Oregon — U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley on Monday criticized a newly announced $12 billion federal assistance package for farmers affected by recent U.S. tariffs, placing blame on the trade policies of President Donald Trump and arguing that the relief effort shifts costs onto taxpayers without addressing underlying problems.
In a statement released following the administration’s announcement, Merkley said tariffs imposed by the Trump administration had sharply reduced foreign demand for U.S. agricultural commodities, particularly soybeans, and contributed to rising financial stress in the farm sector. He cited an increase in farm bankruptcies compared with 2024 and described the aid package as a “bailout” intended to offset losses caused by the tariffs.
The statement, however, did not cite specific data sources for the bankruptcy figures or detail how much of the increase could be directly attributed to tariffs, as opposed to other factors affecting farm incomes. Economists have noted that agricultural finances are influenced by a range of variables, including global commodity prices, weather conditions, interest rates, input costs, and long-standing production imbalances, in addition to trade policy.
Merkley also argued that the assistance program places an added burden on taxpayers, saying consumers and businesses initially bore higher costs due to tariffs and are now funding relief payments through federal spending. At the same time, he said the aid would be insufficient for many family farms already facing severe financial distress.
The administration has defended the assistance as necessary to stabilize farm incomes while trade disputes continue, framing the payments as temporary support rather than a long-term subsidy. The White House has also maintained that tariffs are a negotiating tool aimed at securing better trade terms for U.S. producers over time.
Merkley’s statement did not outline alternative policy options, such as modifying or rolling back tariffs, expanding trade adjustment assistance, or pursuing other structural changes to agricultural support programs. It also did not address the administration’s stated trade objectives or provide analysis of whether those goals have been achieved.
The debate over the farm aid package comes amid broader scrutiny of U.S. trade policy and its economic effects, as lawmakers from both parties weigh the short-term costs of tariffs against their intended long-term benefits for domestic industries.
About the Author
