D.C. wrecking crew has taken sledgehammer to services for Kansas rural communities

“A good thing to remember. A better thing to do. Work with the construction gang. Not the wrecking crew.”

As a fifth-generation Kansan who has spent more than two decades building up Kansas communities, I was honored to be appointed by the White House as state director for U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development in 2022. Throughout my years working in local and state government, nonprofit management, small business, politics, and consulting, I carried the same mission with me — work with the “construction gang” to leave every place better than I found it. Don’t break something you can’t fix.

I worked for two and half years to rebuild what the first Trump administration tore down. And now I have an unparalleled (and unenviable) perspective as I watch the second Trump administration, in just a few short weeks, dismantle the federal programs that feed, house and employ his rural constituents.

I cannot overstate the importance of USDA Rural Development to Kansas. The programs, which got their start in the 1930s with the Rural Electrification Administration and Farmers Home Administrations, make investments that the private sector can’t do alone. With grants, direct loans and loan guarantees, RD offers workable financing for roads, water systems, sustainable energy, broadband, telehealth, hospitals, clinics, housing and businesses in rural America.

During the Biden-Harris Administration, RD invested $1,343,970,165 dollars in 6,044 Kansas projects, plus another $140 million in special initiatives through the Inflation Reduction Act. This included more than $500 million to finance 4,083 single-family housing projects spread over every one of our state’s 105 counties; more than $230 million for 116 water projects in 38 counties; nearly $212 million for 111 community facilities projects in 43 counties; more than $114 million for 460 rural businesses in 88 counties; and more than $71 million in rural telecom projects.

These projects improve the lives of rural Kansans and keep critical rural businesses, such as small-town grocery stores, open.

I’ll be the first to admit that government programs are not perfect and certainly are not the answer to every problem. Earnest attempts to ensure good stewardship of taxpayer dollars appropriated by Congress have resulted in roadblocks that are tough to navigate for the communities that need them most. This is especially true in Kansas, where 79% of our municipalities have populations of fewer than 1,500 and are run mostly by volunteers.

To ensure that farmers have equitable access to critical programs, USDA’s Farm Service Agency and National Resources Conservation Service have long had offices is nearly every Kansas county, staffed with hundreds of Kansans who can help farmers apply. Trump’s policies are devastating to the 2% of rural Americans engaged in farming. But what about the other 98%? The system is failing the communities that have already suffered decades of disinvestment.

Ironically, it was so-called “Red America” that suffered most during the first Trump administration. Rural Kansans who placed their votes and trust in the urban billionaire didn’t know that he failed to appoint an undersecretary for Rural Development. The devastating effects of this betrayal of Rural America are documented in Michael Lewis’s 2018 book “The Fifth Risk.” Without a political appointee in Washington DC, state directors were stripped of political influence and staff.

A decade ago, USDA Rural Development had approximately 130 staff members in Kansas. By the end of the first Trump administration, the Kansas field operation had been devastated, with 30 overworked staff managing thousands of projects each year.

This move did not result in more efficient management of government programs. Instead, it took funding decisions out of the hands of people who knew their state’s rural communities best and moved them to Washington, D.C., often to well-meaning federal employees with little to no experience in Rural America.  In other words, they “filled the swamp.”

Suddenly, Kansans were competing for a nationwide pool of funding, with programs that define “rural” as places with populations of fewer than 50,000. In that environment, where larger communities can afford consultants to make the case for a project’s impact on more “rural” people, it’s nearly impossible for a town of 1,500 to compete.

To level the playing field, Rural Development offered millions of dollars in “technical assistance” funds, not for more field staff, but to pay private consultants to help applicants navigate programs. Technical assistance awardees were paid to promote federal programs, which often resulted in higher demand than a dwindling field staff could manage. And some projects, which we knew would fail, were funded without feedback from field staff, or anyone in the state. This system bred false hope.

Other programs were moved out of the hands of state and local offices altogether. For instance, in-state staff would help rural Kansans apply for loan assistance. Once approved, however, borrowers were forced to work with an understaffed and under-resourced centralized servicing center in St. Louis.

In my first month on the job, a USDA RD senior housing project a few blocks from my house in Cottonwood Falls suffered a fire that tragically took the life of one of its residents. I met with the group in person, spoke with them often by phone, and used my vast network of connections to help. But because this program had been centralized during the first Trump administration, my ability to help my own community was stymied.

Rural Kansans should not have to rely on a broken system, regardless of who sits in the White House.

Biden-Harris appointees, including state directors with decades of experience working in rural communities, set out to fix what was broken. I renegotiated office leases to save hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, led an effort that streamlined environmental review processes nationwide, invested in staff training, advocated to rebuild our field operation, worked to retain the brightest among our staff, and fought to dismiss the most ineffective. During my tenure, I worked closely with the talented staff of the Kansas Congressional delegation, who set aside political differences to demonstrate their support for rural communities.

I am proud of the progress we made for rural Kansas in my short tenure. But I’m confounded at how quickly and easily the “wrecking crew” has reversed it.

I am a huge advocate for making it easier to remove and replace ineffective employees and retain the best. Unfortunately, the new administration’s approach to civil service has had the opposite effect.

Those who accepted DOGE’s recent buyout offers were top performers and seasoned employees. At Kansas RD, this included one of the best young water engineers in the nation, the only two remaining loan technicians, and two highly trained and passionate community development specialists who could have served rural Kansas for another 20-plus years.

The only conclusion I can draw about this approach is that it is designed to break programs that Congress created, a move that will only further erode rural America’s faith in government.

In my decades serving the Sunflower State, I’ve learned many lessons. One is that false hope and broken promises break the will and threaten the survival of rural communities. Another is that there is not one politician in the state who will admit defeat for rural Kansas. Chances are Congress will continue these critical programs. Unfortunately, without Kansas staff who can help rural communities navigate them, they will fail. Who will benefit from the funds Congress has appropriated for rural communities? Who will be to blame when citizens can no longer access clean water, reliable health care, or broadband?

Even if you don’t agree with me that federal programs are essential to the survival of rural Kansas, you can’t deny the economic impact of government investment. With 15,672 federal employees earning an average salary of $94,948, federal salaries pump $1.5 billion into the Kansas economy each year.

After years of centralization under the first Trump administration, USDA RD state offices worked around the clock to rebuild their field staffs, hiring hundreds of new employees in states during the past year alone. Now, after suffering the blow of the DOGE buyout, the decimated field offices watch helplessly as anyone hired in the past year — those still on probation — are forced out.

Perhaps the Trump Administration is ready to admit defeat in rural America — to perpetuate the myth that success can only be found by leaving our beloved communities.

Isn’t that what made Vice President J.D. Vance famous? That he escaped? As an unapologetic rural Kansan, I will continue to celebrate the rich culture and heritage of our small towns; to demand a government that is a leveling force, not a disruptive one; to work with Kansans of all stripes to level the playing field for the rural people and places Kansans love.

Christy Davis is a fifth-generation Kansan who has worked with communities in all 105 counties over a 25-year career. Through its opinion section, Kansas Reflector works to amplify the voices of people who are affected by public policies or excluded from public debate. Find information, including how to submit your own commentary, here.