MAHA and Agriculture
January 10, 2026
| Friends, As we planned our Q1 Dispatch issues, the team and I had already flagged Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) as a topic we’d be spending time on. January reliably brings a flood of resolutions to eat better, move more, and reinvent yourself because this is YOUR year. And while I truly am rooting for 2026 to be the year everyone hits their goals, I’ll admit I’ll be equally happy when my gym quiets down again in March. That backdrop made Wednesday’s news in the MAHA world especially interesting. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins released the updated Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which are revised every five years. And, honestly, I surprised myself by cheering as I read through them. More protein (yes!). More fruits and vegetables (yes!). More dairy and healthy fats (yes!). And even a few wins for plant-based protein options. While I was initially skeptical of headlines claiming these guidelines “put real food and American agriculture back at the center of the plate,” there is real opportunity here for U.S. farmers if consumer behavior follows policy intent. That “if” still matters, but the direction is encouraging. Still, this moment feels like a tale of two MAHAs. In the first week of 2026, we’re celebrating science-based nutrition guidance that encourages people to eat more “real” food. We’re also hearing important acknowledgments from Secretary Rollins that access to healthy food remains a barrier in many communities, paired with commitments to require retailers that accept SNAP benefits to stock greater volumes of healthier options. American-grown and raised products are specifically referenced in new requirements tied to school meals, SNAP, WIC, and military feeding programs. That’s meaningful. And I’m genuinely excited about the prospect of this administration leaning on food grown by America’s farmers to advance public health goals. But we can’t ignore the MAHA conversation we were having just a few months ago, particularly when it comes to how that food is produced. Early MAHA advocates pushed for strict limits on so-called ultra-processed foods, expanded regulation of pesticides and crop protection tools, and new federal definitions that could have far-reaching implications for labeling, marketing, and consumer perception. We’ll take a deeper dive into the history and impacts of the MAHA movement in a future Dispatch, but it’s worth remembering where this process started. Farm and agriculture groups were clear: farmers welcome nutrition discussions, but strongly oppose efforts that mischaracterize modern agriculture or dismiss EPA-reviewed, science-based crop protection tools. Because of strong engagement from the agriculture community, the final MAHA report ultimately pulled back from sweeping regulatory changes and instead focused on voluntary education, research, and pilot programs. That outcome was not accidental, and it should not make us complacent. This week’s nutrition guidelines underscore why agriculture advocates must remain fully engaged as MAHA continues to evolve. Yes, we all want Americans to eat more American-grown whole foods. But that goal only works if producers are allowed to grow that food using safe, effective, science-based tools. Restricting access to crop production tools doesn’t make America healthier. It undermines the very system required to deliver the foods these guidelines promote. I’m cautiously optimistic that the new Dietary Guidelines signal a renewed respect for science-based nutrition policy and could lead to positive outcomes for farmers. But a few encouraging developments do not mean the broader MAHA agenda is no longer a threat to agriculture. I believe we can celebrate this progress and still keep our eye on the ball. Best regards, |
 |
| Tori Rumenik Executive Director, North Carolina Ag Partnership |