By Andi Anderson
Ohio farmers are sharing mixed reactions after the announcement of a $12 billion federal aid package designed to support producers affected by trade tariffs and challenging weather conditions, including heavy rain and drought.
The program was introduced by the Trump administration earlier this week as a way to help farmers manage financial strain created by current market disruptions.
Shelby County farmer Chris Gibbs, who also leads the Shelby County Democratic Party and the Ohio Democratic Party's Rural Caucus, expressed strong concerns about the subsidies. He argued that the funds are intended to discourage farmers from speaking out about tariffs.
Gibbs stated, “These hush money payments won’t benefit farmers at all. They’ll be immediately assimilated by the monopolies that control our fertilizer, seeds, and crop protection supplies, magically resulting in increased costs that match the payments. These payments will go through farmers like poop through a goose.”
In contrast, Rep. Bob Peterson (R-Sabina), who farms 3,000 acres in Fayette County, viewed the subsidies as helpful assistance for farmers during this period of change.
He credited Trump’s tax policies for supporting producers and protecting U.S. trade interests. Peterson noted, “What the Trump administration has done with the 'Big Beautiful Bill' on tax cuts… has been more helpful than probably anything that’s happened in the past 20 years.”
Peterson also highlighted other benefits, saying, “They’ve worked to lower fuel prices… Trump has been an advocate for driving down interest rates.”
Gibbs, however, warned that accepting subsidies may create future dependency. He explained, “Where we are, because I’m struggling too, is by design… You are now dependent on your neighbor’s tax dollars to survive.”
The debate comes as Ohio soybean farmers continue to experience significant losses due to tariffs. Soybeans are Ohio’s largest crop, and earlier this year the Ohio Farm Bureau reported that China had not purchased any soybeans from the state—despite previously buying one-third of Ohio’s annual crop.
The contrasting perspectives show how federal aid is viewed differently across Ohio’s agricultural community, reflecting both immediate needs and long-term concerns about market stability.
Photo Credit: gettyimages-brzozowska
Categories: Ohio, General