Rural Vermont Attacks Trump Policies for Federal Workers

Helping farmers, or federal bureaucrats?

(How a rural Vermonter (me) moves a round bale feeder on his Jeep!)

The Vermont nonprofit Rural Vermont recently issued an email claiming:

“The new federal administration is unleashing a shock and awe campaign against the institutions and norms of US government and democracy, is threatening and actualizing persecution of our neighbors, and creating deep instability for our farms and communities. Executive Orders and dehumanizing narratives have targeted immigrants, transgender and gender non-conforming people, communities of color, and people affected by Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives and programs.”

“Subsequent court rulings have stated that the funding freeze cannot continue, though uncertainty remains if court decisions will be followed or enforced. The New York Times reported that over 2,600 programs were temporarily paused. Sen. Welch, speaking at the NOFA VT conference this past weekend said, “I'm often asked if things are as bad as they look. I’m here to tell you they are much, much worse.” ”

Rural Vermont’s newsletter refers readers to “resources” that are ultra-left-wing and one-sided: definitely not about farming, or helping “all” Vermonters. One resource titled “The Underground: WTF?” should take notes from Dostoevsky. The link is titled “what you need to know & DO to defend your federal funding.” I don’t receive federal funding, and I don’t know too many farmers panting with bated breath to get their salaries paid the way nonprofits and Marxist agitators do on the federal taxpayer tab. The piece makes some bold legal claims that are quite revealing:

“In issuing the Ending Radical and Wasteful Government DEI Programs and Preferencing Executive Order, the Administration initiated a coordinated, comprehensive strategy to eliminate what it calls “illegal” “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” (DEIA), “environmental justice,” “equity,” “equity-related” programs, grants or contracts across all federal agencies.

“The Constitution and Impoundment Control Act make it illegal for the Executive branch of the government to take deliberate action to override Congress’s power of the purse. Presidents are not able to make government spending decisions without first getting permission from Congress. Across the country, communities and public servants alike are struggling to assist vulnerable communities that are falling into crisis because of this illegal funding freeze.”

There are two grotesquely misinformative aspects to this silly screed: 1) The Impoundment Control Act does not “make it illegal” for presidents to curtail wasteful government spending, and 2) the cuts are not sweeping, and simply pare back the crony corruption by which Biden created more than half of new US jobs in government agencies last year! I will prove these two points here:

1. Two veteran attorneys addressed claims of ICA unconstitutionality in 2024 this way:

“The media has breathlessly reported that former President Donald Trump plans to upend longstanding norms around the separation of powers, such as in coverage of Trump’s criticisms of the Impoundment Control Act, a 1974 law that purports to restrict the president’s authority to save taxpayer money.

“Far from being a disturbing break with law and practice, Trump’s defense of the impoundment authority is deeply rooted in our constitutional system, good governance norms, and American history and tradition. Presidents from both parties have criticized the act’s restrictions on the president’s ability to impound funds to reduce federal spending.

“Impoundment is common sense — if it takes fewer resources to implement a program than what was appropriated, an agency should not be forced to waste taxpayer dollars. If there is room for savings in federal programs, why should the president be restrained from ordering agencies to shrink the size of the federal government?

“Both the Impoundment Control Act’s restrictions on presidential impoundment authority and its mechanism to enforce those restrictions flagrantly violate the Constitution. Trump is right to stand up against this norm-breaking and unconstitutional measure and to restore commonsense limitations on government spending.”

2. Commonsense limitations on reckless government spending is exactly what the far-left, government-dependent workforce seeks to prevent, like a cancer on Vermonters and the nation.

Another Rural Vermont link takes us to the ultra-progressive VTDigger for an article in support of this sky-is-falling (for government employees only) alarmism:

“Just hours after Brooke Rollins was sworn in as secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C., Thursday, in Vermont, Richard Amore received a 7:30 p.m. email from his human resources office saying he was terminated effective immediately. Amore had served as the head of economic development for USDA’s Rural Development team for just four months.

“We’re a staff of about 30. We’ve lost 5 — all probationary employees,” Amore said, speaking about the Rural Development office, adding that some had been very recently hired. “It breaks my heart what happened yesterday. I’m committed to the rural communities and you’re taking away the resources, the funding,” he added.

“Amore’s team is not alone. Several thousand so-called probationary employees at USDA regional offices across the country also were suddenly laid off, including within the Farm Service Agency, the Natural Resources Conservation Service, and the National Forest Service.

So, five probationary employees were “lost” out of 30? That is hardly a rout and has little bearing on Vermont farmers trying to make ends meet under Bidenflation and massive property tax hikes under Vermont’s “progressive” bully supermajority. The probationary employees can find other jobs more easily than low-income, young, and retired Vermonters can find new land to live on when they can’t afford all of the state and federal progressive hires of favored political allies.

Because, let’s be honest, Vermont schools and bureaucracy do not knowingly hire conservatives. How many conservatives work at Rural Vermont? And how does this Rural Vermont rant help small farms and regenerative practices? It seems all about sucking money from the federal cash cow. The VTDigger article goes on to whine about lost money for non-governmental entities: but not farmers or Vermonters working in trades, restaurants, or retail. That’s a very different kind of agriculture – next thing they will be calling ugly commercial arrays of solar panels “solar farming.” (You can boil those panels all you like but they just aren’t palatable, and their manufacturing and disposal are not very beneficial to regenerating healthy soils.)

In closing irony, Rural Vermont’s newsletter drops its deceptive screen of agriculture used to veil its real mission: “Thank you for a strong 2025 start supporting the advocacy, education, and policy work Rural Vermont will continue to provide to our rural, agrarian communities. This work couldn't be any more important than now.”

What is Rural Vermont’s real mission? In my next Substack, I will undertake a deeper investigation into its activities and why I believe this organization has deceived Vermonters about its primary mission and abused its tax-exempt 501(c)(3) status.