President Trump Promotes Glyphosate Production
Last night, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to promote increased production of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate. Trump signed the Defense Production Act because “a lack of either chemical could leave our defense industrial base and food supply vulnerable to hostile foreign actors since there is only one domestic producer of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides.” He signed the Act under the guise of strengthening domestic security which is a far stretch from the truth.
The sole “domestic producer” of elemental phosphorous, through the wholly owned subsidiary P4 Production, LLC, and Glyphosate herbicides is the German agrochemical conglomerate Bayer. At the beginning of 2026, Bayer donated $1 million to President Donald Trump’s inaugural committee. Bayer has poured millions into lobbying campaign to co-op federal regulators, officials, and representatives to limit liability and ensure future sales. Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in America and is here to stay despite widespread health risks and litigation.
HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. reversed course on his previous glyphosate skepticism and defended Trump’s executive action, saying “Donald Trump’s Executive Order puts America first where it matters most — our defense readiness and our food supply,” he said. “We must safeguard America’s national security first, because all of our priorities depend on it. When hostile actors control critical inputs, they weaken our security. By expanding domestic production, we close that gap and protect American families.”
Kennedy previously won a $290 million case against glyphosate producer Monsanto, now owned by Bayer, for proving the chemical was likely responsible for their client developing cancer. On June 14, 2024, Kennedy tweeted “The herbicide Glyphosate is one of the likely culprits in America’s chronic disease epidemic. Much more widely used here than in Europe. Shockingly, much of our exposure comes from its use as a desiccant on wheat, not as an herbicide. From there it goes straight into our bodies. My USDA will ban that practice.” We are now seeing quite the opposite play out. This is the second incidence of the chemical industry successfully lobbying the HHS Secretary in recent months. In November, the pharmaceutical and mining industries pushed RFK to withdraw a FDA rule that would have required testing for the carcinogen asbestos in cosmetics.
Right wing political influencers are using agrochemical talking points to spin the story and shed the President in a more favorable light. Their claim centers around the President bolstering domestic glyphosate production to strengthen national security. As previously stated, domestic glyphosate production is controlled by the German company Bayer at a large plant in Louisiana's cancer alley. Bayer, along with Chinese owned Syngenta, German owned BASF, and American owned Corteva control the majority of seed breeding, patenting, and chemical applications. To reiterate, three of the four companies with an oligopoly on seeds, pesticides, and fertilizers are foreign. The companies have bought out the White House, Congress, and EPA. In 2024, American politicians accepted over $10 million in lobbying from Bayer, Syngenta, and BASF. Syngenta, which gave $250,000 to Trump's inaugural fund, won major victories at the EPA recently. The EPA approved several new Syngenta pesticides with the PFAS forever chemical Isocycloseram. The EPA also reapproved Syngenta sprays with chemicals like paraquat, atrazine, and Dicamba.
Representatives and farmers Thomas Massie and Chellie Pingree announced that they will introduce a “No Immunity for Glyphosate Act” next week to counter the President's Defense Production Act.
The new executive order was passed only days after Bayer proposed a $7.25 billion class action settlement to end glyphosate-based Roundup litigation. Bayer wants to limit its entire Roundup exposure to the $7.25 billion sum that it already set aside. The settlement sounds like a win but it’s actually a part of a carefully thought out plan to limit financial responsibility. The allocated amount of $7.25 billion would pay out capped settlements for tens if not hundreds of thousands of past, current, and future Roundup cases.
The settlement structure would make payouts significantly smaller than individual cases and maintain Bayer’s position that glyphosate doesn’t pose any health risks. For example, Bayer recently resolved at least $3 billion in settlements behind closed doors, including a $2.1 billion verdict in Georgia. The single $2.1 Barnes v. Monsanto Co. is over 25% of the total $7.25 billion sum that Bayer hopes to collectively pay out for hundreds of thousands of cases just like it. To pressure victims into complying, Bayer will require the vast majority of plaintiffs with individual cases to participate in the $7.25 billion. If not enough plaintiffs agree, Bayer could cancel the settlement altogether and leave the victims with nothing.
Bayer’s worst case scenario of paying out the pre-allocated $7.25 billion would still be a victory for the agrochemical producer, saving it billions annually. Bayer’s best case scenario would be the Supreme Court ruling in its favor on the Durnell Roundup case and expunge it of all liability.
