Jeremy Buckingham
Among groups affected by farm bill policies are anxious farmers struggling with a long-term slump in commodity prices, working families reliant on food aid to buy groceries, and clean water advocates seeking strong support for farm conservation practices.
The enormous policy package known as the farm bill—programs of which influence every eater and grower in the country—has been sitting on the Congressional sidelines for months. Passed every four years, the bill stalled midsummer, missing its expiration date of September 30 after the two houses of Congress passed versions so different that reconciliation seemed impossible. Spending for some programs was extended through Continuing Resolution until December 7, but many others were left in limbo.
Now, with the Democrats poised to take charge of the U.S. House of Representatives in January, the pressure is on for the current Congress to pass a farm bill before year’s end. The monster bill, representing some $860 billion of spending over the next five years, is on the move again. After securing her fourth term, Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin said her first order of business will be to complete the farm bill. “I know too many dairy farmers in Wisconsin who are at risk of losing their farms right now,” she told a Wisconsin television station.
The monster bill, representing some $860 billion of spending over the next five years, is on the move again.
Among the groups deeply affected by farm bill policies are anxious farmers struggling with a long-term slump in commodity prices and economic uncertainty around trade tariffs, working families reliant on food aid to buy groceries every month, and clean water advocates seeking strong support for farm conservation practices.
The farm bill also provides money for agricultural research, farmer training, credit for beginning farmers, and subsidies to help stabilize farmer incomes. It funds programs to help improve water infrastructure in rural areas, and is the single largest source of funding for conservation efforts on private lands. It’s important for protecting endangered species—for example, by supporting farmers in setting aside land to prevent soil erosion and protect waterways, or provide bird and butterfly habitat.
Back in June, the House produced the most partisan farm bill on record. The final version received not a single vote from Democrats, all of whom objected to “working requirements” for families seeking federal food assistance—a priority for House Speaker Paul Ryan.
Even Republicans had a hard time signing on to the abject version of the bill, which passed on a narrow 213-211 vote after weeks of uncertainty and backstage arm-twisting from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. The rules would have required adult beneficiaries of food assistance to prove they worked twenty hours every month, participated in a work training program or qualified for an exemption, in some estimates reducing benefits for almost 2 million people, many who live in households with children.
“Work requirements sounds good, but below the surface their approach increases barriers to food support among the elderly, people with children, and people who are already working two or three jobs but aren’t paid enough to keep food on the table,” said Rebecca Vallas, vice president of the Poverty Program at the Center for American Progress, about the draft House bill back in May. “In 2016 SNAP [food stamps] served more than 42 million Americans.”
The Senate version of the farm bill, in contrast, passed easily on June 28, on a vote of 86 to 11, making it one of the most bipartisan farm bills ever. Senate Agriculture ranking member Democrat Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and Senate Agriculture Chairman Pat Roberts, a Republican from Kansas, spent months crafting the Senate version, staying well clear of any significant amendments to food and nutritional assistance programs—which enjoy widespread support among Americans despite being a target of Tea-Partiers.
The Senate version of the farm bill is one of the most bipartisan farm bills ever.
Although the Senate version largely maintains the status quo, some heralded it a conservation powerhouse—perhaps comparing it to the House version, which the Center for Biological Diversity’s Lori Ann Burd described as “the Extinction Act of 2018.” In particular, the Senate maintains full funding for the Conservation Stewardship Program, or CSP, which the House version completely eliminated.
“The CSP is routinely oversubscribed,” notes Reana Kovalcik, associate director for communications and development at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition about the program’s popularity. The program supports farmers in conservation efforts that combat erosion, support native birds, pollinators and other wildlife, and protect water quality. “It involves a suite of conservation practices, and there are over 72 million acres enrolled right now,” she says.
The farm bill is now in conference committee, and the current and next House Agriculture Committee chairs are meeting this week, with many anticipating that House Republicans will be forced to back away from their demands to end the CSP and add work requirements for families in need of food assistance. Farmers stung by Trump’s trade wars are hoping that the coming Democratic control of the House will improve chances for crop subsidies, rural development programs, and access to export markets, all provided by the farm bill.
Kovalcik wants people to know that now is a good time to speak up about aspects of the food system they care about, especially sustainable agriculture.
“Hopefully we can move forward with something that resembles the Senate version of the bill. But we are also really concerned about what we call the “tiny but mighty” programs,” she says, referring to a number of efforts that represent a cutting edge for agriculture.
Nearly a dozen sustainable agriculture farm bill programs help support new farmers, veteran farmers, farmers markets, organic agriculture research, urban agriculture, small farm entrepreneurs, and other efforts to create a more diverse, healthy agricultural system. All these progressive efforts lost funding as the result of the failure of Congress to pass a farm bill.
“We are telling people that there is still time to talk to your representatives—that if you support a beginning farmer program, a program supporting veteran farmers, or a conservation program—now is a great time to let them know,” Kovalcik says.
There is still time to talk to your representatives—if you support beginning farmers, veteran farmers, or a conservation program—now is a great time to let them know.
Congress is back in session November 13, giving lawmakers only a handful of “legislative days” to work things out and come to a final vote by the end of the year.
“There isn’t any reason why this thing can’t get done,” said Collin Peterson, of Minnesota, the ranking Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee. “The only thing I care about between now and the end of the year is getting this farm bill done.”
At least there is one strong point of agreement across both houses and parties—industrial hemp, long championed by Senator Mitch McConnell, who wants to see it removed it from the federal list of controlled substances and sold as an agricultural commodity. “If there’s a farm bill, [hemp] will be in there,” he recently told reporters, “I guarantee you that.”