Wartime Powers for a Weedkiller

Last night I sat under the classic American interrogation lamp: desk light, stale coffee, and a stack of printouts curling like guilty homework. The document on top treated a farm chemical the way we usually treat jet-engine parts. Same presidential seal, same familiar move: make extraordinary authority sound like routine housekeeping.

In Washington, committee rooms never really sleep. They just dim the lights and rename things.

What the executive order does

On February 18, President Donald Trump signed an executive order invoking the Defense Production Act (DPA) to ensure an adequate domestic supply of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides. The order frames elemental phosphorus as defense-critical and glyphosate as essential to agricultural productivity and, by extension, food security as national security.

The order says there is only a single domestic producer of elemental phosphorus and glyphosate-based herbicides, that the producer does not meet annual needs, and that the U.S. imports more than 6,000,000 kilograms of elemental phosphorus each year. It delegates DPA priorities and allocation authority to the Secretary of Agriculture, to be exercised in consultation with the Secretary of War, and directs Agriculture to issue orders and regulations as needed.

The Orwell check: “national defense” as cologne

Here is the civic-skin-itch part: the order does not just prioritize production. It wraps the whole thing in national defense language. Those words can be used honestly. They can also be used like cologne: a few sprays and suddenly scrutiny is treated as rude.

If glyphosate is being treated as strategic, the public deserves a clear explanation of the vulnerability, the remedy, and the endpoint. Otherwise “national defense” becomes a universal solvent that melts every guardrail it touches.

The Paine test and the liberty ledger

The Paine test: does this expand liberty, or concentrate power? The DPA concentrates power by design. Sometimes that is warranted. But once normalized, emergency levers become habits.

And this order adds a twist: it says resulting orders, rules, or regulations should not place the corporate viability of any domestic producer at risk. That is emergency authority plus a pre-commitment to keep one producer financially safe. A boot on the accelerator, and a pillow under one company.

The liberty ledger: farmers may gain a more predictable supply of inputs. But the order also confers DPA-tied immunity and compels compliance from domestic producers. Immunity can speed action, or it can outlive the justification and leave the public holding the bag if harms show up later. Glyphosate is not an office-supply item; it is a controversial chemical with a long-running, high-volume presence in American life. Elevating it to “national defense” tilts the playing field for agencies, courts, and contractors.

The tradeoff: security vs accountability

I will concede the strongest argument: single-source dependency is a real vulnerability, and strategic materials are not a game. But we pay in transparency and democratic control unless Congress and watchdogs force those back into the picture.

Guardrails, not vibes

• Congress: public hearings putting Agriculture, relevant defense officials, and independent experts under oath on the supply problem and the fix.
• Inspectors general: audits of contracts, priority ratings, and allocation decisions, including conflicts of interest and whether the corporate viability clause acts like a blank check.
• GAO: review whether the DPA is being used narrowly for a documented vulnerability or broadly without clear off-ramps.
• A simple public dashboard: actions taken, entities that benefited, capacity changed, and when extraordinary measures end.

If this is truly national defense, it can survive questions. If it cannot survive questions, what exactly are we defending?