Why the Department of Agriculture Is Closing Hundreds of Offices

Eliminating 7,000 jobs to save about $150 million every year could be enough to head off further budget cuts sometime down the line.

main shutterstock_74271124.jpg

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that it is closing 259 domestic offices and seven foreign offices "to meet the evolving needs of a 21st-century agricultural economy."

You have to love the government-speak explanation:

When fully implemented, these actions along with other recommended changes will provide efficiencies valued at about $150 million annually -- and eventually more based on future realignment of the workforce -- and will ensure that USDA continues to provide optimal service to the American people within available funding levels.

Huh? What is this about? I can only speculate.

Over the years, as a result of congressional earmarking -- putting government "pork" in the districts of members of House and Senate Agricultural committees -- the USDA's bureaucracy became highly decentralized into hundreds of offices staffed by just a few people throughout the country.

The USDA has wanted to clean this up for years. I'm guessing that the USDA is using congressional budget cutting pressures to do something its leaders have wanted to do for a long time. Are so many of those offices redundant? Some USDA oversight committee thought so.

The closures will not affect meat safety. The USDA still must maintain its legislated inspection responsibilities.

What surprises me is how little money this saves. The USDA's annual budget is $145 billion. If I have this right, this move will get rid of 7,000 jobs and save a mere $150 million, or just one-tenth of one percent of total annual expenditures.

This seems like a lot of trouble to go through for something so relatively small. Maybe USDA Secretary Vilsack thinks this is enough of a sacrifice to head off further budget cuts? In the meantime, expect cries of woe.

Image: hxdbzxy/Shutterstock.

TEMPLATEFoodPolitics02.jpg

This post also appears on Food Politics, an Atlantic partner site.

Presented by

Marion Nestle is a professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University. She is the author of Food Politics, Safe Food, What to Eat, and Pet Food Politics. More

Nestle also holds appointments as Professor of Sociology at NYU and Visiting Professor of Nutritional Sciences at Cornell. She is the author of three prize-winning books: Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health (revised edition, 2007), Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety (2003), and What to Eat (2006). Her most recent book is Feed Your Pet Right: The Authoritative Guide to Feeding Your Dog and Cat. She writes the Food Matters column for The San Francisco Chronicle and blogs almost daily at Food Politics.

How to Cook Spaghetti Squash (and Why)

Cooking for yourself is one of the surest ways to eat well. Bestselling author Mark Bittman teaches James Hamblin the recipe that everyone is Googling.

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

How to Cook Spaghetti Squash (and Why)

Cooking for yourself is one of the surest ways to eat well.

Video

Before Tinder, a Tree

Looking for your soulmate? Write a letter to the "Bridegroom's Oak" in Germany.

Video

The Health Benefits of Going Outside

People spend too much time indoors. One solution: ecotherapy.

Video

Where High Tech Meets the 1950s

Why did Green Bank, West Virginia, ban wireless signals? For science.

Video

Yes, Quidditch Is Real

How J.K. Rowling's magical sport spread from Hogwarts to college campuses

Video

Would You Live in a Treehouse?

A treehouse can be an ideal office space, vacation rental, and way of reconnecting with your youth.

More in Health

From This Author

Just In