Big Ag Has Corrupted Our Food System. Here’s How We Can Rebuild — An Introduction
There are certain truths in this country that cut across party lines, geography, and ideology. One of them is this: our food system is broken.
For decades, Big Agriculture has consolidated power, squeezed out family farms, degraded our soil and waterways, and flooded our communities with highly processed food that is cheap at the checkout counter but devastatingly expensive to our long-term health. Meanwhile, small farmers struggle to survive, rural communities hollow out, and consumers are left wondering why food is both unaffordable and lower in quality than ever.
This didn’t happen by accident. It happened because policy choices — made in Washington and echoed in statehouses across the country — consistently favored consolidation over competition, scale over sustainability, and corporate profit over public health. When a handful of massive companies control seed, fertilizer, processing, and distribution, the system stops serving people and starts serving shareholders.
As a business owner, I understand efficiency. As a city councilor, I understand budgets and infrastructure. But as someone who cares deeply about community health and long-term resilience, I also understand that a system designed purely for short-term profit is not sustainable. Not for farmers. Not for consumers. And certainly not for the next generation.
Rebuilding our food system isn’t about nostalgia for some imagined past. It’s about creating a modern, resilient, and fair system that supports local agriculture, protects our environment, and ensures that the food on our tables actually nourishes the people eating it.
The following piece lays out how Big Ag helped create the mess we’re in — and, more importantly, how we can begin to fix it.
Big Ag Has Corrupted Our Food System. Here’s How We Can Rebuild.
Austin Frerick explains how eaters and farmers can unite to fix our broken food system
I first came across Austin Frerick in The American Conservative in 2019. His story, “To Revive Rural America, We Must Fix Our Broken Food System,” with its plain-spoken, factual description of how Big Ag conglomerates have held hostage and defrauded farmers for generations, was an awakening.
Not since Osha Gray Davidson published his 1990 Broken Heartland: The Rise of America’s Rural Ghetto had I read someone who could break beyond a liberal audience to expose our country’s failed agricultural policy and its impact on rural communities. Both Frerick and Davidson help those from rural places understand what happened to us over the last half-century under the influence of “get big or get out”—the advice Nixon’s Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz gave U.S. farmers in 1973
Like Davidson, Frerick delivers a warning that transcends the politicization of farming: Big Ag monopolies, and the policies that allowed them to thrive, have failed our rural communities and country’s food system, leaving them vulnerable to epic failures. The urgency of that message has even spooked the government officials and powerful industry leaders who helped create the farming crisis we face today. On February 3 former U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) officials from the Bush and Reagan administrations, as well as former heads of industry groups representing corn and soybean farmers, sent a letter to Congress warning of “a widespread collapse of American agriculture” should current economic conditions and Trump administration policies continue.
But Frerick also sees bold possibilities to disrupt the Big Ag status quo. In his conversation with Barn Raiser, Frerick considers ways to dismantle monopolies and solutions to transform food policy to support small farmers. He invites us to entertain what is possible if we face the crisis in agriculture with strategic action instead of apathy.
Frerick, a seventh generation Iowan, is an expert in antitrust law and agricultural policy. He’s lead projects at the Open Markets Institute and he’s published research and analysis for tax journals, the New York Times, and at the U.S. Department of Treasury. He served as a co-chair on the Biden campaign’s Agriculture Antitrust Policy Committee. His 2024 book, Barons: Money, Power, and the Corruption of America’s Food Industry exposes the families who control America’s agricultural monopolies.
This is the first of a two-part interview with Frerick.
The last time I talked to you was back in September when the Arkansas farmers were raising alarm bells. At a hearing with the House Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources subcommittee, Arkansas lenders and farmers warned that 1 in 3 farms could close without federal aid because of how Trump’s tariffs had upended export markets. How are you making sense of the moment we find ourselves in?
What’s happening with farmers says everything about this moment. Last week, the New York Times ran a story saying farmers are going to let their crops rot because the prices are so bad. At the same time, we’re having a food affordability crisis. That juxtaposition captures how broken our food system is, where farmers are letting crops rot and they’re barely getting by as Americans are paying more and more for food in the stores.
On January 1, the U.S. Department of Agriculture began implementing a new rule requiring that “Product of U.S.A.” labeling on meat only apply to livestock born, processed, finished in the United States. Is this a win for farmers and eaters?
No, and here’s why. I’m so sick of giving gold stars for doing basic things. When Americans buy meat that says “made in America,” it should mean made in America. This debate has been going on for more than a decade. To me, this is a good example of the incompetency of the USDA: You don’t get a reward for doing your job.
It’s embarrassing more than anything that it took them this long to make the “Product of U.S.A” label mean something.
The scariest thing to me right now in the beef market is this: Normally in moments like this where prices are high and herd populations are low, ranchers expand the herd. But they’re not doing that. We’re not seeing herd expansion.
And what this is telling me is these markets have been so tight for so long. They don’t trust the USDA to police these markets and they don’t think they’ll get a good price in the future. So they’re essentially letting the American herd shrink. That means more and more of our beef will have to be imported. What’s going on in the beef markets is a good example of just how hard it is to farm in America anymore.
I want to talk about pricing for a second. In 2019, the cost for a pound of hamburger was just under four dollars. Today it’s more like six and a half dollars. Many eaters can’t afford hamburger anymore. So, who’s making the money for the last seven years?
The Big Four meatpackers (Tyson, JBS, Cargill and National Beef). R-CALF USA is a great cattlemen’s organization and they have a chart I love to show in my presentations. For the longest time, what Americans spend for beef and the dollars ranchers get in return has been closely correlated. What happened in 2015 is a significant divergence started to occur. Today that gap is wider than ever. And that to me is a story of monopoly. You’re seeing Americans spend record prices for beef, but that’s not going to the farmer. It’s all going to the four largest meatpackers.
The largest meatpacker in America (JBS) is owned by a cartoonishly corrupt Brazilian family, the Batistas. They were also Trump’s largest inauguration donor. So it’s all going to them.
Think of what this means for rural communities. You’re seeing the wealth of rural America being hollowed out. Farmers are producing the most they’ve ever produced, but that wealth is not staying in their community. And so Americans are paying more and a secretive family, whether it is the Cargills of Cargill or the Batistas of JBS, is capturing all that.
And on top of it, you’re seeing a lot of corners being cut. Beef imported from Brazil is just not as good. Something I realized in the last few years is this whole system is making bad tasting food.
I get chicken through a local farmer right here in southwest Virginia. When you start eating locally, like chicken that’s raised on a normal farm, the difference is amazing compared to the Tyson chicken you buy in a chain store. Eaters have no idea.
It’s also that the farmer doing it right, managing their operation locally, is not playing on a level playing field. The local farmer is not getting government subsidies. These industrial big corporations are. It’s just not fair.
My favorite example to illustrate this is butter. Butter in America is awful. It’s white. It’s hard. It doesn’t spread well.
Most of the butter in America now comes from Bakersfield, California. It’s cows on a feedlot next to an oil rig, being fed corn. On the other hand, Kerrygold is now the second largest branded butter in America. Irish butter. People love it. Here’s the thing: That’s the way butter used to be in America. But now it’s a premium. Now it’s only for the yuppie class, which just shows you how many corners are being cut.
We’ve chosen to subsidize this really bad system. And most of the subsidies are just being captured by a few rich oligarchs or robber barons.
Tyson Foods announced in January that they’re cutting 5,000 employees in their industry. They cut a line in Amarillo, Texas, with about 1,700 employees losing their jobs. And then in Lexington, Nebraska, they’re closing a whole beef processing plant. That’s 3,200 employees who are losing their jobs. Lexington, in Dawson County, has a population of 10,348. So about a third of the whole community is facing unemployment. But for Tyson, this is just business as usual.
The reason Tyson gave is it expected to lose $250-$500 million in its beef segment, so they are deciding to scale back operations. Yet the United States right now is not producing enough beef to meet demand. What is happening here, and why is Tyson closing domestic processing plants?
It’s a few things. As I mentioned earlier, our beef supply chain is moving offshore. But Tyson’s also in a weird pickle. Other big beef packers like JBS are state-backed monopolies. Tyson doesn’t have these Brazilian operations like they do.
You also can’t deny the climate crisis here.
A lot of former beef packing regions are getting too hot and the aquifers are getting too low. A few years ago, in western Kansas, thousands of cattle died because of a heat wave.
At the same time the ethanol mandate has essentially pushed a lot of cattle ranchers off the land. Ranchers are in this weird pickle where they have less land because of the climate crisis, but then corn being grown from ethanol subsidies is taking over a lot more land too. They just can’t compete for land against ethanol. And on top of it, margins are getting tight because of the price squeezes they’re getting from the big meatpackers. And a lot of them ranchers are just saying it’s not worth it.
When you look at the situation in Lexington, Nebraska, is a disaster for a small town and rural area around it. When these corporations come in, they sell an area on job creation, they invest and that increases the tax base, and then they up and close, they leave. It’s like a death sentence. Can you talk about that?
My perspective on this is shaped by Newton, Iowa. Newton used to be home to Maytag appliances, where the company was founded in 1893. The town even used to be called the “Washing Machine Capital of the World.” Maytag’s last factory closed in 2006. I went to college down the road in Grinnell, Iowa, and Maytag’s closing was like watching a slow death. Because you don’t realize it overnight.
What tends to happen is you can’t sell your home when these things close, and your home is everything in America. That’s your wealth. Some people just take a loss, try to restart elsewhere. Others start doing long commutes. So in the case of Newton, people start driving like an hour to Des Moines for new jobs, making a fraction of what they used to.
Think about what that does for the local community of Newton, Iowa. People have less time to be active in their communities. On top of it, they have less money. This is how the slow decay of the community begins. Don’t get me wrong, Newton has tried really hard since to recreate itself. The town has tried to get back on its feet, but it’s not the same as it used to be. What was unique in Newton’s case is they also lost a white-collar workforce. A lot of the workers in Maytag would live in the town, like the ad people, and all that’s gone.
The scary thing in the case of Tyson closing its plant in Lexington, Nebraska, is it’s pretty remote. There’s not a lot of job options nearby. And so I think it’s going to hurt the community even more because you just can’t drive two hours for a job. Some people might, but a lot of people will probably just take a big financial hit and try to restart somewhere else. I think an underappreciated thing of consolidation are all the towns that are hollowed out because of it.
Austin, you’re an expert in antitrust law. What do you see as the future of antitrust legislation and the enforcement?
First of all, fun little fact: The first antitrust laws in the world come out of Iowa. It was Iowa farmers mad against the railroads and grain elevators. So they organized the Iowa legislative body to pass the first antitrust laws in the world. Then a few states copied it. And then eventually D.C. copied it as well. I love telling this story because it’s ingrained in me the notion that D.C. is always the last to know. Change in America always starts locally.
The New Deal didn’t just happen in D.C. A lot of the New Deal actually came out of Wisconsin, where the state legislature created several measures that have now been called the “little New Deal.” These ideas are always incubated in small towns and states in America. And it’s also part of the Iowa culture of fairness. The joke is that usually the richest person in Iowa is an old farmer in the back with overalls on.
There’s a humbleness I’ve always respected. And I think that’s why a lot of Iowans gravitate towards anti-monopoly stuff.
But to your question in the future of antitrust. Honestly, the reason why I love antitrust issues the most is it’s one of most bipartisan things right now in America. Everyone’s feeling like they’re being shortchanged for different reasons, and it’s unifying.
My whole thing is: Don’t blame the immigrant, blame Tyson. People have a right to feel their anger, but we need to redirect it to productive means. I also view this whole thing as cyclical. The goal of any corporate executive is monopoly. That’s where profits are.
Corporate people don’t want competitive markets. Government wants competitive markets because that’s good for innovation, it’s good for workers, it’s good for farmers. So you have a natural tension between the two. We’re at a new laissez-faire moment in American history where business has captured government and things have gone too far. We need to usher in a reform era.
So what should we do? What should a well-regulated meat market look like? You can only be angry for so long. I really want to focus on articulating hope, what things could be.
The beauty of a family farm a diversified operation because it makes you resilient. Diversity breeds resiliency. The system we have now pushes people to one or two crops, which makes you very fragile. One bad thing happens and it can wipe you out. It also makes it really expensive.
Look at bird flu, for example. When you have that many genetically similar cows living in the same confined area, you’re just asking for trouble.
And then we have this expensive, fragile, broken system that makes bad tasting food.
How do we think about antitrust enforcement as our food production moves international? Does legislation like the Packers and Stockyards Act, which was meant to reign in meat monopolies, apply?
That is the key question here. The short answer is: No.
Trade agreements, have essentially moved our produce system offshore, especially anything that’s labor intensive. Look at California. California used to produce a lot of produce. Today, it’s mostly nuts, because that’s more mechanical work. The second agriculture production moves offshore, labor and environmental standards collapse. In Barons, I talk about Driscoll’s. Driscoll’s is my berry baron. They sell one in three berries globally.
A lot of their berry production has now moved to Baja, California. These are essentially modern-day plantations. And it’s very, hard to inspect them. As a journalist, you’re putting yourself at risk if you want to go investigate them. And on top of it, the USDA’s Food Inspection Service has been gutted by the Trump administration, which would inspect food imported to this country. So it’s a Wild West. You cannot compete on price against a berry picked by a child in Latin America. And it undermines the growers doing it here domestically.
Going back to the issue of taste: When your produce is coming from Chile, it’s not going to taste good. That produce is engineered for durability, not for taste.
I’ve followed your work for a few years, and I see you navigating some polarized political scenes concerning agriculture and farming. On the one side, Barons received good reviews from publications like The American Conservative. And on another end, you’re also speaking at events like the Real Organic Project at Churchtown Dairy, in Hudson, New York. Do you see agriculture as a polarized issue in today’s politics?
In the same month this past summer I keynoted one of the largest cattle conferences and I also keynoted one of the largest vegan food festivals. I love being able to tell people that. I’m a big believer that things get done when you have a big tent approach and weird bedfellows get together.
Because who isn’t happy after a good meal? I always like to redirect the conversation there.
Neither party really has a vision here. An undercurrent in Barons is my dislike of Tom Vilsack [the former Iowa Governor and Secretary of Agriculture under Obama and Biden].
To me, there’s nothing worse for a democracy than when a politician pretends to be your friend, and they undermine you. A lot of people over the years have been galvanized in Iowa fighting these industrial animal facilities, fighting these Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) wanting to break up Big Ag. A lot of farmers went on a limb, testified. Not only did Vilsack not do anything, he made all the situations worse. That’s how people lose their faith in government.
How do we get out of the situation we’re in? We actually know what to do here. We’ve addressed the concentration crisis in the meat packing before, such as with policies like the Packers and Stockyards Act. The question right now is political courage.
