CHICAGO, April 29 - Federal authorities declined to confirm or explain their decision to reject several state-nominated candidates for the United Soybean Board, including four women farmers selected by their peers earlier this year. The unexpected intervention by the U.S. Department of Agriculture disrupted a long-standing process in which state soybean boards nominate candidates and the USDA’s appointment has typically been routine.
The USDA declined to provide a reason for turning away at least five nominees put forward for director seats on the United Soybean Board, according to three of the women who were affected. The rejections reduced the number of women on the 77-member board to five - the smallest female contingent documented in at least a decade - even as women account for more than a third of U.S. farm operators.
Reactions from those dismissed
Several of the women whose nominations were overturned said the move felt like part of a broader administration pattern. Sara Stelter, a farmer from Wisconsin who lost her position on the soy board, framed the decision through that lens: "It seems like a small thing," Stelter said, "but in other ways, it’s really a big deal because it’s just another thing of where the current administration views women, I believe, and what their role should be."
Susan Watkins, a Virginia soybean grower and six-year board veteran who had been tapped in December to serve as treasurer overseeing the board’s 2026 budget, called the rejection "very disheartening" and said: "We should be judged on our merit." Watkins, who described herself as a conservative and a supporter of President Trump, said she searched social media for any explanation and wondered if a 2023 photograph of her with former Virginia governor Glenn Youngkin had contributed to her dismissal.
Michigan farmer Carla Schultz said she worried the remaining five women who had earned board positions could face the same fate during reappointment cycles. Dawn Scheier of South Dakota, another nominee ousted by the USDA, did not respond to requests for comment.
Process and precedent
Current and former directors of the United Soybean Board, along with a former agriculture secretary, described federal approval of state-selected nominees as historically perfunctory. During prior administrations, including those led by officials who served under both Democratic and Republican presidents, USDA sign-off on state nominees was rarely contested, they said.
Directors reported that five candidates were rejected this cycle, some after already being placed on an executive committee or assigned responsibilities related to the organization’s $121 million budget and communications. Of the 40 new and reappointed directors for the board this year, none were women.
Farmer-led soybean organizations in 29 states and two multi-state regions submit nominations to the national board, which directs spending of so-called checkoff dollars - mandatory assessments collected from nearly every bushel of soybeans sold.
Federal response and appeals
The USDA and the United Soybean Board did not answer detailed inquiries seeking the department’s rationale for rejecting nominees. They provided only the outline of the process: the agriculture secretary selects board members from a pool presented by state boards. The White House did not provide requested correspondence on the matter, citing a backlog of public information requests, and a White House spokesperson referred follow-up questions to the USDA.
The Virginia Soybean Board appealed the USDA’s decision after Susan Watkins was turned away. Meeting notes shared with state leaders indicate that Sarah Aswegan, a regulatory oversight specialist at the USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service, told the Virginia board the department decision was final, but that a letter of recommendation from a sitting member of Congress might improve Watkins' chances should she choose to stand again next year.
Unusual in the context of a non-political industry board, the USDA subsequently tapped Lynn Gayle, chairman of the Virginia Soybean Board, as an alternative candidate. Gayle told the department he was not in a position to serve, leaving Virginia with only one of its two allotted seats filled.
Broader policy environment
The rejections occurred amid an administration-wide initiative to eliminate programs and policies characterized as promoting diversity, equity and inclusion - often referred to as DEI - from federal agencies. Over the past year the administration rescinded certain equal pay efforts enacted by the previous administration and moved to roll back related programs across multiple federal departments, citing concerns that such programs violate antidiscrimination laws and undermine merit-based advancement.
Observers who study equity in business and policy said the USDA’s intervention in the soybean board process illustrated how the administration approach to DEI extended beyond grant-making or program language and could affect federal interactions with industry boards. Shaun Harper, a professor at the University of Southern California who researches equity in business and education, said groups like the United Soybean Board "are casualties of a blanket implementation of anti-DEI policies and practices in the federal government."
Officials comments and history
Tom Vilsack, who served as U.S. agriculture secretary under both the Obama and Biden administrations, said the White House was not involved with board nominations during his 12 years in that role and that federal sign-off on state nominees was not ordinarily contentious. Vilsack said he had encouraged state groups to consider nominating more women and minority candidates during the previous administrations' diversity efforts, and while some states acted on that urging, he could not recall any comparable pattern of USDA rejection of nominees. "I don’t know that it happened, but if it did, it was very rare," he said.
Former Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue, who served under President Trump during his first term, declined to comment on whether his department had intervened with state nominees. Current and former United Soybean Board directors told reporters that under Perdue the USDA did not interfere with state selections.
Multiple state soybean boards told the USDA that the department almost always approved the primary nominees put forward by states, underscoring how the recent turn of events departs from long-standing practice.
Operational impacts and uncertainty
Board members and state officials said some members were only informed of the USDA's rejection of their appointments months after states had named them, with a handful learning of the decision following the new board's first meeting. Several of the candidates who were turned down had already been assigned leadership roles in areas including budgeting and communications for the $121 million checkoff program.
Susan Watkins said she had been on the path to assume the board chairmanship within several years before being removed: "I was on the path to become chair within several years, and that was taken away from me," she said.
With fewer women in leadership roles on the United Soybean Board, the composition of decision-making for the checkoff funds - which influence industry programming and promotion - has changed. How that affects the board's priorities or the administration of the checkoff budget remains unclear at this time.
What remains unknown
The USDA and the board have not provided an explanation for why the department rejected the nominees, and the White House has not released correspondence related to the decisions. That absence of public detail has heightened concerns among affected farmers and their advocates that the rejections could reflect broader policy objectives rather than candidate qualifications.
Several of those removed from the board indicated they may seek to stand again next year, potentially with new political endorsements, but some said they feared future reappointments might be subject to the same scrutiny. The full implications for leadership at the United Soybean Board, and any downstream effects on soybean promotion and research funded by checkoff dollars, remain uncertain while the department's rationale remains undisclosed.
Key names involved
- Sara Stelter - Wisconsin farmer whose board appointment was rescinded.
- Susan Watkins - Virginia soybean farmer and six-year board member rejected after being selected to serve as treasurer for the 2026 budget.
- Carla Schultz - Michigan farmer who lost her board seat and voiced concern over future reappointments.
- Dawn Scheier - South Dakota farmer whose appointment was overturned.
- Sarah Aswegan - USDA Agricultural Marketing Service regulatory oversight specialist who informed the Virginia Soybean Board of the decision's finality, according to meeting notes.
- Lynn Gayle - Virginia Soybean Board chair tapped by the USDA after Watkins' rejection; Gayle told the department he could not serve, leaving one Virginia seat vacant.
- Tom Vilsack - Former agriculture secretary who said federal approval of state nominees had been largely routine during his tenure.
- Sonny Perdue - Former agriculture secretary who declined to comment.
The situation has underscored both procedural uncertainties within nominations to federally sanctioned commodity boards and concerns about how federal policy shifts could influence the governance of industry-funded programs. Until the USDA provides a clear explanation, state boards and affected farmers will be left to consider their options for appeals and future nominations.