Frustrations over the skyrocketing costs of doing business, trade policies and lack of E15 expansion have put producers’ votes – many in competitive political battleground states – in play, according to an exclusive poll of Farm Journal readers.
The poll, which surveyed producers through April and was commissioned by the agriculture-focused public affairs firm Amato Advisors, shows the following:
- Four in 10 producers are currently undecided or considering voting for a different party.
- Half of those surveyed report fair to poor finances. Twenty-five percent fear they will restructure or leave farming or ranching entirely.
- Almost 90% negatively view tariffs, with rising input costs also a top challenge.
- Year-round E15 approval is a decisive voting factor for nearly half of all producers.
- The biggest frustrations that can move voters vary by state. In Iowa, it’s E15 and trade, but in Wisconsin, it’s healthcare and input costs.
Researchers, lobbyists and analysts who reviewed the poll for Farm Journal stress this is not a realignment toward Democrats. Rural America remains Republicans’ home turf.
Instead, producers increasingly think neither party knows nor cares to understand them, let alone solve their problems, according to the findings. If a candidate from either party can prove they are serious about farm-country issues that could be enough to win votes and change the course of up-for-grabs midterm elections.
“The frustration is not simply with ‘government,’” says Nicholas Jacobs with the Bram Public Policy Lab at Colby College, who reviewed the poll’s findings. “It is with a government that is too removed from the consequences it creates and poorly aligned with the realities of rural economies. When people feel squeezed while also believing elected officials do not understand their lives, that creates real political vulnerability heading into a midterm election.”
Amato Advisors’ founder Mike Amato, who served in senior positions in the Biden-Harris and Obama-Biden administrations, says the findings apply to both parties.
“[The results show] a strong signal of disconnect between what is happening on the land and what is happening in D.C.,” Amato explains.
This Farmer & Rancher Policy Sentiment Survey polled farmers and ranchers from April 2 to April 24. A total of 974 producers from 44 states responded. About one-third live in “swing districts” with competitive elections in November, including areas in Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Michigan and Ohio. Amato Advisors details more of the data here.
The findings come at a crucial moment for agriculture and the political direction of the country.
Year-round E15 stands front and center. Producers and retailers consider E15 expansion as the single fastest way to generate real, immediate demand for corn and reduce reliance on government support. Resentment reached a boiling point when legislators continued to delay a vote.
On Wednesday, Congress passed a bill by 15 votes that would allow nationwide year‑round sales of gasoline containing 15% ethanol. It now faces a tough battle for passage in the U.S. Senate.
In the meantime, Republicans have been losing what were comfortably safe districts, including some with agricultural voters. For example, Democrats flipped two Iowa state Senate seats in 2025 special elections (Iowa’s 1st and 35th Senate districts).
Anecdotally, producers have shared their frustrations over policies during the second Trump administration. But this Farm Journal-Amato Advisors survey is among the first to try and measure whether any of those changes will result in changes at the ballot box.
Status Quo or Shakeup? What Moves the Rural Voter
According to the poll, 61% of producers say they plan to vote for the same party as usual. However, nearly 1 in 5 say they aren’t sure yet, and 17% are actively considering either a different party or an independent/third-party candidate.
“That leaves a lot of rural America potentially up for grabs,” says Jessica Schulken, a lobbyist with the Russell Group based in Washington, D.C., who viewed the results of the poll.
Jacobs looks at it as roughly 40% of respondents express either uncertainty, openness to independents or willingness to consider another option.
“That does not mean Democrats are suddenly competitive everywhere,” he says. “It does mean this block of rural voters – who tend to be even more conservative than their neighbors – are feeling downright frustrated with the status quo.”
Noting that machinery costs, input prices, trade policy and tariffs are pinching margins for producers, Callie Eideberg, a principal with Washington lobbyist the Vogel Group, says these issues are also policy choices made by the administration.
“The administration was not forced to take action on trade and input costs, and these policy choices can be reversed or muted at any time,” she says. “If you assume respondents understand the president chose to implement policies increasing machinery costs and dismantling trade agreements, then their reporting that 61% will still vote for the same party in November implies they are also choosing to keep those policies in place.”
Rural ag voters don’t hold much confidence in the current slate of elected officials to grasp their situation. Nearly three-quarters say office holders don’t understand the realities farmers face.
So how does that translate to the rural vote?
- 23% say nothing would change their vote. “Until Democrats stop showing up in an election year in rural areas and then disappearing again, nothing will change my Republican vote. Words don’t help, action does.” — says a Congressional respondent
- 26% say candidate quality is the primary determinant. “ … I am open to voting for a solid candidate, regardless of party, which brings a strong knowledge and positive position to the table for the rural landscape and production agriculture in particular.” — says a Congressional respondent
- 51% name specific conditions or issues that could move them. “High input costs, tariffs causing market volatility, loss of health insurance, frustration with SNAP changes, high interest rates, high fuel prices and global conflicts coinciding with planting and harvest.” — says a Congressional respondent
“Partisanship in rural America has become increasingly layered on top of older frustrations that predate any single administration or price fluctuation,” Jacobs says. “For many rural voters, dissatisfaction with economic conditions does not automatically translate into openness to Democrats because the Democratic brand itself remains deeply unpopular.”
He says it would be similar to asking why urbanites didn’t revolt against Democrats when housing prices shot up or when schools keep failing.
The Split: Row Crop Strain vs. Livestock Optimism
When farmers were asked to describe the overall financial condition of their farming operation over the past 12 months, about half say they’re in good to excellent shape. More than 1 in 10 consider their economic condition poor or very poor.
“The farm economy at 50/50 shows the split between livestock profitability versus row crops,” adds Tyson Redpath, chairman of advocacy and business strategy for the Russell Group.
Eideberg looks at it another way.
“Just 43% of respondents reported their farm’s financial condition was ‘good’ and 38% reported ‘fair’ financial conditions,” she says. “This stands in opposition to the repeated proclamations from this administration that the ag economy is turning around.”
Rising Input Costs and Trade Policy: Farmers Rank Top Challenges
In the poll, participants were asked to identify the three biggest challenges currently facing their operation. Machinery and input costs top the list at more than 78%. Another 44.3% say it’s commodity price volatility, and another quarter say either weather or trade policy and tariffs.
When it comes to farmers who would consider changing their vote, one congressional respondent says: “I’m fed up with the U.S. financing other countries when our farmers are going bankrupt. Our politicians need to do their job on a bipartisan level!!!”
Of those citing tariffs and trade, nearly 88% say the policy is either somewhat or very negative, and 65.5% say tariffs will hurt long term.
When asked to describe the overall effect of federal government policies on their farming operation over the past year, 54.6% of nationwide respondents describe the effect as moderately or significantly negative. Just under 1 in 5 describe the effect as positive to any degree.
Why Input Costs and Trade Lead Farmer Concerns
As producers look past this vote and to the next presidential election, respondents ranked nine policy areas in order of priority for the current administration. Regardless of whether respondents are in targeted swing districts or the broader nationwide sample, input costs rank first by a wide margin, followed by trade policy and export markets. Conservation programs come in at the bottom of the priority list.
“If you look at the top issues identified by producers, input costs and trade policy, there’s not a whole lot that can be done about either one of those that will directly impact the farmers’ bottom line before the elections,” Redpath says.
Based on his analysis of the survey results, Jacobs says farmers and ranchers are searching for stable rules and better prices.
“I think both parties should pay attention to the fact that these concerns are overwhelmingly operational rather than ideological,” Jacobs says. “Rural voters are not saying the government should disappear, but rather that it needs to get its act together.
Year-Round E15 and Competition: Critical Factors for Rural Voters
The tariff and trade debate is all about finding and developing new markets for U.S. ag goods as global competitors erode a once dominant position. There’s been no bigger “new market” debate than year-round E15.
When asked how important year-round E15 approval was as a voting issue, 45.5% of nationwide respondents say it is very or extremely important — making it a direct candidate selection factor for nearly half the sample. Another 28.2% say it is somewhat important.
The poll results show E15 is one of the few issues in the survey where support for a specific policy is explicitly tied to electoral behavior rather than just expressed as a preference. Voters in key swing states and districts rate E15 as a voting issue at a slightly higher clip, which appears to reflect the higher concentration of corn and ethanol-producing states in the sample.
While trade and export markets continue to rank high, respondents are also focusing on competition abroad. More than 85% say they are very or somewhat concerned about global agriculture competition from producers in Brazil, Argentina and the European Union. The poll shows this is one of the highest rates of agreement on any issue in the survey.
How Ag Priorities Vary Across the Rural Vote
According to this poll, not all swing states are focusing on the same issues. For example:
- Iowa. The most swing-available state in the sample with the highest E15 mobilization.
- Wisconsin. The most financially distressed state — and the only one where Democrats are genuinely competitive on healthcare.
- Nebraska. The most economically conservative electorate — but with the highest E15 intensity and notable tax concerns.
- Ohio. A distinct issue mix – commodity prices and weather dominate, not input costs or tariffs.
- Michigan. The highest vote motivation and switch potential in the survey — Democrats lead on farm labor.
“People do not experience politics as detached issue-by-issue calculators,” Jacobs says. “That does not make economic concerns irrelevant – and they are clearly not in this poll – but it does mean that dissatisfaction alone is often insufficient to fully reorder political loyalties.”
As Nov. 3 approaches, Amato describes midterm elections as an accountability checkpoint – a referendum on whether political actions match campaign words.
“Polls like this, combined with additional advocacy and farmers using their voices to talk to elected officials, can help close the gap so federal policy actually meets farmers where they are,” he says. “I hope this poll sends a signal to everyone who’s in elected office, or who wants to be an elected official, to take into consideration the challenges producers are facing today.”