MAHA Cannot Be Crushed

President Trump’s recent glyphosate Executive Order (EO) was a massive shock to the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement. We were, and continue to be, outraged. While our response, in the form of this article, may seem delayed, we have been avidly responding for over a week to various forms of media, which can be seen here.

In summary, our outrage is warranted. Providing foreign glyphosate companies (Bayer and ChemChina) with government contracts brimming with vague forms of immunity from lawsuits, was unnecessary and the exact opposite of what MAHA has been asking the government to do for decades. Consider: products essential to national security such as drones, jet planes, missiles, and vehicles, are given quiet government contracts practically daily. No EO is issued to declare them a “national security asset.” No immunity is awarded for the production of the product. Yet a pesticide (a term that includes herbicide), for the first time in history, was declared a national security asset the week before a legislative markup for the Farm Bill, with sections including pesticide immunity, and two months before a Supreme Court case that would also provide Bayer with immunity. We assert this was not a coincidence.

Instead of a simple government contract signed on a Tuesday without fanfare, the announcement (EO), was a signal to the Supreme Court that it would be unwise for them to jeopardize glyphosate’s production by granting Bayer immunity. In fact, the EO might possibly even override any decision made by the Supreme Court, and ensure Bayer’s ability to continue to sell glyphosate regardless of their decision.

Certainly, the clause in the Farm Bill specifically states that the immunity afforded in the bill, if it were to be included and passed, would supersede any entity, including state, region, or court’s decision. The audacity! The fact that any of our legislators would even consider such an addition to a Farm Bill is grounds for an accusation of treason. Our legislators must not allow a foreign company to pressure them to block our court system from legally assessing and determining what justice is for Americans.

Members of the administration, via Calley Means, senior advisor to the HHS Secretary and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. himself, are not pushing back on our anger. They understand. They are not happy either, to put it mildly, and the administration is getting the message.

On Friday, the administration announced a one billion dollar commitment to transitioning agrochemical farming to pesticide-free methods. The glyphosate EO was a lost battle, but the war on pesticides is not over; in fact, because of the glyphosate EO and the massive outcry, it is now tipping in our favor.

The glyphosate EO was a massive blow to the MAHA movement. It set many of us back 12 steps. But it did not crush us. MAHA cannot be crushed, because you cannot crush the commitment of mothers and others to the health and safety of their children, families, and Americans.

Our impact as a moms movement is incalculable. Not only do we purchase 85 percent of the food, we are leaders in shifting the organic marketplace from 20 billion dollars a year when we began in 2013, to over 70 billion dollars a year today. But legislators, according to a California legislator, “are more afraid of moms than any other grassroots group out there.”

While this administration does not appear to be afraid of anyone, they are, of course, listening too. The glyphosate EO may be a partial result to the messaging that Moms Across America (MAA) has been posting and sharing with elected official staffers for several months: 85.7 percent of glyphosate production comes from Chinese-owned companies. This is disturbing because 80 percent of GMOs are engineered to withstand glyphosate, and anywhere from 85 to 100 percent of our commodity crops, such as corn, soy, canola, cotton, and sugarbeets, are GMO. Kennedy recently stated on the Joe Rogan show that, according to industry reports, 99 percent of the glyphosate our farmers use comes from China. Proponents of glyphosate may say that Bayer is a German company, but do not know that even Bayer has a production facility in China.

The unfortunate fact is that the majority of our agriculture industry utilizes glyphosate. Many farmers say they are dependent upon it. However, it must be stated that the crop could still grow without glyphosate. It is not true that U.S. farmers are “dependent” on glyphosate. The farmers using these GMO seeds engineered to withstand glyphosate (their choice) would have to use a different method for weed management. However, they are currently not set up to do so. Therefore, the pressure is on the administration to support farmers to transition to regenerative agriculture.

Recent post by Kari Bundy Health Activist, MAA board member

🚨 Significant U.S. Investment in Sustainable Agricultural Research: Total Funding Exceeds $1 Billion

The U.S. government recently announced an additional $200 million in research funding dedicated to innovative and sustainable farming practices, elevating the overall commitment to more than $1 billion.

This initiative, announced jointly by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department of Agriculture (USDA), aims to develop effective alternatives that reduce dependence on chemical pesticides and advance safer crop protection methods.

Key components include:

• $100 million from HHS to investigate the health effects of cumulative chemical exposures, covering exposure pathways, diagnosis, and treatment strategies.

• An additional $100 million to support the discovery of non-chemical or low-chemical approaches for weed and pest management, with potential benefits for farmer health, soil quality, and environmental sustainability.

These investments represent a meaningful push toward evidence-based advancements in agriculture, potentially leading to reduced pesticide reliance and improved long-term food security.

However, the announcement arrives amid significant controversy surrounding the recent EO to secure and prioritize domestic supplies of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides.

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in widely used products like Roundup, remains at the center of ongoing debates and thousands of lawsuits alleging links to serious health risks, including cancer.

Critics, including many in the MAHA movement, view the protection and expansion of glyphosate production as a conflict.

While the research funding signals progress toward alternatives, the simultaneous emphasis on maintaining glyphosate availability raises important questions about policy consistency and the pace of transitioning away from controversial chemicals.

——

It must be stated however, that “regenerative” is not the end goal. Regenerative is a farming practice that could still use glyphosate. There is no regenerative certification that has measurable requirements for the reduction or elimination of glyphosate. Regenerative organic, organic, or biodynamic are the only forms of farming that do not allow glyphosate and other toxic chemicals. We must avoid greenwashing and the deception of the public by using the phrase organic as the end goal for non-toxic nutrient-dense food.

We continue to strive to raise awareness about GMOs, glyphosate, and toxic agrochemicals, as well as the benefits of organic and regenerative organic farming. The fact is, we know how to MAHA, and we know this administration knows how to MAHA. We encourage you to speak up, share this article, contact your elected officials, and let them know we are watching their votes regarding pesticide immunity shield language and lack of action to restrict or reduce pesticide use.