USDA Creates New National Security Czar to Track Foreign Influence, AI, and Data in US Farming

The new Agriculture and National Security Act is pretty clear about one thing: the food supply is now officially considered a national security issue, right alongside military readiness and cybersecurity. This bill is less about farming subsidies and more about putting the Department of Agriculture (USDA) on a war footing when it comes to protecting our food chain from foreign threats.

The New Watchdog: A Security Czar at the USDA

Within 180 days of this bill passing, the Secretary of Agriculture has to create a brand-new, high-level job: the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture for National Security. Think of this person as the USDA’s chief intelligence officer. Their main gig is to be the liaison between the USDA and heavy hitters like the National Security Council and the intelligence agencies. They will be tasked with coordinating security across the entire department, essentially merging farm policy with defense strategy (SEC. 3).

This new Assistant Secretary isn't just shuffling papers; they are mandated to look for weak spots in our food and agriculture system. This includes everything from foreign state ownership of agricultural land and intellectual property to control over farm data. They are specifically told to look at the security risks posed by emerging tech like AI, drones, and biotech. If you’re a farmer using precision agriculture tools or a company developing new seed technology, this new office will be tracking how secure your data and IP are, and who might be trying to get their hands on it.

Blurring the Lines: Farmers and Intelligence Agencies

One of the most interesting and potentially challenging parts of the bill involves information sharing. The USDA will now have the authority to swap personnel with defense, intelligence, and law enforcement agencies—without having to exchange money for the staff. This means you could have a USDA policy expert working at the National Security Agency, or an intelligence analyst from the FBI suddenly embedded at the USDA (SEC. 3).

The goal is to improve threat information sharing, but the practical reality is that it significantly blurs the line between agricultural policy and national intelligence operations. For the average person—especially those working in agriculture—it means that the government agencies traditionally focused on crop yields and food safety will now be closely intertwined with agencies focused on surveillance and counterintelligence. This raises questions about how far the security net will stretch when it comes to monitoring farm operations and data.

Required Reading: The Biennial Security Report

To keep everyone accountable, the bill requires the Secretary to send a detailed report to Congress and the National Security Council every two years. This report has to lay out all the identified security gaps—from supply chain dependencies to cybersecurity weaknesses—and detail what the USDA is doing to fix them. Crucially, it also requires the Secretary to make policy recommendations, suggesting new laws or executive actions needed to close these security gaps (SEC. 3).

For those of us trying to track policy, this mandated report is a big deal. It forces the USDA to publicly (or at least, semi-publicly) state where they think the biggest risks are and what new regulations or oversight they might be seeking. This is where the rubber hits the road, as these recommendations could lead to new rules affecting everything from who can buy farmland to how agricultural data is stored and protected.