As the number of lawmakers with direct ties to production agriculture continues to shrink, who will step up to speak for rural America? Farm Journal is proud to present Ag Vote 2026: Who Speaks for America’s Farmers?, delivering in-depth reporting from now through Election Day. Tune in for LIVE election night coverage Tuesday, Nov. 3, at 7 p.m. Central on Farm Journal TV, Farm Journal Now, AgWeb.com and YouTube.
We are just three weeks away from the midterm elections and American agriculture has a lot at stake. From the cost of fuel and fertilizer to the future of the farm bill, tariffs and trade, how the vote goes will set the agenda for the next couple of years. But who represents those items in Washington is the biggest part of that future.
No doubt, farmers have been front and center with this administration. Back in March, President Trump hosted a gathering of farmers and ranchers on the White House lawn.
“You voted for me. I’ll never forget that,” said President Trump in his closing remarks. “I’ll never forget the great friendship that we’ve had.”
From aid packages and trade agreements to surprise beef import announcements, persistently high fertilizer prices and surging fuel costs, agriculture and farm policy have remained prominent issues during President Trump’s second term.
“We do not have a farm bill and there is a big question as to whether or not the farm bill will get done, or even can get done, in a lame duck after the midterm elections,” says Callie Eideberg with The Vogel Group.
Strong Ag Voices Leaving
As the midterms approach, Congress is set for a shuffle. Many long-tenured advocates of ag are leaving Washington. Names like Mitch McConnell, Amy Klobuchar, Joni Ernst, Angie Craig and Thomas Massie are on that list. Some are retiring, others are seeking higher office and some lost their primaries.
The midterm vote is poised to determine who will speak for America’s farmers and ranchers in the future. Many of those leaving have direct ties or personal ag backgrounds, even as rural voters express frustration about a lack of knowledge about their livelihoods in D.C.
“What we are seeing and what we’re hearing is that there is frustration across the countryside that elected officials just don’t understand what it’s like to live and work on a farm,” says Michael Amato of Amato Advisors.
Earlier this year, Amato Advisors and Farm Journal surveyed rural voters about the midterm elections and found they feel disconnected from their D.C. representatives. Seventy-three percent said elected officials don’t understand them and roughly a quarter said the right candidate, with real farm ties, could sway their vote.
“Even in this era of deep partisan division, an increasing number of Americans, especially rural Americans, are just fed up with both parties and that’s an interesting combination,” says Nicholas Jacobs, a political science professor at Colby College and author of The Rural Voter. “We are becoming more divided, but then more and more people are just politically homeless.”
Fewer Farmers in Washington
The number of members in Congress whose prior occupation was farming continues to dwindle, falling from more than 20% around 1950 to somewhere between 3% and 8% today.
“One of the surprising things is that farmers were so well represented even as the percent of the population that was directly engaged in agriculture, ranching or other forms of ag production declined,” Jacobs says. “Yet you saw representatives from those industries still elected.”
Ag Voices At Risk
Ahead of November, according to Farm Journal calculations, there are 136 members of Congress who have a voice for agriculture in Washington, D.C. That includes those who serve on the House or Senate Ag Committees. Of those, 90 members have some sort of personal background or connection to agriculture. That is defined by growing up on or owning a farm or ranch, working in agriculture or an ag-related job, having a parent or grandparent who farmed, or owning farmland of their own.
Of the 136 members who have a voice in ag, nearly 40 are either leaving Congress, running for another chamber or facing a competitive race this cycle. History indicates that when the voting ends, there are likely to be fewer ag voices in Washington.
“When you lose that experience, when you lose that direct connection, what we know is that politicians become more dependent on their staffers,” Jacobs says. “I’m not super convinced that either party’s dependency on young staffers, who spend all their time in D.C., is necessarily a good thing for the country. Politicians [also] become more dependent on lobbyist groups.”
It likely will not be a sea change or total loss of strong ag voices. Current polling shows 77 of the 136 with an ag voice are in less competitive races and 23 aren’t even up for reelection.
“This has certainly been a heavily Republican voting bloc, but we’ve seen signs that they’re looking around now and trying to look at candidates, specifically,” adds Amato. “I don’t think this is a political realignment, but I think there are opportunities for candidates on both sides of the party to step up and communicate that they understand what it’s like to live on a farm.”
And that open door has political pundits wondering just how much opportunity lies at the ballot box this November.
“Historically, I think once since Reconstruction has the president’s party in power in the second term of that presidency actually held or gained seats in that second midterm,” says Tyson Redpath with The Russell Group. “History is at odds with the GOP’s chances of adding seats in the House and Senate during this midterm.”
A Non-Ag Endorsement
“What’s happening in Washington now is just unbelievable,” laments Bob Stallman, a rice and cattle farmer from Texas and former president of the American Farm Bureau Federation.
This year, he’s endorsing a non-ag candidate, James Talarico, over another non-ag candidate, Republican Attorney General Ken Paxton, for U.S. Senate.
“James Talarico, I mean, he’s willing to see where the problems are,” Stallman says. “He’s willing to work, he’s willing to learn and he understands the importance of agriculture to the state of Texas.”
When asked why Stallman, who spent years fighting for ag interests in Washington, is endorsing a non-ag candidate, he said it’s about a willingness to engage.
“You know, he didn’t sit next to me over the years as we debated the details, the onerous details, of farm bills and those kinds of things, but he’s willing to learn,” Stallman says.
His endorsement stands at odds with the Texas Farm Bureau, which is backing Paxton, citing his time as attorney general and work involving farmers and rural landowners.
Races Heat Up Farm Country
The race in Texas isn’t the only one with rural roots. There are tight races in Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska and beyond.
“In Kansas you’re talking about over a century or nearly a century of that Senate seat being in Republican hands,” Redpath says. “Does that flip?”
Amato is keeping his eyes on Iowa.
“I think it’s an ag-heavy state and there are open seats on the Senate side, there are open seats on the [House] side and there’s an interesting governor’s race happening there,” Amato says.
As Nov. 3 approaches, this election is likely to boil down to voter turnout.
“For 30 years, almost from the nineties until really Barack Obama’s presidency, the Republican Party always had turnout advantage just based on who comprised their coalition,” Jacobs explains. “Then it flipped and now Democrats have the turnout advantage because more of what we call high propensity voters are more likely to vote Democrat.”
It’s The Ag Economy
Beyond just turnout, today’s business headaches and tight economics are adding to the conversation. Will frustrations around the cost of fuel and fertilizer drive voters’ decisions?
We recently asked ag economists about what will matter most to rural voters this cycle and 84% agreed that inputs and energy costs are at the top of the list. Those concerns clocked in well ahead of trade or tariff policy and rural healthcare.
New Leadership, New Priorities
The fallout has the potential to significantly impact rural economic policy in 2027 and beyond. If leadership in the House changes, a new Democratic chair of the House Ag Committee is likely to take a different approach to the farm bill if it’s not passed during the lame duck session of Congress.
“Those members are very likely going to want to put their own stamp on a farm bill,” Eideberg says. “I think folks should expect to see a greater emphasis on the SNAP program and probably an emphasis on oversight of the decisions that USDA has been making over the last two years.”
In the Senate, Democratic Ag Committee leadership is going to change regardless.
“If Senator Michael Bennet becomes either the chairman or the ranking member of the Senate Ag Committee, we’re going to see a big focus on Western producers,” explains Eideberg. “We’ll probably see much more [focus] on ranching than we have seen in the past, when we’ve seen Midwestern or Southern members control the committee.”
Speak Up, Educate More
However the next Congress shakes out, the question for rural agricultural voters remains: how does a country founded with such close ties to agriculture change if farmer voices continue to disappear?
“I think that it matters in a much more fundamental way whether people feel represented, whether they feel seen, and whether they trust the people that are going to office to represent them,” Jacobs says.
These experts say that whether the candidate is a farmer or not, the agriculture industry has a responsibility to educate.
“I don’t think I’ve ever experienced a time where people are more interested in how their food is grown, where it’s grown, and why it’s grown in the manner that it is,” Redpath says. “The more people that are interested in our food and agriculture supply system, the better. But with that comes responsibility, right? With that comes the opportunity and the challenge to explain, to educate and that [is what] has changed.”
Even though Stallman has been out of the spotlight for the last decade, he agrees that in today’s political climate, continuous education is paramount.
“I think too many organizations look at their big fly-in as, you know, wow, we did our jobs,” Stallman says. “No, it’s an everyday job. It’s getting on the phone. It’s getting on the internet. It’s getting on social media and making the case for agriculture and developing those relationships; that’s the most important thing.”
