The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Rural Development (RD) division is facing mounting pressure to restore staff and funding after witnesses at a recent House Agriculture Committee hearing highlighted the critical role RD plays in supporting rural infrastructure, local economies, and agricultural services.

According to testimony, many state and field RD offices are operating at half capacity or less, severely limiting the department's ability to deliver essential programs. Xochitl Torres Small, former USDA Deputy Secretary, described the situation as a systemic weakening of a mission already struggling to meet rural needs. "In Mississippi, 90% of Rural Development staff were cut last year," she said. "Nationally, only 16 engineers remain in the RD state system."

Staffing losses under the Deferred Resignation Program have totaled approximately 1,500 employees-nearly one-third of the RD workforce. These departures, coupled with administrative restructuring under the Department of Government Efficiency, have left many regions without the personnel needed to approve projects, answer calls, or support grant applications.

"Vital projects are sitting on desks waiting for approval," Torres Small added. "Phone calls are going unanswered. That's not serving rural people."

Testimony from local leaders reinforced the message. Paul Heimel, a commissioner from Potter County, Pennsylvania, emphasized the need to keep RD staff embedded in communities. "That service has existed for decades. It's part of our way of life. The number one priority should be to protect and grow field staff - it's that important to all of rural America."

Lynne Keller Forbes, representing the National Association of Development Organizations, called on USDA to preserve its local footprint amid agency reorganizations. "Maintaining field staff in communities is essential," she told lawmakers.

Lawmakers across party lines appeared to agree. Rep. John Rose (R-Tenn.) acknowledged that consistent staffing is critical to delivering on RD's promise. Subcommittee Chair Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.) praised the bipartisan tone of the hearing, saying, "The rural way of life is worth fighting for."

Witnesses also called for policy reforms to strengthen RD programs, including:

Doubling down on proven, flexible investments like community facilities and business support programs.

Simplifying application processes, especially for small producers and rural counties with limited administrative capacity.

Implementing multi-year grant funding to give communities more time to plan and execute projects.

Creating fast-track processes for small-dollar grants.

Torres Small recounted a conversation with a farmer who compiled a four-inch binder just to apply for a more efficient grain dryer. "Those are the folks you've got to talk to," she said, emphasizing the burden placed on applicants.

Former RD deputy undersecretary Bette Brand, now leading a rural consulting firm, cited the success of USDA's Business & Industry (B&I) guaranteed loan program, which helped create over 750,000 jobs between 2014 and 2022 at a cost of just $438 per job. In one example, the Maryland-Virginia Milk Producers Cooperative was able to upgrade a Virginia milk processing facility in 2023, retaining 178 jobs and increasing farmer income.

Still, frustrations over federal cuts were clear. Torres Small criticized past USDA staffing reductions under the Trump administration, saying they occurred without consulting affected communities. Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) also condemned cuts to Medicaid and rural health infrastructure in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, arguing that the proposed $50 billion Rural Health Transformation Fund does not come close to addressing the damage.

The hearing sent a strong message: Rural America needs fully staffed, locally rooted USDA services. Without them, everything from infrastructure investment to farm efficiency projects remains out of reach. As Congress looks toward the next farm bill and budget cycle, rural leaders are urging lawmakers to prioritize boots-on-the-ground capacity over bureaucratic restructuring.

The stakes are high, not just for farmers and agronomists, but for entire communities whose livelihoods depend on the strength of USDA Rural Development.