#2578 - Calley Means

Calley Means said he recently resigned from his White House job because he believed a small group of officials was blocking voters’ health priorities and favoring fundraising and special interests. He described the Trump–Bobby Kennedy coalition as initially “electric,” with potential to unite voters around health, but said decisions in the White House were tightly controlled through Chief of Staff Susie Wiles’s office. Means accused Wiles, her deputies James Blair and Richard Walters, and pollster Tony Fabrizio of shaping policy and political strategy in ways that disadvantaged health reforms. His allegations included conflicts involving lobbying clients and donors; he also said staff discussed giving a company higher priority if it hired Wiles’s daughter. These were Means’s claims, not independently established findings in the conversation.

Means argued that policy changes come mainly from special-interest money or public pressure, not private meetings with officials. He said public attention helped advance psychedelic policy, dietary guidelines and food-dye restrictions, while fundraising and midterm concerns slowed other proposals. He criticized a Republican strategy focused on redistricting and messages such as “no tax on tips,” affordability and tax cuts, saying it sidelined corruption and money in politics even though he cited polls identifying those as major public concerns. He said Fabrizio’s polling influenced which proposals were viewed as politically viable, and claimed Fabrizio, who was paid by Pepsi, argued against pursuing school-lunch reform. Means also cited polls finding broad support for regulating pesticides and defining ultra-processed food, and said officials should not assume action would alienate voters.

Glyphosate became his clearest example of the conflict. Means said the MAHA report’s mention of the herbicide drew intense industry pressure and that the final report was watered down. He argued that the EPA had not reviewed glyphosate in close to 30 years, disputed its position that it does not cause cancer, and cited lawsuits settled for billions of dollars. He further alleged Bayer had ghostwritten research for a previous EPA review and bribed officials. Means said a draft executive order invoked national security to preserve glyphosate supplies and shield pesticide makers from liability, and alleged that officials advanced the measure without Kennedy’s involvement. Because the order was signed without a public signing, he said he could not say whether Trump knew about it. Means said military leaders did not view glyphosate’s absence from U.S. farms as a national-security threat, and stressed that allowing lawsuits is not the same as banning a chemical.

Means said the Justice Department urged the Supreme Court to hear a glyphosate liability case and support liability protection for pesticide makers without consulting Kennedy. He said the Court took the case after the administration’s request and ruled in favor of liability protection; he also said Trump was unaware of the government’s brief and called the result a terrible idea. Means acknowledged that the Court followed the law governing EPA authority and argued that a Justice Department memo enabled the case, rather than making the Court responsible for investigating alleged regulatory capture. He said U.S. agriculture is highly dependent on glyphosate-based herbicides, citing use on 99% of U.S. corn, and favored preserving legal recourse while encouraging regenerative farming rather than immediately banning pesticides. He linked concerns about runoff and cancer in Iowa, while presenting the connection between glyphosate use and cancer rates as an argument, not proof of causation.

On food policy, Means cited USDA statistics that 38% of U.S. teens had prediabetes, 45% were overweight or obese, 20% of young adults had fatty liver disease, and nearly 80% of adults were overweight or obese. He argued that incentives and the food environment, not just individual choices, contribute to these outcomes. He said the government had developed an ultra-processed-food definition after six months and hundreds of meetings, but repeatedly delayed its release; the proposed definition would identify foods containing certain colors, non-nutritive sweeteners or factory-derived chemicals. He said transparency could enable voluntary labeling and later steps such as school-meal restrictions, without itself regulating food. His proposed school rules would bar sugary desserts and require protein, but he said industry opposition and internal resistance impeded the effort. He also described a proposed initiative to investigate the effects of sugar and refined carbohydrates in children’s diets, which he said Wiles stopped amid fundraising concerns.

Means said resistance also delayed Trump’s executive order on psychedelics for veterans and people with addictions, despite his view that these treatments merit faster research and review. The discussion also raised concerns about vaping and FDA decisions. Means disputed the claim that approving fruit-flavored vapes was a central midterm issue and said an administration policy to relax standards faced a court challenge. An unidentified speaker separately alleged that lobbying affected FDA vaccine reviews and that a limit on 7-OH in kratom products was later increased 20-fold; the speaker predicted harm but acknowledged uncertainty around some claims. Means said he had no firsthand insight into how Pfizer’s COVID-vaccine study requirement was dropped, though he believed senior officials would have been needed to change it.

Means called for structural political reforms, including a bipartisan constitutional amendment addressing corporate money in politics on the same terms as union money, changes to super PACs and fundraising demands, and restrictions on officials moving into industries they regulated. He claimed senators spend 90% of their time fundraising and argued that reform would require a popular president to make it a mandate and pressure Congress.