Source: POLITICO'S MORNING AGRICULTURE, 2/3/20

The department's most sweeping policy changes under President Donald Trump have frequently been marred by missing pieces of important data, or scientific assertions challenged by outside experts. The trend has left lawmakers scratching their heads about how major decisions were made — and has fueled criticism that USDA leaders are making political moves first and gathering the relevant facts later, your host reports.

For example... Secretary Sonny Perdue's plan to shut down a popular Forest Service program last year faced bipartisan complaints about the lack of data to justify closing down job training centers in rural districts across the country.

— House Democrats have accused USDA of playing keep-away with some of the key statistics behind its crackdown on food stamps, like how many low-income students or veterans would be affected.

— And the department's overhaul of pork slaughterhouse inspections has been hit with lawsuits and an inspector general probe centered on whether officials used flawed worker safety data during the rulemaking process.

Those cases, and several others, point to a pattern of problems with USDA's use of data and analysis — a trend that goes beyond the normal pushback against an administration's regulatory agenda.

"They operate much more on anecdote and ideology than facts and data," said House Ag member Chellie Pingree (D-Maine). "I've seen a dramatic shift with this administration using less reliance on data, less interest in talking about data, or completely ignoring it when the facts don't go their way."

A USDA spokesperson said Perdue has "emphasized the importance of ensuring USDA is facts-based and data-driven, especially when creating and developing policies. To achieve this, the department not only relies on data and science from within our agencies ... but has also worked to improve data integration so we can measure decisions and outcomes against clear performance standards."

But longtime ag policy watchers argue USDA's actions under Trump don't match its rhetoric. "If this administration wants to be transparent and use evidence-based policy, then what we're seeing at USDA seems not to be in line with that stance," said Susan Offutt, who served as Economic Research Service administrator under the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.