump yesterday, but today we celebrated together at the cabinet meeting and we're about I'm going back over to the White House right after we finish to do more celebrating. Great. Well, we appreciate it. The USDA is an

incredible agency. It was founded under Abraham Lincoln, I believe, was established under Lincoln when I think I was talking to your staff. I think 60% of American uh workforce within agriculture at the time. That's right. And uh it's a really critical agency for American prosperity and has been really important for uh food security and for the interest of America around the world as a trade partner, the largest a exporter in the world. The agency is incredible in terms of the scale. 29 sub agencies, hundred thou over 100,000 employees, 4,500 locations, and an over $200 billion Yeah. annual budget. So really an incredible um uh department to

oversee. But before we get into the USDA and talk a little bit about some of the work you're doing and have been doing, maybe we can talk a little bit about your background. Did you grow up on a farm? How did you get into agriculture? So yes, I grew up uh in a really small town in Texas. We uh were not farmers or ranchers per se in Texas. I grew up on a small farm. We raised animals. We bailed hay. But my family, my mom's side of the family, uh my grandmother, they had a big rowcrop farm in Minnesota. So I spent every summer um on that farm, corn, wheat, soy, pretty much everything you could consider and think of. So that

was my rowcrop. um which has actually been very very helpful because coming from Texas and being more of a cattle raiser and being in cattle more which is what I'm in in Texas uh it's really great to have sort of both sides of the house and and I'm very appreciative to that but yes grew up in a very small town uh we didn't have much I was raised by a single mom but we did have the land and uh and on that land we raised our animals again we bled our hay I barrel raced every Friday night I grew up in 4 and FFA went to Texas A&M on an agriculture scholarship ship uh studied soil science and meats and and feeds and feeding and and really dove way into agriculture knowing I would go to law

school. um I really had a heart for understanding policy and the people but thought I would really stay in agg um for the rest of my life and obviously sometimes the the path diverts and changes but um even over the you know the 20 years since I last worked 100% in agriculture which was for Rick Perry when he was first governor um then quickly moved into all the policy but but I've always stayed very much in touch and involved in a and always really worked in a polic policy, but as part of a much broader portfolio until this job. But um no, listen, the USDA is the people's department. That was what President Lincoln's vision was. Uh the American founding had four key agencies,

of course, the attorney general, justice, state, and defense, which was war, state, you know, Department of War at the time, but defense. And that was really the beginning of our country were those four. Interior was added a couple decades later. And then agriculture that was sort of the um the cadence of of uh building a new government and creating some sort of self-governing structure that you want the power to remain with the people. But certainly as America moved from a frontier republic into you know as we know the the world's greatest economic superpower certainly you needed some kind of of governing structure. And

so Abraham Lincoln in the 1860s uh believed sincerely that the you know the majority of Americans then were rural. They were agriculture related and that they needed um representation here in Washington. So the people's department was formed and uh this building was built uh in the early 1900s 19 uh 20s and uh and here we are today. Now through the years as you mentioned it has grown and grown and grown. I do believe it became a bit of a catch-all uh in some ways. You know, we we run the food stamp program, uh the SNAP program, the supplemental nutrition program. We run the forests, of course, forest services under forestry is under USDA.

So, that's tens of thousands of firefighters as an example. Um and of course, all of the farming and agriculture related from rural development loans to farm loans to crop insurance. Uh and then and then of course moving all of the economic relief, etc. that sometimes is often needed. I am still getting my arms around, you know, two months in exactly everything that that we're we're working on here. But in President Trump's greatest vision and in his bold leadership, one of my top priorities is how we realign the USDA around its original purpose, which was serving the people and especially the farmers and

ranchers. So really looking forward to continuing that work. But you were in the first Trump administration. I was in the first Trump administration. I think I was the only A major uh in the building and and I was doing a lot of different hats. I was working with Jared Kushner um in the office of American innovation uh and then was doing all the strategy. So kind of the big picture you know for the president and and the policy especially on the domestic side eventually ran the domestic policy team eventually towards the end um took on Kelly and Conway's team and some other portfolios. So really over the course of those three years in Trump 1. How did you end up in Trump one? Well, that is a

really crazy long story. Um, I for my entire policy, my heart is in public policy. I have just I I first thought I may end up at seminary and be a pastor um a youth pastor and that was really where I was felt very called uh after college, but then realized that if I lean into public policy and I didn't know what that meant. I didn't even know what a think tank was, but that I could perhaps change more and help more people um going that route than if I just worked at a church. And so um I really kind of got excited about that idea and I was a big firm litigator uh for a couple of years after law school. did a clerkship, a federal clerkship for a

judge in Dallas in the northern district. And then um got a call from Rick Perry, also another big-time Texas Aggie, a major from a from a a background, a rural town, and he just become governor. And in Texas, George W. Bush had just become president. They had the whole hanging chad. You know, when they think the election integrity issues are new to today, they are not new to today. This goes way back. But uh Rick Perry became governor. He was lieutenant governor. and he called me and I was sitting um billing my every six minutes the billable hour for this big law firm in Dallas. Loved the firm, didn't love the work. And he said, "Why don't you come join my new team down here in

Austin?" I was 28 years old. I'd only been out of law school for a couple of years. And he made me his deputy general counsel. Um sort of shocking to everybody, but I'd known him. I met him when I was 15 as a future farmer of America. and he believed in me and and so that was really how the pivot as I was trying to figure out what was next. I really leaned into public policy and and I found in the governor's office it was a great experience. I only did it for two years at the very beginning of his administration, Rick Perry's uh that you could make such a difference. But what I realized was that there was no one at that moment in Texas governance that was lobbying for freedom and for

liberty and for God and for family that all of those people that would come see me every day wanted something even in Texas looking for a specific law or wanting a little bit more taxpayer money. And I was I wasn't even 30 yet. So I was sort of new to all of it but I was put in a pretty a pretty highly you know responsible area. and it was so instructive to me. So anyway, long story short, I ended up um planning to sort of step away from uh any sort of official work. And my husband and I were ready to start a family. And uh I was going to do that for 20 years and then perhaps think about re-entering the workforce again, having no idea um what that even meant.

But I got a call from Wendy Graham, who was then Senator Phil Graham's wife, chair of this organization I had never heard of, called the Texas Public Policy Foundation, and only had a couple of employees based in San Antonio. I was the governor's policy director at the time. I went from being deputy general counsel to taking on all the policy for Rick Perry. And she said, "Would you like to come do this?" I didn't have any kids at the time. And I thought, "Well, you know, I could do it for a year or two." And I didn't even know what a think tank was. But I did know that based on my experience in Rick Perry's office, I'm not an academic. I'm an A major from Texas A&M, but that if there

were significant efforts to build a policy apparatus, I couldn't have articulated this 20 years ago, but I can now into what my instinct was. if there were a significant policy apparatus or apparatuses I guess um that were strategic and intentional and that didn't have clients that weren't paid to advocate for certain things. We only advocated for what was right that it could change everything in Texas, everything. I just been the policy director. I had no one telling me what the right thing to do was. I just had the industry and lobby in my ear. And so I thought, well, yeah, let me go do this Texas public policy thing for a year or two and that'll be fun. And then

I'll really step away once my kids start coming hopefully. And uh and I looked up 15 years later with four kids, Luke, Jake, Anna, and Lily. Um I was doing the flexible work before it was a thing. Uh my board at TBPF was wonderful. Went from two employees to about 120. Became, I believe, the most effective public policy organization in the country. moved Texas because I had been in the sausage making. So I knew wasn't again was an academic which at the time most think tanks were run by but I understood innately how to stop bad things and how to move good things and that was really the bottom line and how to hire really really good people. So I got a call from

Jared Kushner whom I had never met. I had been on the president candidate Donald Trump's economic team. Uh got a call when he was running against Hillary Clinton. would you help us just build out our economic tax plan, deregulation plan, etc. And I said, "Of course, but I run a nonpartisan think tank." And uh I'm always happy to help because obviously I think we thought Donald Trump was going to be more conservative than Hillary, but no one really knew, right? He'd been a Democrat, right, very early, not very long ago. And uh and I said, "But yes, if anyone calls and helps, I want them to understand the Texas model, what we did and cutting taxes and deregulating and the job

growth that happened and how it helped poor people the most." Going back to my original idea of going to seminary and um and so he won. I was on that economic team. I was not interested in coming to DC or the White House. I told the team that. They said, "What would you like to do?" You were on the team when a lot of people weren't. And I said, "No, no, no. I'm going to stay in Texas and help." Then I got a call from um my now very good friend but then at the time didn't know him Jared Kushner who said whatever you're doing this is about six months into term year one of term one is that thing y'all are doing in Texas you know

criminal justice reform um deregulation tax cuts I mean whatever all of the great things you've done that's sort of can you come just talk to me about how you did it and so I flew up to DC and flew up again and flew up again and he started saying we really need you in the White House we want you to build something very similar to what you built in Texas, a relentless, super strategic, very intentional policy apparatus that um could move things. And I said no and then I said no again. And then I said no again. And then my family and I finally um said yes. And so that's how I ended up in the last White House. And that transitioned into this this term.

Obviously, you've kept in touch with the president and well, it's much bigger and more interesting story than that, I think. So, the final year of term one, I took it upon myself. I sort of anointed myself as the person that would ensure that when President Trump won the second term, yeah. On November 3rd of 2020, that we would be ready unlike we were not in the first term. And so I spent the year with Larry Cuddlo who ran the National Economic Council, Scott um Robert O'Brien who ran National Security Council and I was domestic policy at that point and really drove an effort to put together an agenda in the teams that

would be ready for that second term. And so when that didn't happen and you know everyone else was discouraged, no one would hire Trump people. Um it was a it was a it was a very dark time. January 6th happened In November of 2020, I realized that what I had been blessed to build in Texas, what the Trump first White House asked me to help do within the West Wing, um, that that's what I needed to do on the national scale. Never never thinking for a second at that moment that President Trump was going to run again. But the whole idea that we had just had four incredible years, that we had a team of people in the cabinet, Trump won, senior staff,

Trump won, that finally not only knew how to talk about conservative issues, but knew how to govern from a free market, America first perspective. And that couldn't be lost. If we lost that team, if we lost that thinking, if we lost that knowhow, I didn't know if we'd ever get it back. And the Democrats are really good. The left is really good at government. We our side is really good at raising families and building business. And so this happens every time that we're put into government. We we have a team of people that have the best intentions, but we lose years because we don't know how to run a bureaucracy, how

to deconstruct it, and how to reconstruct it. And so what I in the time frame exactly because that's it. It's the time frame. So, we launched the America First Policy Institute in uh quietly in early February of 21 publicly in April, almost exactly four years ago. Um, today in April of 21, I had nine former Trump cabinet members from Trump 1. 50 former White House senior staff. Many were volunteers at the beginning. Eventually, I could raised enough money to get everyone on payroll. But when the president won in November, AFPI and then our sister C4, we launched America First Works. was a $90 million operation in just a couple of years and I think

fundamentally transformed the landscape. Part of it part of it, not all. Part of it was getting ready for a second America first term, whether that was Donald Trump or whomever. And part of that was having 300 executive orders drafted, having 196 agency plans ready. And we did it all very quietly. No, we didn't talk about it in the press. No one really knew it was happening. So that then translated to seven of our team are now on the cabinet. um dozens and dozens and dozens are um in the White House and and and along with our other partners that in those dark days of early 21, you know, from Steven Miller um that there were just so many

of us that were kind of, you know, in solidarity in those early days, not knowing that we would be back, but if given the opportunity, we would answer the call again. So now you're in the cabinet, you're running the Department of Agriculture. It's been 70 some odd days, 100 days for the president. How have the first 100 days gone? What have been kind of the highlights for you in starting this term out? You know, everyone says, "Are you exhausted?" And it's a 7-day a week, 20 hours a day. And for me, there are days where I'm tired of me. I think I got here to DC. I was in uh doing tours all day yesterday with Secretary Kennedy. The day before I was

in Ohio, I think that's right. Yes. Um two days before that I was in North Dakota. Then I'm back here. It's literally a 5:00 a.m. to midnight, seven days a week effort, but it's just such a gift. I mean, who gets to do this? And at an inflection point in our country's history, this is I feel like this is 1776 all over again. And I think about never ever to compare myself to, you know, the founding fathers, but those guys were farmers and teachers and businessmen before they declared independence from the greatest power the world had ever known, and that was Great Britain. and the king and and so in many

ways I feel like our cabinet and this president has God's hand and that that's what we are called for as well. So while certainly we're working very hard and the 100 days has been extremely fast-paced, I think that's why you see the joy in the work is because we're ready for it. Some of the secretaries in the cabinet have talked about the need to deconstruct, tear down. Yeah. Rebuild, or in some cases completely dismantle the department that they're overseeing. What's your kind of mandate with agriculture? Is there a reform needed in agriculture like others have declared for their departments? Does it need to be rebuilt from the ground up? Does it

need to be rethought or does agriculture work well and in the best interest of America? what's your general kind of take and your general mandate on the department of a yeah well and I think when you say you know does agriculture work well I think you mean USDA so the fact that we have an agency with 100 plus thousand employees um the largest budget item is food stamps that the SNAP program uh there are so many different divisions and contract I mean we are just getting started we've already canceled almost $6 billion a h 100,000 $200,000 at a time that's a significant ificant amount of contracts that we're cancelling. We are reducing in force to make sure that we are as efficient, as

effective, and as flexible as possible. There is no doubt that USDA absolutely needs a realignment, a reconstruction, and a significant reorganization. So, that's what we are working through right now. the idea that USDA should be, you know, we've got other programs and and those are important like food stamps, although they need significant reform, but this agency should be should be about farmers and ranchers all day, every day and our egg producers. And how do we talking about the industry now, an industry that every year we lose more family farms, every year things get outsourced to other countries including China and Brazil. Every year it gets harder and harder for most of our

farmers to make a living where they can support their family, pass their fourth, fifth, and sixth generation farmer ranch on to the next their sons or daughters. It's getting harder and harder. It's also getting harder and harder for new Americans, men or women, to get into the business of farming. It's almost impossible. there's not enough, you know, opportunity for capital to inject, to buy a new tractor, to buy the land, to figure out how to how to become, you know, part of this great historical legacy profession in American history. So, we've got a lot of things a here at the department we need to really really

be refocused on and we are, but also there's some massive policy questions that we've got to think through. And then the the kind of the final big priority is these farmers don't want all these checks. I mean, they they take them. It's the way they stay in the black and the way they keep farming. It's a national security issue because we lose more farms. We buy more food from overseas. That's not good for the country for a lot of reasons. But at the same time, it they would like to be able to sell their product at a profit and not have to worry about the government, right? You know, at the end of the day. So, these are all big policy questions that hopefully we expand markets. The

president's realigning the entire world economy right now, putting America first. All of those things combined, I believe, will lead us into a new era of prosperity where we can hopefully solve for most of that. I think they're all really good targets. Um, obviously tactically challenging, but can we start with SNAP real quick? I just because it's 70% of your budget. It is $123 billion a year. So, just to create some context, 13% of Americans are on the food stamp, the SNAP program at $123 billion a year. That's roughly, call it 2% of America's federal budget is going towards the food stamp program. And one key kind of policy point that's come up lately is that roughly 10% or 15 billion

a year is spent on soda. Yeah. And 75% of the population on SNAP are clinically obese. Yes. And there's a real health concern about the SNAP program continuing to fuel a health crisis in America. What What have you and in partnership with Senator H sorry with Secretary Kennedy talked about with regards to addressing the health challenges that arise from the way the SNAP program operates today. Yeah, that's been a pretty big priority of ours. And uh within the first hour of being sworn in on February 13th, uh 50 letters went out to all 50 governors in the country. And in those letters, we talked about SNAP and innovation and send me your waiverss because the way

the program works, it moves through the states. And so, and I love that anyway, like why would the federal government be telling everyone what to do? We want in the founders best vision of the 10th amendment to allow the states to to build those programs. But but within that was why are taxpayer dollars why are taxpayer dollars billions of taxpayer dollars being spent on sugary drinks and junk food to go into our supplemental nutrition program for our food food insecure populations. you know, our lower um income populations when to your point, the backside is an obesity and chronic disease epidemic unlike any developed country in the history of the world has ever seen. 74%

of our adolescence, our teenagers would not pass the military readiness test of our United States military right now today. 75%. So again, talk about national security, talk about all of the things. This is a massive massive challenge facing America and in the first administration and you know health health care was under my portfolio in domestic policy as conservatives we've long talked about how do we make America healthy again but but very much from a numbers perspective right the the cost to the health care system at the back end of this it's not just the taxpayers funding it at the front end with the junk food and the sugary drinks and the the diabetes I mean just it's it's it's

really stunning what's happened just in the last couple of decades. But then on the back end, the cost to our health care system and treating those chronic diseases is going to bankrupt our country. It's almost bankrupting all the states right now through Medicaid. So, how do we solve for that? And you know, enter Bobby Kennedy. And Bobby and I don't agree on everything, but we do agree on most things. And the opportunity I was just with him yesterday touring some farms and talking about nutrition and agriculture all day. the opportunity for the agriculture lead and the health lead to work daily handinand to solve this together. You

can't solve this through government regulation. You just can't. But you solve it through nutrition, through empowering your farmers, through getting good food into these programs versus the ultrarocessed, etc., etc. We've all heard Bobby use these points and he couldn't be more right. And listen, it's a it's again talk about realigning the world economy with the president's vision of tariffs. It's also realigning how we look at food, how we as a federal government, to your point on SNAP and other food programs, we have 13 nutrition programs. Listen to this number. This is going to astound you. In America today, through USDA, this is not

all the other agencies. This is just here at USDA. We spend $370 million a day on nutrition programs. So, not just SNAP, but food banks and all of the other ones. That's just USDA. That is a stunning number. We've got to do better. And um and so that's a big part of it. So, Secretary Kennedy and I are on this. We are so aligned. We've got the dietary guidelines we're doing right now. What shows up in DC as you guys try and make this move because there's a lot of money to That's just just to paint the picture. About a quarter of a percent of federal spending is going towards buying soda. Yeah. Okay.

interest. What is what happens as you guys try and make these sorts of reforms? Who shows up and what do they try and do? Well, I I I will I will talk about it. I I will also say that those that represent those industries, they are they are good people who are raising their families and I do believe, you know, their talking point is freedom. Why should someone at the bottom of the socioeconomic level ladder not be able to buy the same things you and I could buy? Of course, my answer is, well, we're not using taxpayer dollars, so that's a big difference. And we're not paying for it on the back end. But I but I understand I understand where they

would, you know, potentially be coming from, but the amount um of money that is at stake is reflected in the amount of lobbyists um that are out and about and um and certainly um very much a part of the Washington DC establishment, but it goes directly to why as difficult and as challenging as these policy issues are for All of us in President Trump's cabinet reflecting today on the 100th day celebration. It's also so different because none of us are of Washington. That was true in the first term and that's why I felt so freed. I could I could just do what was right. He just said go do what's right. But in the first term, we didn't really know yet how to do it, what we were

doing, and who was on our side. That four-year pause in between term one and term two, it was the greatest gift. I mean, not only could we plan, but we also fully understood who was in it to save the country, what it was that we needed to do to get this done. And for me, this is so black and white. And I've told everyone this. I don't need to listen and have 57 meetings with lobbyists representing the industry. This is black and white. Taxpayer dollars be spent on sugary drinks and junk food that's making our kids sick? Absolutely not. Does that mean we shut them down? Does that mean? No, of course not. But it just means we realign and we

spend the dollars where they need to be spent. We reform and hopefully we make America healthy again. I think this is one of the most important points about this administration is without having all the political insiders in the administration, there's no political leverage that can be applied and you can have a true objective first principles point of view on policy which seems to not have been the case for you know a very long time in the United States. Going back to the point about the founding fathers and that era of America, these were folks who ran farms, who ran businesses. They came and provided their time as civil servants for a period and then they left and went

back to private service. That's right. And that government did not have the sort of political careermanship that I think allows lobbying and lobbyists to have the leverage that they have. That's right. In government today. Um that's exactly right. On both on both sides. This is I'm not I'm not it's not a party thing. It's not it's it's just it is an entire industry that has been built around this is the problem when the government gets too big right I mean this is the this is world history Greece Rome Spain France great every great world powerland has buckled under the weight of a government that hands out the large s right that that everyone's got their hand in the pot and they

buckle and that's how they lose their place in the world right And that is what listen I sincerely believe that without Donald Trump coming down that escalator and I listen there were 17 guys and one girl I think running that you know in 15 when he did that I was not the smart one that said oh there's the the game changer that that's him I was like oh I love that person and I've known him forever and they're going to be so great it's not going to be Donald Trump but but at that moment in American history without that human being who is literally willing to swing for the kit fences every single day, a 100 times a day for the American people who owes no

lobbyist not one thing. We were all hired with the idea that we owe not industry, not lobbyist one thing. Now, we need to listen to their concerns, but every day, all day, we're called to do what's right. And I don't know that that's ever happened, at least in our in my lifetime, in governance, in federal governance. So, I I want to talk about the irony of running the USDA with your policy background. This is an an organization that administers programs like SNAP. Yes. The federal crop insurance program, the direct payments program to farmers, commodity price support where the federal government, the USDA is buying commodities to keep prices high. And coming from a free

market background, coming from a maximizing liberties background, small government background, wasteful government spending needs to be eliminated background. How do you reconcile the irony of running this department and how do you think about where you want to take this department with that background over time? Yeah, it's a great this is you're the first person to really dig down on this that I've talked to since I took the job and it's ex it's an extremely insightful and thoughtful question um that you raised because that's 100% true. My entire background is how to get government out of people's lives and how to get government quote handouts out of um p

the private sector and how do we you know downsize significantly everything that that the government stands for and how do we let the markets work. Um I think two things. First, I have become an absolute avid believer in President Trump's vision on putting America first. Um, for years, you know, I was, well, that the cheaper goods from China are good for everybody, and and they allow those at the bottom of the economic ladder to have a better quality of life, and this is the market at work. Now that I've seen it in the first term, but especially as the agriculture secretary, realizing how poorly our products are treated on the world stage, the tariff, it just is, it's stunning to me that we

let this go on for so long. the way Argentina treats our beef, the way China treats the way the way Brazil treats our corn. I mean, the way the UK treats our pork, and that's just in my world. I haven't even really studied the automakers and others. There is no doubt that that realignment has to happen for America to continue to thrive and lead on the world stage for another 250 years. That's the first thing. So, so really realigning my thinking after deep study and deep thought in his approach of America first, not free markets for the sake of free markets, but fair markets for the sake of America. Get parody first, right? With the goal of

freer markets eventually. The second thing I will say and more on the USDA side is food security is national security. We have already lost tens of thousands of family farms in the last decade. If we continue on that trajectory, America will not be able to feed oursel. And the minute you become unable to feed yourself is the minute you lose all power on the world stage. The minute you have to rely on China or Brazil or Argentina to feed your people, you're done. And what has happened over the last number of years is China's been buying up a lot of our farmland in America. Um, a lot of our major meat packers, etc. are now owned by foreign ownership. And, you know, it's not all

I'm not going to cast dispersions on everybody, but at the end of the day, we have to make sure that our agriculture industry is here in this country, that we are feeding ourselves, and that we're relying on ourselves. And so all of the programs that you just outlined are part of that effort. We lose our farmers and our ranchers. We lose America. Not just the the diligence and the hard work and the discipline and what that um righteous I believe the most righteous of all professions means. The beginning of our country was fought by farmers. But also we lose it from a national security perspective. And when that happens, we lose everything. Let's talk

about farming and the farmer. Today, there's 2 million Americans that work directly in agriculture across, I believe, 1.8 million legal farms in the United States. China historically has bought $ 36 billion a year of American agricultural product. America is the largest a exporter in the world. So, we our our farmers are deeply dependent on trade. That's right. And um in California today, farmers have declared there's a 20% labor shortage. Meanwhile, there's a massive effort to address illegal immigration in the United States. Um, and I want to just hear like what's your view on the ground? You visited, I think you said, 15 states since you've been in office. Hundreds of

farmers. Hundreds of farmers. What's the state of mind of the American farmer today? What are they feeling? What are they worried about? What are you hearing? The first uh three things on that. The first is that they are almost to a farmer. They are so supportive of President Trump even understanding that this current again trade renegotiation. It hurts and and they they they're not going to be able to survive that long, but they know that the president has their back. So that that's been really encouraging to me. Now, I have made a huge effort to get out into the country to meet the farmers to continue to shake hands and say, "We're with you." But in the long run,

this is going to be so good for our agriculture industry. This renegotiation, these opening up markets under Joe Biden, we lost $50 billion uh in trade. We went from a Z trade deficit with Trump one to a $50 billion trade deficit with Biden. And that's $50 billion almost directly out of our farmers pockets. So that you know the short term but that the president is with them. But secondly to your point there are tremendous headwinds whether it is the trade renegotiation whether it is you know row crops especially being in the thinnest margins they've ever had in their lifetimes and then we export so

many of those row crops that's almost a double whammy. the president's vision of a you know basically a disruptive restructure of the American economy includes the ship building and so for again a lot of the exporters that need that extra fee on top of that is just one more um and again that that Jame Greer and the team has been great they've been solving for that and ensuring that a is at the table and that every day and every decision they're making um they're doing that but but I think ultimately and this has been a big part of what I've been talking to the farmers about is ensuring that we're opening up those new markets. And

whether it's India or Japan or South Korea or Brazil or Peru or the UK, I am going to all of those countries in the next few months. And this is just me on behalf of agriculture. This isn't our our trade crew, our commerce secretary. I mean, it's just me. But I feel so bullish on the idea that if we are we're on Trump time, we deploy Trump time, which is going as fast as you can, as hard as you can for as long as you can around the world. We're going to open up so many new markets for our farmers and then we solve for the labor issue, which you brought up, which is a really big issue. Now, I think sometimes the Californians tend to inflate that

because What are you trying to say? Yeah, I know. They're they're they think a little bit differently. I hear it in Florida, too. Yeah. Well, and and there's no doubt our I'll give you one statistic from a large strawberry farmer. I work in strawberry um as well as other crops. Uh but the farmer mentioned that he he did an analysis. He thinks that since precoid days, the total labor cost in the strawberry industry has grown from 700 million a year to 2 billion a year. Wow. And that's really hurt margins. And so it's really hard to net a profit, particularly in specialty crops, not row crops where everything's automated, but

specialty crops where you're dependent on labor doing work in the field, harvesting product to to be able to keep up with the the lack of labor and that of late there's been a lot of an exodus of of immigrants out of that that might qualify under the uh the visa program. So maybe I don't know if you're active or spending or the the department and and I'll and I'll put a little note a little um cross the tea on what you just said and that is I'm a Texan and our South Texas the citrus farmers down there think about in Mexico for some of them half a mile away they can see it right across the border now through the wall but they can see it and uh and the it's $2 an hour those farmers are paying

$2 an hour over there. you come across on our side and with everything that we're required to do and pay and do it's 20 to $23 an hour. How do you compete? You're you're you're growing the same crops. You can't. And so that's what we really have to focus on. Our dairy farmers, you know, the the visa programs don't work for them. It's not a seasonal deal. Those cows have to be milked 365 days a year. They can't find people to to to milk the cows. So the president, not in today's cabinet meeting, but in the last one a couple weeks ago, brought this up himself and he said, and he and I talked about it in the first term, we've talked about it since then. He understands that there is a massive

labor challenge for our farmers and our ranchers, especially our farmers in this country, but our ranchers as well. And he himself said, you know, that that those who are not here legally, they need to go back. they need to self-epport, but that we will ensure that there's some sort of program in place that will help make sure that our farmers on this side have the labor that they need. Now, the details of that are being worked out. I can't really talk much about it, but the fact that the president himself is focused on that should give our farmers some some a lot of encouragement that help help

literally, figuratively, and metaphorically is on the way. Got it. I think that's a key thing for farmers to hear. they, you know, from what I hear from folks in the industry, it it's something that they want to make sure is is acknowledged and and addressed. Um, it's agriculture is such an interesting market. There's such an alignment with some of these conservative values that you and this administration espouse, but then there's such an important role that government actually plays. That's exactly right. that that is at this point you couldn't it's you know I I love Elon and love Doge and they've been such a good partner and helping us get rid of the the the $500,000 grant to

study transgender menstruation cycles in men and you know the what the mice are going to do with under you blah blah the craziness he's been wonderful but um but agriculture in many ways is different you can't come in here and gut the crop insurance program you will lose lose thousands of farmers and guess who swoops in and picks up their land in their operation? The Chinese get you. You just can't do it. Now, my goal and my fervent prayer is that in four years from now, we will have moved. We will have opened up the markets. We'll have reached this new era of prosperity for our farmers and our ranchers. And in so doing, this should be the goal of every government program that we're able to

roll a lot of that back and out and that we don't need it as much so the budget can come down over time. Exactly. Yes. That's the goal. The same with the food stamps. I mean, talk about 80% of the USDA budget is food stamps. Our goal needs to be moving people into a work, you know, a life of work filled with dignity where they don't need those programs anymore versus the last administration trying to get as many people into those programs as possible. Our goal is to move them off of programs because they have a good well-paying job and they don't need that anymore. No one wants a handout. Exactly. No one wants a

handout. I think that's what a lot of a lot of people don't understand. And so effectuating on that is really important. Yeah. And I guess maybe you can share a little bit of the anecdotes. What's it been like with the Doge representatives that have been come into the department of a are they embedded? Are they long-term? Do you believe that Doge plays as an forget Elon? Yeah. But as um a department or whatever it is ad hoc department, does it play a long-term role in continuously improving and identifying opportunities for cost savings? thousand% and it's it's like all my dreams have come true. You know, I'll never forget when the president came down the escalator in 2015 and he was

talking about for every one new regulation, we're going to get rid of two. And I thought, are you kidding me? For the first time, are we making deregulation fun and sexy? Like I've been talking about this in Texas and it no one wanted to talk about it, right? Even Republicans like, oh, you know, we can never get rid of once government's there, we just have to make it better. And Donald Trump 10 years ago started talking about it, made it a thing. The first year of Trump won for every one new regulation, 22 win. The next year it was 17, the next year 13, I think. And then by the end, because it got a little bit harder to find them, but still it wasn't two to one. Our average was like

10 to one in the first Trump administration. Well, then you add on Elon Musk and his, you know, team of geniuses who normally would never even think about being in government. Not that they wouldn't want to, but they wouldn't even begin to know how. You combine that with this idea that we're returning power to the people. We're downsizing government. We are not in charge that the we're not here for the people to serve us like some monarchy. We're here to serve the people. And that's a fundamental shift in the way we're thinking in the federal government. And then to add Elon on. So it actually right after our cabinet meeting, maybe right before a couple

hours ago, I guess the news reports were saying, "Oh, he's headed back to, you know, do his business." I pulled him aside and I said, "I hope this isn't true. This country needs you and your team forever." And to see now the states begin to add their own doses. This is how we save America. This is how we protect the country. Hopefully that becomes the institution. It becomes institutionaliz. Exactly. And and hopefully we make it so powerful and get the people so involved that even the Democrats can't roll it back that this is the long-term plan for the country. for your uh department, there's a big farm bill negotiation that comes up. I've I've been in DC a couple of times

for farm bills. I'll give an anecdote. Uh go in I have a conversation with someone on a committee or in an office and they're like, "Well, I I'll we can get this thing, but we got to go give the other guys this thing." And it it clearly becomes this bill that today I think is rated at a trillion five over whatever the the the the budgeting period is. It's one of the largest bills we pass and the SNAP program is in it. So it serves the House of Representatives interests and then all the farm programs are in it. So it serves the Senate interests because the Senate is heavily influenced by rural states, by agriculture. And so it's become this behemoth bill. And how do

you view are you going to play a role in um and how do you view this kind of horse trading that needs to go on to ultimately reduce government inefficiency, spending on things that don't necessarily make sense as we get into this farm bill negotiation in the next couple of months? Well, I am encouraged that that the Biden team couldn't get it done. I mean, they worked and it's important. I know a lot of people are hating it and they should because it does become a Christmas tree of sorts, but the reference prices, which is what our farmers are paid on, have not been changed since the last farm bill, which was at the beginning of Trump one. So, Debbie Stabinau, who's

now gone, was the lead Democrat in the Senate. The Senate was leading. Of course, Joe Biden wasn't. That team was sort of MIA. Um, we've got a different team on the ground now. And one of the very first conversations I had with Amy Clolobachar, who took Debbie Steanel's place as the lead Democrat, um, of course now we we're running the Senate, it's a little bit different, is how do we get this done? But realizing that the SNAP program, which is what the Democrats are always trying to put more money into, that grew 40% under the Joe Biden term, 40%. The program that was already this gigantic, you know, huge amounts of waste and fraud and abuse, it's now even more. And they did that on

purpose, right? They knew it would be hard for us to roll that back. I'm underscoring your point that this is not going to be easy. That um the farmer part of the farm bill is 15% 15. The food stamp part of the farm bill is 85%. So I have been thinking about this already having conversations and strategy sessions on both sides of the aisle. Frankly, we've got to get this done for our farmers. And even, you know, to Senator Clolobachar's credit and other Senate Democrats on the A committee, they care as much about the farmer um in their states as I believe most of the Republicans do. It's a a is the number one industry in almost every state. And so trying to find that middle

ground, but ensuring that we're bringing real reform to the SNAP program, but that we're most importantly supporting our farmers and our ranchers will continue to be the driver. As in all things, I think Donald Trump is the is the the game changer here and I think he's gonna help us get this done. So, I want to talk about one last point before we wrap, which is on um innovation generally speaking in food. There's been a large amount and how it relates to protecting farmers interests. Yeah. Um there's been a lot of investment in cellular agriculture using cells to make milk or eggs or cheese or fish or chicken. um you know using new biotechnologies

and uh Dantis went on stage with a couple of ranchers from Florida and they passed a law banning the sale or production of cellular agriculture cellular products in the state and there are two other states that have passed laws others that are considering it now there's a conversation about some folks at the house also doing it and the general statement well there's already a regulatory framework for making sure it's safe for consumers making sure it's healthy etc. Some people might not like it, but I go back to my free market principles. Why not let consumers choose? As long as it's safe, as long as it's appropriately regulated, shouldn't

it be made available rather than protecting the interests? Otherwise, you end up looking like Europe and Europe has stifled innovation in agriculture for decades and as a result, they have fallen way behind America and it's an opportunity for America to sustain its innovative advantage. Yeah. Do you have you spent any time on this topic? And do you have a point of view? Well, let me say this. I have not dug into this yet the amount that I need to. But having said that, I do believe that the innovation and the drive for better should never be stifled. And I sincerely believe that there is hopefully room for everyone, especially as this emerging market is happening. And I also believe

that at the end of the day, the American consumer when most of them when having to decide between real American beef and something that's not that they're going to choose the real American beef. So I at least in my, you know, nominal knowledge at this point without digging in, I just believe so strongly in our in our ranchers and our farmers and what they produce and what it means to the average American family. I'm the mom of four uh and how I feed my family, but I don't think we ever want to get in the way of stifling innovation, especially as it relates to something that could eventually be such a gamecher. Well, Brooke, I really appreciate all the time

you've given us given me today. Uh it's really great to spend this uh this hour with you and congrats on the role. Congrats on the progress and really look forward to seeing the work you're going to be doing over the years ahead. Thank you. Oh, thank you. It's an honor to do it. Thank you. Thank you. [Music] I'm going all in.