WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Agriculture faced questions Wednesday from the Senate Agriculture Committee over its plan to relocate thousands of Washington-based employees to five regional hubs. USDA Deputy Secretary Stephen Vaden testified in support of the reorganization, saying the move would streamline operations, cut bureaucracy, and bring the agency closer to the producers it serves.
The plan, announced earlier this month, would shift about 4,600 USDA employees out of Washington, D.C., reducing the department’s presence in the capital by more than half. Vaden told lawmakers that decentralizing USDA operations would improve responsiveness, promote efficiency, and align more closely with the department’s mission to support rural America.
Senate Ag Chairman John Boozman of Arkansas acknowledged the need for reform but criticized the lack of consultation with Congress. He stressed the importance of preserving USDA’s reach in the field while avoiding disruption to services farmers rely on.
Democratic senators expressed stronger concerns. Ranking Member Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota warned that the proposal could harm the department’s research capacity, following years of staff attrition. She pointed to the 2019 relocation of ERS and NIFA, which a GAO report found had resulted in temporary productivity losses and delays in grant funding and research outputs.
Outside experts have also voiced skepticism. Former USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan noted that most USDA employees already work outside of Washington, making further decentralization less effective than advertised. Economist Chad Hart of Iowa State University cautioned that forced relocations could prompt a loss of experienced staff—further straining USDA’s ability to serve producers and implement the new farm bill.
USDA says the new hubs — expected to be located in Raleigh, Kansas City, Indianapolis, Fort Collins, and Salt Lake City — will strengthen service delivery and reduce long-term costs tied to underused federal buildings. Still, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are asking for more data on how the changes will affect programs and staffing before the plan moves forward.
The Senate hearing made clear that while the reorganization may offer some benefits, questions remain about its timing, transparency, and overall impact on American agriculture.