What is more American than farming?

Much like the cowboy or pioneer, the farmer has great cultural significance in our country. Not born from our popular imagination alone, our history of agriculture stems from our country’s natural landscape, climate and history, making us one of the largest “breadbaskets of the world.” However, modern populism has seemed to have forgotten that, in favor of social or industrial populism. If President Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders, the two most outspoken American populists, cared about farmers, both of them would have supported the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Instead, they use falsehoods about immigration, post-industrialization and technological development to further their personal popularity.

The debate over free trade and tariffs is ongoing since our country's founding, such as the contrast between the Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian economic models. While Thomas Jefferson supported free trade to enable American farmers to sell their produce overseas and buy cheaper European manufactured goods, Alexander Hamilton supported tariffs to boost the American industry. Today, we are at a similar crossroads, but the answer is much clearer: in order to support American agriculture, we need to continue and expand our free trade deals, and let obsolete industries die.

Trump’s removal of the U.S. from the TPP has already caused problems for farmers. Knowing that the trade deal was imminent, American agriculture started investing in bigger facilities to expand their businesses in Asia, which is growing and industrializing, and becoming one of the leading meat-consumers in the world. China is a leading pork consumer, and Japan is a steady consumer of American beef, even with a 38 percent tariff, which is set to almost double this year. In the wake of our withdrawal, China took charge, pushing for a revived “Silk Road.” Now, though, after Trump murdered the TPP, farmers are forced to recoup their investments made to expand their businesses. Not only are American farmers left with fewer markets, but Trump’s administration has also called for cuts to agriculture subsidies, opening the way for monopolies to take over small and family farms. It is bad for both farmers and consumers, who will now have limited choice when buying produce. Again, it doesn’t just affect the farmers or their consumers, but also rural towns and communities who will suffer when their farming constituents do.

While Sanders has his environmental policies right, Trump certainly does not. From supporting the coal industry to cutting regulation, Trump’s agenda of anti-intellectualism and anti-environmentalism is destined to ruin our nature-based economy. Mercury found in larger fish, such as tuna, swordfish and whales is commonly caused by coal mines and coal-powered factories, among others, polluting local streams and waterways, leading into the ocean. Global warming is causing desertification and drought all over the world. Pesticides are killing bees, which are responsible for pollinating plants and are raised by apiarists for honey. These are real threats to our agricultural and aquacultural industries.

If either politician cares about our rural communities, they should revise their policies.