Senator Marshall Questions USDA Deputy Secretary and General Counsel Nominees During Agriculture Committee Hearing

Washington – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) participated in the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry confirmation hearing today for President Donald Trump’s Deputy Secretary of Agriculture nominee Stephen Vaden and General Counsel of the Department of Agriculture nominee Tyler Clarkson. 

Stephen Vaden comes from a farming family and is currently a judge of the United States Court of International Trade which possesses exclusive jurisdiction over most of the United States’ trade matters. He served nearly the entirety of the first Trump Administration in the Office of General Counsel and clerked for two of our nation’s federal judges. Tyler Clarkson served as USDA’s deputy general counsel in the first Trump Administration and previously worked in President Trump’s first Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

During the hearing, Senator Marshall questioned Mr. Vaden and Mr. Clarkson on conservation efforts, precision agriculture, Proposition 12, the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), and the United States’ international trade deficit.

Senator Marshall is a fifth-generation farm kid and Chairman of the Subcommittee on Conservation, Forestry, Natural Resources, and Biotechnology.

Click HERE or on the image above to watch Senator Marshall’s full line of questioning.

Highlights from the hearing include: 

On the United States’ international trade deficit:

Senator Marshall: “Judge Vaden, I’ll close with my question for you, dealing with our trade deficit, $1.2 trillion trade deficit. For the first time in my lifetime, an agriculture deficit. We’re importing more food than we’re exporting… In your new role, what can you do to decrease the international trade deficit, and how will you be promoting strengthening domestic demand for agriculture products?”

Stephen Vaden, Deputy Secretary of Agriculture nominee: “Senator, I think you hit on it in the verbs you used in your questions, we’ve got to promote, and that involves a salesmanship activity. I know the Secretary has committed to visiting six countries this year in terms of promoting more ag exports. That’s important. No one else is going to sell our stuff. We’ve got to sell it.

“Secondly, we’ve got to keep track of foreign trade barriers, whether they be tariff or non-tariff-related, and we’ve got to remind the trade team that as they’re out there looking for new trade deals, as they’re standing up for other American industries, they need to stand up for American agriculture too and oppose these efforts that are trying to keep our wonderful farmers’ products out of the international market.” 

On conservation efforts and precision agriculture:

Senator Marshall: “Judge, my [family’s farm] goes back 100 years. I think yours were even 100 years older than my family’s. And I’d like to think that my great grandfather, your great, great, great were the original conservationists – that they wanted to leave this world cleaner, healthier, and safer than we found it, just like you and I want to leave it – for our future generations – cleaner, healthier and safer than we found it.

“I’ll also note, though, that my farmers and ranchers depend upon certain pesticides and fertilizers, and there [are] great opportunities… for precision agriculture, we’re growing more with less every day. In your office, if confirmed, how can you help defend the crop protection and precision ag tools that our farmers rely upon?”

Mr. Vaden: “Well, Senator, I thank you for the question, and I really appreciate how you have linked, because I think the linkage is proper, conservation with the scientific advancements and chemicals that make that possible. 

“No-till agriculture was kind of launched in West Tennessee. I grew up going with my father to the Milan No-Till Festival, which still goes on and was kind of an initial effort at evangelizing this notion that you do not have to plow the field every year, which, as you know, is bad for soil health.

“But that only becomes possible if you have in your toolkit as a farmer the amazing chemicals that are provided in order to clear the land so that you can plant. If you take those chemicals away, what you are doing is you are taking a tool out of the toolkit of the farmer and requiring him to revert, in my view, to the somewhat antiquated plow. That’s bad for soil health, and quite frankly, it threatens a lot of the work done by the old Soil Conservation Service, and now the Natural Resources Conservation Service, to instill best practices in farms. Because, as you know, if you’re destroying the soil, it’s the equivalent of eating into your principal to pay living expenses.”

On the Commodity Credit Corporation:

Senator Marshall: “Let’s talk about the [Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC)] for a second. It’s been used for different purposes and I was concerned with the last administration that the Secretary of Agriculture used it to promote Green New Deal type of initiatives, which I think feels like to me, was outside of the intention of the CCC.

“Do you think that the use of the CCC by the previous administration was legal, and how do we ensure that the CCC is used for its intended use of supporting farmers and not backing special interest?”

Tyler Clarkson, General Counsel of the Department of Agriculture nominee: “I do think that the prior administration’s use of CCC required quite a bit, quite a bit of legal creativity that strained the statutory text and practice in a manner that I don’t think I anticipate continuing were I confirmed as general counsel.”

On California’s Proposition 12:

Senator Marshall: “Proposition 12 dictates, in my humble opinion, tries to tell Kansas farmers how to grow pigs, and it’s really hard for that small producer. If Kansas, or if… California has a way they want us to grow them. If Texas has a way we want to grow them. If Ohio has a way they want to grow pigs. It’s really hard for my small producers. Is there anything that USDA could do to administratively ensure that certain states are not able to dictate production standards for livestock producers nationwide?”

Mr. Vaden: “I’m well aware of the challenge that such state propositions provide to farmers who have to operate in a national market. As you know, when I was General Counsel, we were very active in supporting the efforts of those who challenged the proposition, and I’m happy to say those efforts ended up to be bipartisan, because, though it’s not frequently noted, both the first Trump Administration and the Biden Administration both opposed, in the federal courts, Proposition 12 on the grounds of our and their belief that it violated the Dormant Commerce Clause. 

“The Supreme Court, unfortunately, came to a different conclusion, and in the opinion written by the Supreme Court, they basically put it in Congress’s hands and said that Congress has the power under the Commerce Clause to stop this if it wants. And so, when it comes to any administrative authorities that USDA might have, if any are in existence, they would have to be given [to] us by Congress.” 

###