Senate Ag Committee

Will Congressional Inaction Force Farmers to Choose Between Health Insurance and Their Farm Budget?

Tue, 16 Dec 2025 15:16:10 GMT

Healthcare insurance plans for some U.S. farmers could double in 2026, as enhanced federal subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are scheduled to expire.

The impending cost surge could affect thousands of U.S. farmers who currently rely on the ACA marketplace for their health insurance, according to the non-partisan KFF (formerly Kaiser Family Foundation), a health policy organization.

KFF estimated in 2023 that 27% of “farmers, ranchers, and other agriculture managers” relied on individual ACA market coverage. Nationally, more than 22 million Americans rely on the ACA marketplace for insurance options.

Farmers ‘Don’t Have Many Options’
Iowa farmer Aaron Lehman, who testified before Congress last week, highlighted the severity of the potential cost increase on his family. He said he expects to pay double to purchase an insurance plan for 2026 that would be comparable to what his family had this year.

“That is an incredible cost for our family budget and for our farm budget,” Lehman stated. The fifth-generation farmer and president of the Iowa Farmers Union described how rising healthcare costs are colliding with already harsh economic realities in agriculture.

“Farmers right now are trying to make all sorts of decisions because commodity prices are low, because of the chaotic trade situation that we’re in and higher input prices. All these things have made a real crisis for a lot of our farmers,” said Lehman.

“Finding ways to deal with that, we just don’t have too many options. Farmers will buy less equipment or not make the necessary upgrades and equipment that they need to,” he added. “They’ll look at their input suppliers, and they’ll decide, ‘what can we do to get through just this year … to get a plan to put the crop in the ground?’”

Read the testimony of Aaron Lehman here. A portion of his testimony and discussion is also featured on a posting to YouTube .

Signup Deadlines For Coverage
The challenge for farmers trying to decide on what insurance policy to purchase is compounded by the deadline to enroll in ACA marketplace plans: People needed to choose their ACA plan by Monday for coverage to begin Jan. 1. Open enrollment continues in most states until Jan. 15 for coverage beginning Feb. 1.

Despite broad public support for an extension to the ACA tax credits — a KFF poll said 74% of Americans favor continuing the enhanced credits — a congressional standoff has so far failed to produce a solution:

Failed Votes: Both a Democratic plan to extend the enhanced tax credits for three years and a Republican proposal to replace them with Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) failed to pass the Senate last week.
Impending Crisis: Nearly six in 10 enrollees (across all categories) told KFF they could not afford even a $300 annual increase in 2026 without significantly disrupting household finances.
Political Fallout: The issue of healthcare costs and expiring subsidies is highly polarizing, with some Republicans warning that a failure to address the problem could cost them legislative majorities in next year’s mid-term elections.

As the deadline for open enrollment closes and the Dec. 31 subsidy expiration date approaches, farmers must prepare for substantially higher health insurance costs in 2026 unless Congress acts to reach a last-minute agreement.

Young Farmers Need Better Options
During his testimony and ensuing discussion, Lehman stressed that healthcare isn’t just a personal household issue; it’s central to the future of American farming. With the average age of an Iowa farmer at 57, he said the sector desperately needs young and beginning farmers to return to the land. But without affordable, reliable health coverage, inviting the next generation back onto the farm becomes a far riskier proposition.

“You have to be very smart to figure out the plan that can bring the next generation on the farm,” he said, adding that many talented, innovative young people want to farm, but face daunting financial barriers — healthcare high among them. He noted that one of his sons works with him on their family operation, which is based in Polk County, Iowa.

Lehman framed affordable healthcare for farm families as an investment, not a handout: a way to make it possible for young farmers to feed their communities, support local and regional food systems, or continue larger family commodity operations.

“Extending the federal support for lowering the cost of health insurance is a true win for farmers and for all of rural America,” he said.

Another Temporary Fix: Stopgap Bill Includes Farm Bill Extension — Is This the New Normal for Ag Policy?

Tue, 11 Nov 2025 15:35:52 GMT

A new stopgap spending bill to reopen the government also extends key Farm Bill programs for one year—covering the provisions left out of July’s budget package. While the Senate waits on the House to vote, it brings up what some economists think may be a new reality: the days of passing a comprehensive Farm Bill may be over, and a piecemeal approach could be the new norm in Washington.

It’s been about 6 years and 11 months since Congress passed a new, comprehensive (5-year) farm bill. This week, the continuing resolution (CR), which funds the federal government through January 30, includes an extension of the current farm bill, again. This prevents outdated “permanent law” provisions from taking effect. Without action, those Depression-era statutes could have triggered mandatory price supports for certain commodities, disrupting markets.

The bill also includes an extension of the U.S. Grain Standards Act, ensuring official grain inspection and weighing services continue without interruption.

Senate Votes 60–40 to Advance the Measure

The Senate advanced the package in a 60–40 vote Sunday night, providing farmers relief from uncertainty over whether core safety-net programs might lapse.

An earlier package dubbed the “One Big Beautiful Bill” increased funding for commodity programs, crop insurance, and export promotion, but it left out several smaller and conservation-related initiatives—including the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). The new CR temporarily fills that gap while Congress works toward a full Farm Bill reauthorization.

Boozman: “Critical USDA Services Resume”

Sen. John Boozman (R-AR), chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, praised the bill’s passage, emphasizing its importance for both producers and rural communities.

“Ending the government shutdown ensures critical USDA services resume so vulnerable families no longer experience disruptions to nutrition benefits, farmers can access the programs and personnel they rely on to keep their operations running efficiently and disaster assistance is delivered,” Boozman said in a statement.“We advanced long-overdue farm bill policy improvements in the One Big Beautiful Bill, including enhanced risk management tools farmers have been calling for, and we’re continuing work to reauthorize other key initiatives. Extending the farm bill and the U.S. Grain Standards Act gives us more time to finalize these programs essential to farmers, ranchers and rural America.”

Is This the New Norm?

The extension buys lawmakers additional time to complete a comprehensive Farm Bill reauthorization, expected to be one of the top legislative priorities in early 2026.

But the loss of urgency to pass a new, comprehensive five-year farm bill may be due to the fact Congress included key enhancements to the Farm Safety Net in the One Big Beautiful Bill earlier this year. The Farm Journal Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor asked economists in July if that makes it more difficult or easier to pass a Farm Bill this year. 70% said yes. And in September, the Monthly Monitor asked when Congress will pass a new farm bill. Nearly 40% (39%) said a piecemeal approach for passing the farm bill is the new norm.

According to the Congressional Research Service, Sections 10101 and 10108 (Title I, Agriculture) would increase federal outlays by about $52.3 billion + $1.6 billion over 10 years.

The American Farm Bureau Federation says the bill directs about $65.6 billion in new agricultural investment over 10 years: ~$59 billion for core farm safety-net enhancements, ~$6.6 billion for other ag priorities.

Key Farm Bill-style Provisions in the OBBB

Here’s a breakdown of major provisions in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act that impact legislation within the Farm Bill:

1. Extension & enhancement of commodity support / safety-net programs

The bill extends core programs originally in the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 Farm Bill) through crop year 2031.
Reference prices under the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program are raised.
The Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) program’s revenue guarantee is increased (for example, from 86% to 90%) and maximum payment rates increased.
Marketing Assistance Loan rates are increased.
The bill provides a one-time opportunity for eligible producers to update base acres (“new base acre holdings”).

2. Crop insurance and disaster assistance

Premium subsidies for crop insurance increase; the bill boosts coverage levels for the Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO) and Whole Farm Revenue Protection (WFRP) policies.
Disaster assistance programs are expanded: loss types eligible are broadened, thresholds for payment triggers are lowered, and coverage levels increased.

3. Dairy, sugar, and specialty commodities

For dairy: The bill increases the amount of milk production a producer can enroll in the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) program. Also, it requires dairy product manufacturers to report cost/yield data so that “make allowances” under the federal milk marketing order system can be updated.
For sugar: Under the sugar support program, priority is given to sugar-beet processors if marketing allotments are raised; the bill also mandates reallocation of tariff-rate quota shortfalls by March 1 and requires USDA to report on refined sugar imports.

4. Agricultural research, animals, trust funds, and miscellaneous programs

Section 10108 of the bill funds: the National Animal Health Laboratory Network, National Animal Disease Preparedness Response Program, and the National Animal Vaccine and Veterinary Countermeasures Bank.
Extends funding for trust funds supporting pima cotton, wool, certain textile, and citrus industries.
Miscellaneous investments in horticulture, energy (for agriculture), trade promotion, and rural infrastructure also included.

While nothing is easy in Washington, it seems addressing portions of farm bill funding within other legislation is the path of least resistance. Which could change the way farm bills are shaped - and passed through Congress- in the years ahead.

Opposition to the Farm Bill Extension

While most farm groups applaud the one-year extension of the 2018 Farm Bill, the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) says it comes with potential issues for small and medium size farmers.

“The Senate’s deal to reopen the government has a number of problems that will hurt farmers and rural communities. The Senate attaches a 12-month Farm Bill extension to the deal, setting up the possibility for more chaos just a year from now,” says Michael Happ, Program Associate for Climate and Rural Communities. “Even worse, it is not a clean extension. The text proposes eliminating payment limitations for Farm Bill conservation programs such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). In most years, well over half of applicants to EQIP are turned away due to a lack of funds — and without payment limits, the USDA will likely issue fewer, larger EQIP contracts. By getting rid of the payment limit, the Senate opens the door for more of EQIP’s finite resources to be diverted to the largest operations while more small and midscale farms are closed out.”

IATP is urging the Senate needs to keep payment limits in place and go back to the negotiating table.

Breaking Down the Biggest Differences in the Big Beautiful Bill Proposals and Potential Impact on Agriculture

Fri, 20 Jun 2025 14:14:35 GMT

Senate republicans are racing against the clock to finish their version of President Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill. As the Senate continues to roll out its versions of the reconciliation bill, there are some differences between the House and Senate proposals when it come to agriculture.

The main variations come down to changes in the tax provisions, but it’s key to note proposed changes to the farm safety net are similar in both the House and the Senate.

What’s Next?
The House and Senate will now need to work out their differences in the two versions of the Big Beautiful Bill. President Trump said he wants to sign the legislation on July 4, but many reports cast doubt Congress can meet that approaching deadline. Politico even reported this week the Senate GOP’s version of the bill is “facing major headwinds in the House.”

Read More: Big, Beautiful Bill: What’s in it for Agriculture?

Farm CPA Paul Neiffer believes the July 4 deadline isn’t likely as the debate heats up, but he still remains optimistic the bill is close to the finish line.

“I think July is the date, but not July 4,” Neiffer says. “They’ll get it done before the August recess. I think they’re actually pretty close. The media out there talks about how they’re really far apart on Medicaid and state and local taxes. But I think when push comes to shove, the president has a lot of clout, and they’ll come up a compromise. So, I’m pretty optimistic they’ll get it done.”

Weighing the Differences Between the Senate and the House
Neiffer says he would grade the Senate’s overall budget reconciliation proposal as a “B” for ag, which is slightly below how he rated the House’s proposal. One reason is what the Senate is proposing for Section 199A:

The Senate has a Section 199A deduction of 20%, while the House’s version is 23%.
Both the House and Senate are calling for 100% bonus depreciation, but the Senate’s would be permanent. The House’s version would expire at the end of 2029.

“With the Senate making that permanent, that’s a really good deal for ag,” Neiffer says. “They would now have some certainty all of the assets that a farmer purchases — combines, tractors, buildings and everything but land — they can deduct 100%.”

Neiffer says another difference is on state and local tax deductions.

The Senate is keeping the current $10,000 deduction and reducing the benefit of the pass-through entity tax deduction.
The deduction is at the $40,000 level in the House and retains the pass-through entity deduction in full for farmers.

Beefed Up Farm Safety Net
Under the Senate’s version, Neiffer says farmers would be paid the higher calculated payment rate under Price Loss Coverage (PLC) or Agricultural Risk Coverage (ARC) during the 2025 crop year.

The Senate Ag Committee’s proposal also increases the reference price formula, and instead of having a floor based on 85% of the Olympic moving average marketing year price, the Senate is proposing an increase up to 88%.

“That actually results in a boost on the corn PLC price by about $0.15. And I think on soybeans, it’s about $0.35,” Neiffer says. “So, that’s very beneficial. Now, I was hoping they were going to boost the ceiling. Right now, the ceiling is 115% of the EFR. And they had talked last year about boosting it up to 120%. I think that was too much for the budget, so they kept it at 115%.”

The Differences on 45Z
When it comes to the 45Z Clean Fuels Production Tax Credit, there’s one major difference. The Senate allows foreign feedstocks to be eligible for the credit, just with a 20% “haircut.”

In the House’s version, only feedstocks produced or grown in the United States or Canada qualify for the tax credit. That change would help detour some of the used cooking oil imports from China.

“To me, a 20% haircut means there’s got to be some senators out there maybe pandering to somebody that I don’t know about. Because really, they should eliminate the whole foreign feedstock and just give you a credit based on domestic production,” Neiffer says.

The Bigger Issue with 45Z
Peter Meyer of Muddy Boots Ag says no matter what version of the 45Z tax credit makes the final cut, there’s a bigger issue at hand. The Trump administration needs to provide guidance and rules around 45Z — something the Biden administration failed to do during its time in office.

“We’re just clamoring for clarification, right? All I want is clarification. They can say all they want about extending this to 2030. That’s great. That’s a positive. But tell me what the rules are. We still don’t know the rules,” Meyer says.

Meyer knows there’s been so much talk about 45Z and sustainable aviation fuel, but little action in terms of demand. Meyer says the lack of action in terms of demand is largely because there’s no clarity around the tax credit.

“We need more demand for the ethanol they’re producing,” Meyer says. “Soybean oil can be converted to sustainable aviation fuel. But you just cannot produce sustainable aviation fuel without a credit. You can’t.”

Senate Agenda to Start 2025 Includes New Farm Bill

Fri, 03 Jan 2025 20:45:55 GMT

As the 119th Congress begins, the Senate’s opening day promises to be largely ceremonial, in contrast to the dramatic House speaker election. Senators will convene at noon ET to swear in new members, hear remarks from Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and address procedural matters.

Thune’s Filibuster Pledge
Thune will reaffirm his commitment to preserving the legislative filibuster, emphasizing its role in maintaining the Senate’s deliberative nature. This stance may clash with potential calls from President-elect Trump to abolish the filibuster, as he did during his first term.

Upcoming GOP Agenda Includes New Farm Bill
Thune will outline plans to pass individual appropriations bills, a farm bill, and focus on regular order and extended floor debates. The GOP’s initial reconciliation package, targeting border security, energy, and defense, could test the filibuster’s resilience.

Democratic Priorities
Schumer will advocate for bipartisan cooperation and outline Democratic goals, despite the GOP’s emphasis on party-line measures.

Cabinet Confirmations on Hold
The Senate will adopt its organizing resolution today, formally transitioning control of committees to the GOP. However, Cabinet confirmation hearings won’t begin until the week of Jan. 13, allowing more time for senators to meet with nominees, including former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and Sen. Marco Rubio.

Republicans 53-seat majority will be delayed slightly because West Virginia Governor Jim Justice is waiting until Jan. 13 to allow Governor-elect Patrick Morrisey to take over before appointing a successor. This delay will affect Justice’s seniority ranking but is not expected to impact Republicans’ legislative activities significantly, given the short timeline.

Schumer Sets Democratic Agriculture Panel Member List
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has set the list of Democratic assignments on committees for the 119th Congress, with two new members of the Senate Agriculture Committee – Sens. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Elissa Slotkin. Leaving the panel after the 118th Congress were retired Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), defeated Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) was previously announced as the new Ranking Member on the panel.

More Dramatic Start for the House
House Republicans are preparing for today’s unpredictable speaker election, where incumbent Mike Johnson (R-La.) faces a challenging path to retain his gavel. With a razor-thin 219-215 majority, Johnson can afford only one GOP defection if all members vote. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has signaled opposition, while some others remain undecided. Johnson has emphasized the importance of avoiding theatrics, recalling the protracted 2023 speaker vote, and is striving for a first-ballot victory.

Johnson has secured former President Trump’s endorsement and has focused on uniting his party behind key agenda items like border security and tax reform. However, some Republicans demand assurances of a more conservative approach, citing frustrations with Johnson’s reliance on Democratic votes in the previous Congress.

Johnson’s potential ousting could create a leadership vacuum since there isn’t an obvious replacement. Removing Johnson might reignite public clashes among top Republicans, including House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (La.), Majority Whip Tom Emmer (Minn.), and Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (Ohio). These tensions could fracture party unity and complicate legislative efforts.

Political Implications for Trump and the GOP
The disruption could weaken Republican cohesion, making it harder for the party to advance its agenda or align with Trump’s interests, especially heading into the 2024 elections.

If there is a confirmed House speaker today, the schedule ahead includes:

· Saturday: House Republicans will meet at Fort McNair, Washington, D.C., to discuss reconciliation plans.
· Sunday: Republican elected leadership holds a retreat in Baltimore.
· Monday: The House will convene to certify Donald Trump’s Electoral College victory.

Your Next Read:
How is Stabenow’s Senate Farm Bill Proposal Different From the House Bill?

Ag Groups Say Stabenow’s Lame-Duck Farm Bill is Lame; Gets Lambasted for Timing, Details

Tue, 19 Nov 2024 21:05:00 GMT

Most farm bill observers wonder why Senate Ag Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) even bothered to release text of her long-awaited farm bill at this late date , especially after seeing its contents. Even always optimistic House Ag Chair GT Thompson (R-Pa.) signaled it’s time to focus on a 2018 Farm Bill extension by year’s end.

Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.) characterized Stabenow’s dead-before-arrival measure as “insulting.” Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) released more extensive and biting remarks, saying:

“This morning, Chairwoman Stabenow released her Farm Bill text — a 1,400-page document that no Republican committee member has reviewed or had the opportunity to collaborate on. This is not a sincere or transparent effort to address the urgent needs of Rural America. Instead, it is a last-minute power play in the final hours- manipulating her majority power in the Senate Ag Committee before losing the gavel. Today’s move shows that Senate Democrats have walked away from meaningful bipartisan negotiations that are a tradition in this committee and have opted to play politics with the livelihoods of hard-working farmers and ranchers at a time when Rural America needs real solutions… With farmers facing record decreases in net farm income, we must put FARM back in the Farm Bill by increasing crop insurance coverage and reference prices for the American farmer.”

Stabenow offered the Republicans very little other than agreeing to language regarding Commodity Credit Corporation funding restrictions, thereby boosting the farm bill baseline. But she gave nothing on her must-not-change items dealing with food and nutrition and conservation funding. Stabenow previously chided the GOP House plan on CCC as using “magic math and wishful thinking” but now she is willing to use that same math for CCC and put it toward some additional funding.

More on Stabenow’s CCC Flip-Flop

The bill would provide $39 billion in increased funding by restricting USDA’s use of the CCC from 2025 through 2030 unless the department has congressional authority. The bill says the CCC “is authorized to use its general powers only to carry out operations as Congress may specifically authorize or provide for.”

The Congressional Budget Office would be directed to estimate the savings of the provision at $6.7 billion per year. As we previously noted, the provision could potentially restrict the ability of the Trump administration to provide aid offset the impact of retaliatory tariffs.

She told reporters her bill “embraces” the Republicans’ method of paying for increased commodity program funding, referring to the CCC restriction. She said the bill also would provide $2 billion in payments to farmers faster than they get them now under the 2018 Farm Bill.

Now What?

The death knell has sounded on the latest attempt to get a farm bill this calendar year, a fate most thought would be the case after Stabenow didn’t release text of her bill after the House Ag Committee, with the help of some Democrats, cleared its version in May.

It took Stabenow over five months to release the anemic farm bill version filed on Monday. Efforts are now gaining momentum to get a market price relief measure as part of some must-pass legislation yet this year.

The hope is that farmer payments under that legislation (similar to but likely different from a measure by GOP Rep. Trent Kelly of Mississippi) will be built into a new farm bill baseline, providing more funding whenever farm-state lawmakers pick up the Stabenow pieces and actually get serious about writing a farm bill in 2025, or even 2026.

With Thompson remaining as House Ag Chairman in the new Congress, and Boozman taking the top Ag gavel in the Senate, a more serious attempt at an omnibus farm bill is very likely, especially dealing with likely new Senate Ag ranking member Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) who has a track record of working across the aisle. She is also less fixated on specialty crops than Stabenow is, and instead will focus on corn, soybeans and wheat, key crops in Minnesota. Klobuchar said on the Senate floor Monday that lawmakers should do “anything we can” to finish a new farm bill by the end of the year.

Disaster Aid More a December Timeline Than November

Despite the Biden administration asking Congress to provide $24 billion in aid to the U.S. ag sector, as part of a $98.4 billion disaster aid package, Congress will likely modify key provisions when they return after a one-week Thanksgiving break. Look for farm-state lawmakers to include specific language on the operation of the coming ag disaster funding to avoid how USDA implemented the last aid to farmers.

Of note: Of the $24 billion for agriculture $21 billion would allow USDA to compensate farmers and ranchers for crop and livestock losses. This is significantly above the around $14 billion in disaster aid recently cited by a USDA official.

More on timing:House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said Monday that lawmakers will now “go to work” evaluating the disaster aid request, noting that estimating recovery costs is “a deliberate process.”

With many Republicans campaigning on reducing federal spending, there could be some debate about portions of Biden’s request. Meanwhile, the Senate Appropriations Committee is expected to hear Wednesday from the heads of several of the government agencies that would receive funding through Biden’s request.

It’s possible that emergency aid could be attached to any spending bill designed to keep federal agencies operating after current funding expires Dec. 20. But disaster aid will probably be packaged with a stopgap at the end of the calendar year, senior appropriator Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) told reporters.

“There’ll be some back and forth, and I’d imagine it probably would all ride on the end,” Capito said.

Stabenow Finally Releases Full Text of Senate Farm Bill; Here's What It Means for Agriculture

Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:35:08 GMT

Stabenow unveiled 1,397-page details of her long-awaited farm bill Monday morning. This comes as early Sunday evening Pro Farmer broke the news that Senate Ag Chairwoman (D-Mich.) had briefed Democrats but not Republicans on her coming farm bill text, which was expected to be released Monday.

Stabenow said in a news release and summary of the bill , “The foundation of every successful farm bill is built on holding together the broad, bipartisan farm bill coalition. This is a strong bill that invests in all of agriculture, helps families put food on the table, supports rural prosperity, and holds that coalition together.”

BREAKING: Chairwoman @SenStabenow Introduces Rural Prosperity and Food Security Acthttps://t.co/qRunZlk6zj
— Senate Ag, Nutrition, & Forestry Committee Dems (@SenateAgDems) November 18, 2024

The Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act includes $39 billion in new resources “to keep farmers farming, families fed, and rural communities strong.” The bill builds on the proposal Stabenow released in May by investing new resources and including innovative, new ideas to deliver the assistance farmers need faster.

It provides farmers with the certainty of a 5-year farm bill and the immediate help they need to manage the urgent needs of the present. It doubles down on our commitment to rural communities, ensures that the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) keeps up with the realities of American life, and brings the historic investments in climate-smart conservation practices into the farm bill. These new investments include:

$20 billion to strengthen the farm safety net to support all of agriculture and establishes a permanent structure for disaster assistance so emergency relief reaches farmers faster;
$8.5 billion to help families make ends meet, put food on the table, and improve access to nutrition assistance;
$4.3 billion to improve quality of life in the rural communities that millions of Americans call home.”

Farm CPA Paul Neiffer has already combed through the bill, and says, “This is our first preview of the Senate Farm Bill Proposal. There appears to be some benefit to production Ag, however, many of the proposals seem to penalize production ag such as the following:

Very limited increase in base acres
Restriction on payments due to ownership of farmland by higher AGI individuals or entities
Reduction in AGI limits
No change to definition of farm income
Possible limit on PLC payments
Items that may benefit production ag include:
Permanent ERP (although this is a very messy program)
Partial advance payments of ARC and PLC
Automatic 2023 and 2024 ARC or PLC decisions”

Senate GOP Ag Committee Ranking Member Reacts

Senate Ag Committee ranking member John Boozman (R-Ark.) on X wrote: “An 11th hour partisan proposal released 415 days after the expiration of the current farm bill is insulting. America’s farmers deserve better.”

“An 11th hour partisan proposal released 415 days after the expiration of the current farm bill is insulting. America’s farmers deserve better.” RM @JohnBoozman
— Senate Ag Committee Republicans (@SenateAgGOP) November 18, 2024

Meanwhile, the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) issued the following statement:

“Though America’s pork producers appreciate Chairwoman Stabenow’s efforts to publish Farm Bill text, this is simply not a viable bill, as it fails to provide a solution to California Prop. 12,” said NPPC President Lori Stevermer, a pork producer from Easton, Minn. “Pork producers have continually spoken up about the negative impacts of this issue, and it is a shame these conversations were disregarded.”

In May, NPPC secured 100 percent of pork producers’ priorities in the House Agriculture Committee-passed bipartisan 2024 Farm Bill. In June, producers once again secured all policy priorities in Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member John Boozman’s 2024 Farm Bill framework.

NPPC said it urges both chambers of Congress to swiftly consider and pass a Farm Bill this year that includes a fix to California Proposition 12, a state law that places arbitrary housing standards on the pork industry, creating uncertainty for pork producers as they look to continue their operations to the next generation.

Additional Impact on Agriculture from Farm CPA

In a post this morning, Paul Neiffer of Farm CPA Report included a quick preview of the items that jumped out at him relative to the farm bill details released by Stabenow.

Reference Prices: The House proposal raised reference prices by approximately 10-20%. The Senate proposal appears to raise reference prices by a flat 5% (rounded). Although it appears that Cotton only went up by 4% instead of 5%.
Increase in Base Acres
- Only underserved and disadvantaged farmers may increase base acres
- Based on average of 2018-2022 plantings
- Includes prevent planted acres
- Maximum increase of 160 acres per farm
- If disadvantage farmer does not farm acres during 2025-2029, then increased base acres are eliminated
- Special 2023 and 2024 ARC/PLC election
- Automatic election to be paid the highest amount for 2023 and 2024 crop year even if the farmer originally elected ARC or PLC.

Limit on PLC Payment: The maximum amount of payment for PLC will be 15% of the effective reference price. As example, assume a farmer has a PLC yield of 200 bushels for corn and the effective reference price is $4.30 and the final corn harvest price is $3.50. Under the old PLC rules, the farmer could receive 200 bushels times 80 cents per bushel or $160. Under this proposal, the farmer is limited to 65 cents or $130 per acre.
Partial PLC Payments: Instead of waiting until after October 1 to collect a PLC payment, the farmer, in certain situations may elect to receive up to 50% of the crop beginning February 1. This is based on firm projections by USDA that the final harvest price will be below the effective reference price. If USDA pays too much, then the farmer must pay it back.
Agricultural Risk Coverage: As expected, the Bill increases the guarantee from the current 86% to 88%, less than the 90% in the House Bill. However, not expected, the Bill increases the maximum payment to 12.50% of benchmark revenue, matching the House Bill and makes this retroactive to the 2024 crop. 2023 crop remains at 10%.
Partial ARC Payments: Provides same mechanism for partial payments as under PLC.
Increase to Marketing Loan Rates: For 2025 crops and subsequent years, the loan rate will be the lesser of 110% of current loan rates or an adjustment based on current input costs versus a five-year average.
Sugar Program: Increase sugar cane payment to 24 cents per pound for 2025-2029. Sugar beet growers will receive 136.5% of sugar cane payment rate.
Permanent ERP: Emergency Relief Program would be made permanent (at least until next farm bill). Payment limits of $500,000 for specialty crops and $250,000 for all other crops.
Terms appear similar to old ERP programs, but it does not mandate how USDA will administer it, etc. Also, no extra payment limit if you can prove you are a farmer. This may still be messy for CPAs to help farmers calculate their claim. Also, requires farmers to insure all acres.
Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) limits: AGI limits dropped from $900,000 to $700,000.
- Increases AGI limits to $1.5 million for specialty and high-value crops.
- What happens if a farmer grows both? The Bill does not address this, other than likely leave it up to USDA to come up with rules.
- Waiver of AGI rules available to economically distressed producer.
- It appears that no payments will be allowed if the land is owned by someone or an entity whose AGI is over $700,000. This means that a farmer who is cash renting that ground will not qualify for any payment on that ground. Under current rules and the House Farm Bill proposal, any farmer who is cash renting the ground and their AGI is under the limit will qualify for a payment. This is a major change and will create the law of unintended consequences. They seem to want to not have an incentive for wealthier individuals to purchase land since their high AGI will not qualify them for any payments but under current rules they get no payment anyway.

Increase in CCC Scoring: Section 1708 indicates that for purposes of CBO scoring, the restrictions on utilizing CCC funds shall be $6.7 billion per year for 2024-2033. The last scoring by CBO was $400 million per year.

CRP Rentals Limit Increased to $125,000 from current $50,000

Crop Insurance Changes: Increases subsidies for beginning and veteran farmers and ranchers to essentially match House proposal.
- Increases SCO to allow for payment at 88% instead of 86% of guarantee. House was at 90%.
- Increases premium subsidies.
Makes improvements to Whole Farm and Micro Farm insurance plans.

Comments:

Several contacts, asked to respond to Stabenow’s late farm bill details, used the same words: “Wow, finally, but too late.” Stabenow is departing Congress after this session ends, and veteran farm bill watchers say this late-entry farm bill is not a positive chapter in her long career. Most are asking why she chose today in releasing the details, and why she took a partisan approach in briefing about the matter.

Why John Thune's Election as Senate Majority Leader is Considered Beneficial for U.S. Agriculture

Wed, 13 Nov 2024 19:50:43 GMT

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) wins Majority Leader race. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) was eliminated on the first ballot. And Thune beat Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) 29-24 on the second ballot.

The Thune selection is good for the U.S. ag sector. He has one of the best staff in Congress.

The leadership race unfolded in two rounds of voting: 

In the first ballot, Scott was eliminated. 
In the second and final ballot, Thune secured 29 votes, defeating Cornyn, who received 24 votes.

Donald Trump stayed out of the contest but did make public demands that the incoming majority leader allow him to make recess appointments to his Cabinet. All three men quickly agreed.

Thune’s election as Majority Leader is considered beneficial for the U.S. ag sector for several reasons: 

Agricultural background: Thune has a deep background in ag policy and is a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee. 
Farm bill experience: He has been involved in writing several farm bills, demonstrating his expertise in agricultural legislation. 
Conservation programs: Thune is an avid supporter of conservation title programs like the Conservation Stewardship Program and Conservation Reserve Program.
Bipartisan approach: He is a skilled negotiator, working for the benefit of all.
Constituency focus: Coming from South Dakota, an agriculture-based state, Thune is likely to keep agricultural interests at the forefront of his agenda.  • Experienced staff: Thune has one of the best staffs in Congress, which can be crucial for effective policymaking and implementation.

Of note: This leadership change marks the end of Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) 18-year tenure as the Senate’s Republican leader. Thune will assume the role of Majority Leader for the next two years, coinciding with President-elect Donald Trump’s second term. While Thune has had differences with Trump in the past, he has recently worked to improve their relationship and has pledged to advance Trump’s legislative agenda.

Expert Shares What Could Spark Progress On The Farm Bill

Wed, 25 Sep 2024 17:54:13 GMT

John Newton, former Senate Ag Committee economist and now executive head at Terrain, shares what will move the Farm Bill out of the Senate Ag Committee and toward finalization.

“Chairwoman Stabenow could release bill text whenever she’d like. On the Republican side, I was happy to be part of that team and we released our framework earlier this year,” Newton says. The ball is obviously in the chairwoman’s court to do something on the Senate side.”

In addition to no bill text on the senate side, there’s no floor vote scheduled in the house. But Newton highlights three priorities and a time frame for a final farm bill:

More “Farm” in the Farm Bill: “I was part of a team that put together a Republican Farm Bill framework based on feedback we have received from over 23 states that Senator Bozeman visited. And in every single one of those states, what farmers and ranchers said is we need more farm in the Farm Bill,” Newton says.
Improved Safety Net: “There are real needs in agriculture to make safety net tools better,” Newton says. He sees the need to enhance crop insurance and cites how many reference prices are more than a decade old.
Bipartisan effort: “I would hope that there would be a bipartisan agreement in the Senate to move a farm bill that recognizes the challenges farmers and ranchers are facing right now. Net farm income is down over $50 billion over the last two years, net cash farm income is seeing the steepest two years’ decline of all time,” he says.

As for when the farm bill could make progress, Newton expects next month’s campaign trips home to help with some momentum.

“Folks are going to go home during October, and they’re going to hear from farmers and ranchers on what their needs are,” he says. “I think they’ll come back motivated to get something done, whether that’s a short term bridge or whether that’s a full five-year farm bill over the finish line. I think members can be motivated to do that when they get back in November.”

Hear more from Newton on ARC and PLC programs as well as the nutrition and conservation titles in this AgriTalk segment:

Your next read: Ag Economist John Newton Named Executive Head of Terrain

Ag Secretary Vilsack Has A Clear Message For Farm-State Lawmakers On Passing A New Farm Bill: 'Get Realistic'

Fri, 21 Jun 2024 22:21:13 GMT

During an interview with USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack on AgriTalk Thursday, the focus was on the farm bill. He was asked to start with Title I regarding the differences between the Republicans and Democrats relative to the farm bill negotiations. Are those differences negotiable? Vilsack’s response:

“I don’t think we’re close to getting a farm bill done until the folks who are negotiating the farm bill are realistic about what’s doable within a constrained resource environment. The Republican proposal, whether it’s the House version or the Senate version, essentially requires a significant amount of additional [funding] coming into the farm bill, in order to pay for all of the various promises that have been made from reference prices to crop insurance premium assistance to all the other proposals that are contained in those bills. It can amount to over $50 billion of additional resources that CBO identified within the existing farm bill or new money coming in.”

“The reality is they just don’t have it [the funding]. First of all, they’re taking resources from nutrition assistance which is a red line for Democrats. They’re also essentially playing fairly fast and loose with the amount of savings from reducing liability and future secretary’s ability to use the CCC. The Congressional Budget Office we believe is probably going to score that about $8 billion in savings. They need $53 billion to be able to make it work. So at the end of the day, if we’re really serious about getting a farm bill done, I think we have to lower people’s expectations and we have to really take a look at what is absolutely necessary in order to provide help and assistance to the farm to farm country. We’re not there yet. I think Senator Debbie Stabenow’s (D-Mich.) approach is more realistic, and more reasonable. [Stabenow] has identified additional resources outside of the farm bill that Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has promised would be available, so she’s identified some real money to put into the farm bill. I think there’s some serious concerns on the House side and I think that’s a problem.”

Watch the full interview here:

Contentious Areas of the Farm Bill

Asked if there was any give in some contentious areas, Vilsack said: “There’s going to have to be give. I think that there is a genuine desire on the part of perhaps both Republicans and Democrats to see the potential for the conservation resources that are in the inflation Reduction Act (IRA) moved into the farm bill, but with the guardrails intact in terms of the directing it for climate smart agricultural purposes. If you take the guardrails out, I think then you lose Democratic support for moving that into the baseline. So, I think there’s an opportunity there for conversation.”

“I think there’s an opportunity to creatively use the CCC in a way that actually does provide some additional resources or capacity. But I don’t think it’s anywhere near $53 billion. And as a result, that means that you have to lower expectations. Look, you know, the reality is when you talk about reference prices, you’re talking about roughly 22 commodities out of 130 commodities we have that are covered by crop insurance. We’re talking about the fact that over 50% or so of those benefits go to the top 10% of agricultural sale farms in the country in terms of sales. There’s a real serious question here, especially given the fact that we’re seeing so many farms that we’ve lost over the course of the last 30 or 40 years. Can we continue to sustain the number of farms we’ve lost? Its 544,970 farms since 1981. I mean, are we okay with that? Are we okay with losing 151 million acres of land in 1981 that’s not in farming today. Are we okay with the impact on rural communities. This is one aspect of this. When you look at the fact that a disproportionate share of the military comes from rural communities and now you see the military having concerns about whether or not they have adequate resources and people to draw from in terms of an all-volunteer military and they’re thinking about, you know, expanding who could qualify and so forth. My gosh, you know, these are serious issues.

“So that’s a long way of saying I think there’s a way to get to yes, but people have to lower the expectations. They have to really look at what’s going on in the countryside, and tailor a farm bill in a way that responds to the challenges of more farmers, many farmers, not just a few.”

Snap Overpayments?

We noted that Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), ranking member on the Senate Ag Committee, put out an interesting graphic on the overpayments, etc., in the SNAP program and it was a rather large figure. We asked if there was wiggle room on looking into that as far as better enforcement and moving some of that potential funding or not into the farm bill. Vilsack’s response:

“Let’s be clear about that number. First of all, it isn’t necessarily overpayments. It’s also under payments. That is a function of state government. And we are working with the state governments because they’re the ones who administer the SNAP program. And there’s an opportunity for us to work collaboratively with them to shore up and to begin returning back to where things were before Covid, where there were ongoing interviews and things of that nature, and that’s going to happen, but that’s not necessarily going to be the resources sufficient to pay for $53 billion of increases in reference prices.”

(Farm Journal)

Conservation Funding

Noting if there is any area where there is some agreement, it’s on conservation. We asked Vilsack if the Democrats and Republicans in Congress can find common. His response:

“I think we could get to yes easily if the understanding was we’ll move the balance of the IRA conservation resources into the farm bill with the understanding that the climate guardrails remain. I don’t think there’d be any disagreement on the part of folks to do that.

“There’s roughly somewhere in the neighborhood of $14 billion to $15 billion left of what was allocated in the IRA that’s available. There’s tremendous demand and interest as we had 45,000 contracts last year, a record number of contracts in the various programs, and we’ve got waiting lists. We’re hiring more people for NRCS (Natural Resource Conservation Service). So, there’s a real interest there. I think we can get to yes.”

Using CCC Funding in Question

Regarding the CCC program, Vilsack said: “There’s probably a way that you can put some restraints or utilize the CCC in a way that generates some savings, but it’s just not $53 billion. Let’s get real about it.”

We then turned our focus on past remarks Vilsack has made that climate smart programs could be the next revenue stream for farmers. We told him farmers are in the prove-it stage and asked him for an update. His response:

“We’re beginning to see products that are actually generating value added. I use the rice product that was produced by Louisiana and Arkansas rice producers, getting a premium for producing climate smart. I’m told that there are dairies that are now lined up to get a value- added premium for potential export opportunities. I’m told that there are also a number of producers that are also now seeing increases as a result of climate smart practices. We’re seeing interest in sustainable aviation fuel. That’s a new market opportunity and we are in the process of working with Treasury and with the Department Transportation and EPA to craft guidance for the 45Z tax credit, which is really the significant tax credit for individual and bundled activities on the climate smart side that will allow us to qualify ethanol that’s produced from those crops to benefit from sustainable aviation fuel. That’s a new opportunity. We’re spending resources from the IRA to better align our tools to measure, monitor and verify the results of climate smart practices which are going to allow folks to qualify and participate in ecosystem markets. That’s a new revenue source. We’re seeing interest in renewable energy in terms of trying to do it in a way that doesn’t reduce productive agriculture, but it actually adds to productive agriculture. I was out in Colorado recently, hearing from folks who are now seeing solar panels being raised instead of three feet now 10 feet off the ground so that you can actually have dairy cows grazing underneath the solar panels. So, the innovation and creativity are there to increase the level of income that small and midsize producing farms can produce. At the end of the day, they’re going to have to figure this out because we can’t continue to lose farms.”

Senate Draft of the Farm Bill Includes FMD Bank, But Lacks Funding

Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:12:08 GMT

As expected, the leaders of the Senate Agriculture Committee released their draft of the 2018 farm bill on Friday afternoon. According to Committee Chair Sen. Pat Roberts and ranking member Sen. Debbie Stabenow, the bipartisan draft will provide a new level of certainty and predictably to support farmers and ranchers across the country.

The Livestock Subtitle of the bill creates a National Animal Vaccine and Veterinary Countermeasures bank. The draft directs the Secretary of Agriculture to make the maintenance Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) vaccine stockpile a priority.

However, no funds were earmarked for the new vaccine bank. The House of Representatives draft bill included a one-year funding amount of $150 million,

The full committee will consider the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 on June 13.

It is anticipated that Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell will place the bill on the Senate calendar prior to the 4^th of July break

A date has yet to be set by House of Representative leaders to reconsider the farm bill that was defeated in May. House Speaker Paul Ryan earlier set a July 22, 2018 deadline for the passage of the House bill.

Will Congress Pass a New Farm Bill in 2024?

Mon, 03 Jun 2024 18:25:19 GMT

The farm bill finally saw some movement in Washington last month, but the majority of agricultural economists still don’t think a farm bill will be passed until 2025, with some even saying it could be 2026.

The May Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor , a survey of nearly 70 agricultural economists from across the U.S., asked economists when they believe Congress will pass a new farm bill. Sixty-eight percent of the economists replied they expect it to be passed in 2025.

Nineteen percent said it could be in 2024, which is an increase from the April survey when zero ag economists said 2024.

However, some ag economists think the farm bill will be passed in 2026. Thirteen percent responded 2026 in the latest survey, which is in line with the results from last month’s survey.

“If a bill is not completed in 2024, the dynamics could be very different in 2025. Regardless of the election results, the upcoming expiration of various tax provisions is likely to put pressure on Congress to reduce, or at least not increase, spending elsewhere,” said one economist in the anonymous survey. “Unless the filibuster is eliminated, even a Republican Congress could find it hard to finance increases in spending on farm programs by limiting spending on SNAP. Thus, I expect smaller farm program changes than are currently being discussed.”

The latest survey also asked economists what are the most important changes for producers in the next farm bill, and what potential changes in farm policy are being overlooked. Economists shared nine potential changes:

Higher subsidy levels for area-based products.
The wild card is milk pricing system.
Ongoing trends toward more environmental regulation from USDA agencies, supported by progressive elements in Congress.
The focus has been on changes to reference prices, and potential additional funding for export markets could be an important change.
Expect increases in crop insurance premium support (subsidy) levels for higher coverage levels and for area products.
Commodity program changes will ultimately be modest, but will favor cotton, rice and peanuts. Despite that, the safety net will be more significant across the board in the next few years because of the recent price history and the moving average calculations.
Constraints on the Secretary’s CCC spending will affect administrative programs and proposals going forward.
Based on what has been released so far, it seems like reference price changes are going to be the big change that impacts producers. A potential change in farm policy that is being overlooked is the need for a base acre overhaul (not just voluntary).
Reference price increases will be the most important change.

What’s Next for the Farm Bill?

As Farm Journal Washington Correspondent Jim Wiesemeyer reported two weeks ago , the House version of the farm bill made it out of committee just before Congress broke for a week-long recess. The contentious House Ag Committee markup of a new $1.51 trillion farm bill began on Thursday, May 23, and went into early Friday morning with four Democrats joining all 29 panel Republicans in voting for the measure, bringing the final tally to 33-21.

There a couple different paths to move the bill forward, but nothing has been set. House Speaker Mike Johnson could bring it to the House floor once he’s certain there are enough votes.

House Ag Committee Chairman GT Thompson recently stated that of the 435 members of Congress, more than half have never debated or voted on a farm bill before. He called it a unique challenge that requires a lot of education to bring people up to speed.

However, Wiesemeyer also says it could go to the House Rules Committee first, and there, the bill faces a couple of roadblocks for passage, including not only getting enough Democrats to support the bill, but also finding the support of hard-right Republicans.

The Senate version is a different story, as the the Senate Ag Committee hasn’t released the complete bill, only a preview of what is in it. What are the key differences in both the House and Senate versions of the farm bill? Wiesemeyer broke it all down here .

As Farmers Look to Cut Costs for 2025, Machinery and Technology Could Take the Biggest Hit

A Margin Squeeze is Setting in Across Row-Crop Farms, and 80% of Ag Economists Are Now Concerned It’ll Accelerate Consolidation

A Contentious House Ag Committee Markup of a New $1.51 Trillion Farm Bill Passes Out of Committee

What You Need to Know About the Key Differences Between the House and Senate Versions of the Farm Bill

House Agriculture Committee Set to Mark Up 942-Page Farm Bill Draft

What You Need to Know About the Key Differences Between the House and Senate Versions of the Farm Bill

Tue, 21 May 2024 22:22:21 GMT

The House bill favors production ag while the Senate bill puts lid on food stamp/TFP, conservation and CCC program changes.

The House on Friday released text and other information regarding its 942-page farm bill, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024. (Here’s a link to text of the bill, the updated title-by-title summary can be found at this link and here’s a l ink to our Special Report on the measure.)

The Senate has not released text of its measure, only some summary details of what some charge is a “hodge-podge” of some 100 different bills from farm-state lawmakers.

Of note: We keep stressing that one of the keys in this debate will be official scoring of different aspects of the two bills. Those will show the House approach maintains the $1.51 trillion ten-year farm bill baseline, while the Senate appears to go over it by at least $5 billion and perhaps around $20 billion or more. So, the House approach is budget neutral, and the Senate is not. The official scoring will also show how the two chambers got to their total spending levels and how much funding is being made for various titles. That will answer the equity questions Democrats usually like to talk about on other issues, but not the farm bill.

The House Ag Committee on Thursday (May 23) will mark up the House farm bill. House Ag Chair GT Thompson (R-Pa.) told Agri-Talk on Friday that his panel will have the votes to clear the panel, but he has yet to receive any firm Democratic member commitments to vote for the House approach. But Thompson said those voting against it “do so at their own peril,” with many hailing from rural districts where a no vote could prove a political liability this fall.

House floor debate strategy, Thompson said, depends on what occurs during this Thursday’s markup session. Thompson said a panel vote along party lines would be “unfortunate,” but added, “we’ll still find a pathway to the floor.”

The real reason Thompson wants to get a markup session vote this week is that come June, new farm bill scoring forecasts will come from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and a new baseline would take additional time to work through, with likely different forecasts and implications for farm bill spending.

Democratic complaints in the House and Senate are unified and deal with House GOP efforts to reform the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP), but not take any existing funding from the program, nor for the SNAP/food stamp program. Thompson’s bill would restrict what factors can be considered in future updates of the TFP, which is used to set benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). A 2021 update conducted by the Biden administration resulted in a more than a 20% benefit (over $250 billion) increase, drawing criticism from Republicans over the methodology used and the result.

TFP changes would net $27 billion, House aides said. Some $12 billion to $16 billion would be “reinvested” in nutrition programs, while the balance would be shifted to other programs under the purview of the House Ag Sub./committee on Nutrition, Foreign Agriculture, and Horticulture, including the Market Access Program (MAP) and Foreign Market Development (FMD) programs that are set to see funding doubled.

Aides say the money freed up from the TFP should not be viewed as a cut or as savings given the CBO projections assume future updates to TFP along the lines of the exceptionally large changes brought by the 2021 revamp. They also said the changes would lock in current nutrition program benefit levels set by TFP, preventing a future administration from conducting an update that results in lower ones.

Democrats are also in ideological lockstep against taking off any guardrails they insist on relative to conservation program spending — the House farm bill would remove climate guardrails from $13 billion in Inflation Reduction Act (IRA/Climate Bill) conservation funding. House Republicans note the bill removes the IRA’s climate sideboards to restore the locally led nature of conservation programs and provide flexibility for States — even if the conservation practices involved are not deemed “climate-smart.” Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) has proposed keeping the funds focused on climate and within the four programs originally defined under the IRA: the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP), and Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP). Republican aides said Thompson wants “to make sure that these programs remain flexible and can answer whatever natural resource problems are occurring.” They said casting a wider net with the funds will put more focus on the quality of projects — climate-smart or otherwise — rather than using incentives to boost the volume of projects using the more limited set of climate-smart practices. House aides emphasized that shifting the IRA funds into the bill would result in a permanently higher conservation funding baseline. “This is a long-term investment that increases conservation spending in Title II (Conservation) by about 25% in perpetuity,” they said.

CCC issue. Dems are also opposed to the House GOP push to suspend USDA’s Section 5 spending authority under the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), a $30 billion borrowing authority fund (that Congress replenishes each year) that was used to pay for farmer aid during the Trump trade war with China, and billions of dollars USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack tapped out of CCC for various spending, including over $3 billion for “climate-smart” ag funding.

Some media say the House Ag bill has a significant funding gap, but sources say that is not the case. The issue: The CBO estimates that the suspension of Section 5 authority would save $8 billion over 10 years, but that is considerably less than the $53 billion needed to cover the cost of changes to commodity programs and even more for changes to crop insurance. Efforts to get CBO to alter their low-ball forecast led to Thompson asking and getting help from House Budget Chairman Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) who directly called CBO leadership about the matter. Says one farm bill contact: “Arrington has the power to do directive scorekeeping. Some farm bill analysts apparently do not understand this. I know that Arrington and staff are sure that everything is defensible. After Trump and Biden, does anyone believe that the Ag secretary will only use his discretion to spend less than $1 billion per year of CCC funds? If so, I’ve got a bridge to sell you.”

House aides said they expect the cost of the Title I moves to be scored at between $50 billion and $53 billion, and when combined with crop insurance updates in Title II, the price tag rises to around $90 billion.

Democratic leadership in meetings have been lobbying against House farm bill proposals. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) and Stabenow reportedly have urged House Ag Democrats to vote against the farm bill during this Thursday’s markup session.

Stabenow made her views known about the House farm bill in a statement, offering some hope but also listing major differences:

“I’ve had several conversations with Chairman Thompson encouraging him to get his ideas on paper so that we can move this process forward. I’m glad his Committee released the Food, Farm, and National Security Act, and it appears that our visions for the 2024 Farm Bill have a lot in common.

“I remain deeply concerned that his proposal will split the broad, bipartisan coalition that has always been the foundation of a successful Farm Bill. It makes significant cuts to the family safety net that millions of Americans rely on, and it blocks USDA’s ability to provide real time assistance to farmers through the CCC to address emerging challenges. Even with these shortsighted cuts, it is unclear to me how they will pay for their proposal.

“Democrats have made clear from the beginning that we will not walk away from our commitment to the most vulnerable among us or from our farmers battling the effects of the climate crisis every day. The Food, Farm, and National Security Act clearly crosses those bright red lines and turns back the clock on decades of progress for farmers and families.

“The only path forward is holding together our broad coalition of farmers, hunger and nutrition advocates, rural communities, conservationists, and the climate community. That has always been how we ensure that our country’s farmers, families, workers, and rural communities have the certainty of a bipartisan, five-year farm bill.”

House Ag ranking member hammers House farm bill approach. “The discussion draft released by Chairman Thompson confirms my worst fears: House Republicans plan to pay for the farm bill by taking food out of the mouths of America’s hungry children, restricting farmers from receiving the climate-smart conservation funding they so desperately need, and barring the USDA from providing financial assistance to farmers in times of crisis,” said House Ag Ranking Member David Scott (D-Ga.). “The funding proposal that the Chairman has put forward does a disservice to American agriculture because it doesn’t provide a path forward to getting a bill passed on the House Floor,” Scott concluded.

Of note: Scott’s comments regarding a floor vote seems to acknowledge the measure will clear the Ag Committee, but a warning that a failure to secure Democratic support could be insurmountable on the House floor.

We will have more analysis of the Thursday House Ag markup vote later this week.

COMPARING THE TWO FARM BILLS. The following is not an exhaustive review of both House and Senate farm bills, but a digest of some key issues in various titles. Check the House and Senate Ag Committee web sites for additional information.

KEY FARM BILL SAFETY NET PROGRAMS:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Higher Reference Prices: Increases reference prices for all eligible commodities under PLC/ARC between 10% and just over 20%, enhancing the safety net for producers. Also, by increasing the statutory reference prices, the maximum effective reference price is also increased.

(Farm Journal)
Annual Election Maintained: Keeps the annual choice between PLC/ARC programs.
Increased ARC Coverage: Boosts ARC coverage from 86% to 90% of benchmark revenue and raises the payment band from 10% to 12.5%.

(Farm Journal)

Source: Combest-Sell Associates

(Farm Journal)

Source: Combest-Sell Associates
Expanded Base Acres: Provides an opportunity to add new base acres to farms that have no base, or that have been planting in excess of existing base acres. This provision does not modify or impact existing base acres. Expands base acres based on 2019-2023 plantings exceeding current base, including non-covered crops up to 15% of total acres. Includes provisions to establish payment yields on the additional base acres.
Higher Pay Limits: 1) Ends the disparate treatment of pass-through entities and 2) Raises pay limits for producers that get 75% or more of their income from farming and eligible for a payment limit of $155,000 (up from $125,000) that is indexed to inflation, and including LLCs and other farm structures.
Increased Loan Rates: Increases loan rates with more flexible repayment options and allows redemptions during government shutdowns. Provides for a more substantial increase in loan rates for commodities that did not receive an increase in the 2018 Farm Bill.

(Farm Journal)
Textile Mill Assistance: Enhances Economic Adjustment Assistance for Textile Mills. To account for persistent inflation and support the domestic textile industry, increases the payment rate from 3 cents to 5 cents under the program.
Sugar Policy Improvements: Increases loan rates for sugar beets and cane, and makes other policy improvements. The House farm bill would increase the national average loan rate to 24.00 cents for raw cane sugar; sugar beets: 136.55% of the loan rate per pound of raw cane sugar. The 2018 Farm Bill increased the national average loan rate to 19.75 cents per pound for raw cane sugar and 25.38 cents per pound for refined beet sugar. These rates are adjusted regionally to reflect marketing cost differentials.
Makes improvements in U.S. dairy policy: Including restoration of the “higher-of” formula in calculating Class I fluid milk price and forward pricing authority. Increases cap on Tier I for Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) program to 6 million pounds. Provides opportunity to update production history for DMC. Provides a 25% discount on DMC premiums for operations that enroll in coverage for the life of the 2024 Farm Bill. Mandates biennial cost surveys to ensure make allowances accurately reflect the cost of manufacturing dairy products. Ensures the Dairy Forward Pricing Program does not expire.
Enhances standing disaster programs: Including the Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP), the Tree Assistance Program (TAP), and authorizes any future ad hoc assistance to be delivered via block grants to states. Increases payment rate of LIP to 100% of fair market value of the animal if the loss is caused by an attack by a federally protected species. Allows for a supplemental indemnity payment for the loss of unborn livestock if the loss of the gestating animal qualifies for assistance. Ensures farming operations are eligible for assistance under LIP, ELAP, TAP, Livestock Forage Production Program (LFP), and the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) if the operation derives 75% or more of its income from farming, ranching, or forestry.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Reference Price Increase: 5% increase in reference prices for crops not benefiting from the 2018 Farm Bill escalator, including rice, peanuts, and seed cotton.
Base Acres for Underserved Producers: Opportunity to establish new or additional base acres if recent planting exceeded base for underserved producers.
Prohibition on Payments: No commodity payments on land owned by persons/entities with an AGI of $700,000 or greater, affecting tenants who cash rent or sharecrop the land; lowers AGI eligibility for commodity programs from $900,000 to $700,000.
ARC/PLC Election: Maintenance of the annual election between ARC/PLC.
PLC Payment Band: Introduction of a 20% payment band on PLC, similar to the 10% payment band on ARC, which is maintained.
ARC Coverage Increase: Increase in ARC coverage from 86% to 88%.
Marketing Loan Rates: Authorization to increase marketing loan rates by up to 110% of their current levels based on production costs.
Textile Mill Assistance: Increases in Economic Adjustment Assistance for Textile Mills.
Sugar Policy Improvements: Undisclosed increase to sugar loan rates and other policy improvements.
Dairy Pricing Authority: Extension of forward pricing authority for dairy.
Livestock Disaster Programs: Improvements to livestock disaster programs (LIP, TAP, ELAP) and authorization for a standing disaster program, pending appropriations.
Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance: Modifications including eliminating AGI testing and increasing pay limits.

CROP INSURANCE:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Increases premium support under crop insurance for beginning producers and veteran producers for a 10-year period.
Encourages R&D on improved risk management tools for specialty crops.
Increases SCO and WFRP coverage to 90%, with 80% premium support under SCO.
Requires development of certain new policies to meet the risk management needs of producers.
Addresses private sector delivery concerns by re-establishing an annual inflation adjustment for A&O, eliminating the current flaw that harms specialty crop A&O, and by ensuring states with high losses the A&O necessary to accurately adjust the higher volume of claims in a timely fashion.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Increases premium support for beginning producers and veteran producers akin to the House farm bill.
Increases premium support for SCO at 80% and increases coverage level to 88%.
Includes performance-based discounts for climate and other environmental practices.
Expands native sod regulations from Prairie Pothole Region to the entire country.
Increases support for Whole Farm and Micro Farm insurance policies to serve small and underserved producers. Provides frequent review of rating and actuarial soundness of policies.
Prioritizes underserved producers and crops for new policy development.
Codifies the cease-and-desist order of RMA relative to cancelation of policies, etc.
Allows FCIC to bypass private sector delivery to deliver certain crop insurance policies.
Overhauls A&O, including providing a total A&O on all A&O, and
Provides for a seat at the table for agent groups in any new SRA renegotiation.

CONSERVATION:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Summary: Maintains and extends the new investment in the Conservation Title made under the so-called Inflation Reduction Act (IRA/Climate Bill) by making the new funding baseline permanent rather than subject to a Sept. 30, 2031, expiration as is currently the case. The funds may also be used for all conservation purposes rather than just climate initiatives, so the funds are available to all producers and program efforts are locally led.
CRP: 1) Maintains current 27-million-acre CRP acreage cap and requires state allocations be based on historical allocations. 2) Incentivizes enrollment of marginal lands by basing rental rates on land capability classification and paying high rental rates for land capability classes III through VII than other eligible lands. Class I and II soils would receive up to 85% of the county’s average rental rate, while class III soils would receive 100% of the county’s average rental rate. Classes IV through VII would go up to 155%. 3) Increases payment limitation from $50,000 to $125,000 per year.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Summary: (1) Maintains IRA dollars in permanent budget baseline; (2) permanently authorizes conservation programs (i.e., the programs would not require a farm bill to continue but would be treated effectively akin to SNAP); the Commodity Title would be the only farm bill title with significant mandatory funding that would require reauthorization every 5 years or so in a farm bill; (3) continues IRA-mandated climate strictures on funding and reorients RCCP, EQIP, and CSP to focus more on climate; (4) new mandatory spending —some believe about $13 billion above and beyond IRA funding — would occur with regard to CRP, ACEP, and CSP, and the bill also proposes to codify the $5 cover crop program where there is a state match.
CRP: Gradually increases CRP acreage cap from current 27 million acres to 29 million acres.

TRADE PROMOTION & FOOD AID:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Trade promotion: Doubles funding for the Foreign Market Development and Market Access Program.
U.S. Food Aid Prioritization:
* Emphasizes U.S. food donations over cash in international food aid programs.
* Requires at least 50% of aid to be actual U.S. food.
* Enhances USDA’s role in delivering U.S. food aid programs.
* Streamlines the procurement process for U.S. food to address immediate crises, ensuring effectiveness of U.S. food aid.

SENATE FARM BILL:

(1) Preserves current funding levels for MAP and FMD, (2) Preserves U.S. commodity donations as an option under U.S. food aid programs, generally at current levels.

FOOD STAMPS/SNAP, TFP AND DIETARY GUIDELINES:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Maintains current nutrition title programs, increasing benefits in certain cases.
Reforms the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) update such that the provision may not be used by the Ag Secretary in the future to increase SNAP benefits in the manner that it was done in August of 2021 (i.e., an increase of more than $250 billion) but also prevents the provision from being used to decrease benefits of that magnitude. Apart from removing the possibility of huge increases or huge cuts in the future, as well as a few instances where there are increase, SNAP benefits remain unchanged.
Reforms Dietary Guidelines for Americans process to remove the politics and emphasize good science and transparency.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Maintains current TFP process; and

Increases funding of an estimated nearly $8 billion for SNAP, TEFAP, Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program, Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program, Healthy Food Financing Initiative, and Community Food Projects.

ANIMAL DISEASE PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE EFFORTS, MODIFIES EFFORTS SUCH AS CALIFORNIA’S PROPOSITION 12:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Invests new funds in programs designed to protect livestock and poultry from catastrophic animal diseases.
Clarifies that states and local governments cannot impose, directly or indirectly, as a condition for sale or consumption, a condition or standard on the production of covered livestock unless the livestock is physically located within such state or local government.

* Provides clarity to national markets by ensuring producers must only comply with applicable production standards imposed by their own state or local government.
* Protects producers from having to comply with a patchwork of state-by-state regulations.
* Protects the rights of states and local governments to establish standards as they deem necessary, but only for those raising covered livestock within their own borders.
* Only covers production (excluding domestic animals raised for the primary purpose of egg production), and does not include the movement, harvesting, or further processing of covered livestock.
Requires USDA to report on its preparedness to support livestock producers and poultry growers facing economic losses due to animal disaster outbreaks.

SENATE FARM BILL:

New mandatory funding for historically underserved producers
New funding for local and regional food systems
New funding for programs that address animal diseases
Authorizes additional climate initiatives, including climate hubs
Creates a USDA Special Investigator for Competition
No comparable language regarding Prop 12, etc., that is in House farm bill

OWNERSHIP AND OPERATING LOANS:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Updates and increases limits under guaranteed and direct operating and ownership loans to reflect the modern costs of planting, growing, and harvesting a crop and raising livestock.
Includes provisions to ease securing credit for beginning producers.
Increases loan limits for the Farm Service Agency

* Guaranteed farm ownership loan limits would increase from $2.24 million to $3.5 million
* Guaranteed operating loan limits would increase to $3 million
* FSA direct ownership would go from $600,000 to $850,000
* FDA direct operating loans would go from $400,000 to $750,000
* Eligibility requirements for FSA direct real estate loans would be lowered to one year of experience

SENATE FARM BILL:

Updates guaranteed and direct operating and ownership loans on par with the House proposal except guaranteed operating loans are lower under the Senate version.
Seeks to ease securing credit for beginning producers.

BROADBAND:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Strengthens rural broadband by working to connect those areas still without service while improving those areas with service that is poor by requiring higher standards of providers in exchange for financial assistance.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Strengthens rural broadband and increases funding for the Rural Partnerships and Prosperity and Investments in Rural Infrastructure programs.

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Invests mandatory funding in agricultural research facilities and other research title initiatives.
Invests mandatory funding in specialty crop research initiatives.
Invests mandatory funding in 1890s land grants.
Establishes a commission to improve the accuracy and efficiency of NASS data collection and reporting.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Increases funding for the Specialty Crop Research Initiative, 1890s land grants, agricultural research facilities, and Foundation for Food and Agriculture Research.

RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAMS:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Renews and makes improvements to renewable energy programs, including the Rural Energy for America Program.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Includes extensions and modifications of the suite of energy title programs but the Senate summary does not provide great detail. The Senate bill does increase funding for the Biorefinery, Renewable Chemical and Biobased Product Assistance Program, Biobased Markets, and the Bio Preferred Program.

HORTICULTURE:

HOUSE FARM BILL:

Renews and makes improvements to horticulture programs, including new investment in the Specialty Crop Block Grant program, the Plant Pest and Disease Management and Disaster Prevention Program, Organics, etc.

SENATE FARM BILL:

Includes renewal of programs but also funding increases for Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, Specialty Crop Block Grant Program, Organics, etc.

Farm Bill 2023 Draft is Expected by Mid-September

Thu, 20 Jul 2023 17:40:37 GMT

The 2023 farm bill is expected to be drafted for a markup in mid-September. It might be considered by the House before some provisions of the current farm law expire on September 30, though demands for floor time are substantial, and the deadline is tight.

The bill will not likely include further work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) beyond those stated in the recently approved debt ceiling bill. House Ag Committee Chairman, G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) envisions SNAP as a workforce development program and prefers using incentives to shape participants’ shopping habits.

Despite the farm bill’s challenges, Thompson aims to achieve as many approving votes as possible from both parties. Further, he’s ensuring new representatives are familiar with the bill’s complexities before the vote, to avoid misunderstandings and flare-ups on the House floor.

Thompson, along with other members, is also seeking additional funding sources for the bill, but that will likely be the biggest farm bill hurdle that may trip up lawmakers.

Prepare for big changes in the farm bill

The committee says they plan a mid-September markup of a draft farm bill once the text is ready after August recess. The top four members of the House and Senate Ag committees urged CBO to ramp up staffing to address a backlog of scores for proposed changes to programs the upcoming farm bill, according to a letter .

The letter , addressed to the leaders of the congressional Budget committees and CBO director Phillip Swagel, said the Ag committees have “become increasingly concerned at the volume of outstanding requests” for scores related to the farm bill.

Lawmakers said they “expect several hundred more preliminary scores will be needed before each chamber, and eventually, the Congress, has a farm bill completed for final scoring.”

To address the concerns, the members said CBO and the Budget committees should “use all available resources and authorities to ensure CBO can reorganize staff to prioritize farm bill requests, hire or contract additional staff, or find available qualified professionals who can be assigned on detail.” They added that new hires or detailees should have experience in scoring farm bill-related programs.

Thompson also said that the timeline could be met in getting the bill done by the end of September if the Senate would follow the House schedule.

“There would be no need for an extension if the Senate would get their [farm bill version] done in the same timeframe I’m talking about,” he observed.

Farm bill bottom line

Thompson acknowledged on Tuesday that Congress would likely need to extend the existing farm bill due to delays caused by unrelated legislation. This marks his first explicit admittance that legislators will miss the imminent deadline, as some of the authorizations from the 2018 Farm Bill are set to expire by the end of September.

As his previous comments signaled, Thompson’s prediction seems to stem from assessing the Senate’s progress, being further behind in drafting its version of the farm bill than the House.

McConnell: Extra funding for farm bill ‘hard to come by'

Wed, 28 Jun 2023 20:55:07 GMT

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) today warned that the tight spending atmosphere after the debt ceiling debate will limit any additional money for the next farm bill.

“New spending is going to be hard to come by” for the farm bill, McConnell (R-Ky.) said at a University of Kentucky ag event on the reauthorization of the farm bill. The comments reinforce the idea that House and Senate Ag committees would need to remain at or below baseline spending levels for the around $1.5 trillion food and farm legislation; both parties have requested more funds.

Related story: Stabenow Proposes $20 Billion Farm Bill Solution?

Efforts by some farm-state lawmakers are looking at “efficiencies” in moving some funding around via various titles of the farm bill. Also, the House Budget panel is working with Ag Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) regarding crop insurance program ideas.

“I have proudly served on the Ag Committee since my first day in the Senate and understand exactly how important the Farm Bill is to ag communities across Kentucky,” said McConnell. “I’m glad the Committee’s Ranking Member, Senator Boozman (R-Ar.), joined me in Fayette County with Commissioner Ryan Quarles and Dean Nancy Cox to hear farmers’ priorities for the Farm Bill firsthand.”

Boozeman echoed McConnell in stressing the importance of continuous farm bill conversations as the bill is drafted.

“Stakeholder input is a vital part of the process. That’s why it is important to get out of Washington and hear directly from those on the ground who utilize farm bill programs to ensure their concerns are being addressed and their needs are being met.”

Related story: 3 Reasons the Farm Bill is Behind Schedule

Boozman highlighted the changed global context since the last farm bill in 2018, citing high interest rates, inflation, and input costs. He also emphasized the importance of risk management tools to ensure the ag capacity of the U.S. with the changing environmental and economic conditions. The ongoing war in Ukraine and potential animal pandemics were also noted as significant factors impacting ag.

Bottom line

Boozman expressed confidence in the process of crafting the farm bill, hoping for an effective outcome. He has consistently said he will not support a farm bill that doesn’t provide for an increase in the Price Loss Coverage program’s reference prices.

What was not said: McConnell didn’t comment on the possibility of running for re-election in 2026.

How Does the Farm Bill Funding Process Work?

Wed, 14 Jun 2023 19:52:40 GMT

The Senate and House Ag committees are facing delays in drafting the next farm bill, and it was expected to be the most expensive farm bill to date, clocking in at around $1.5 trillion.

However, Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow, (D-Mich.) said in a Senate Ag Committee hearing that there will be no new funding for the new farm bill. This means any increase in funding for programs will require reallocating money from other parts of the bill.

Funding is a primary reason the bill could held up, according to House Ag Chair G.T. Thompson, who is spearheading the farm bill. He shared a rundown of the farm bill funding process and implications on Wednesday with Jim Wiesemeyer, Profarmer policy analyst, and Davis Michaelsen, AgriTalk host,

Q: Do the current issues between House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the far-right House GOP members mean no additional funding for a new farm bill?

Thompson: “No, absolutely not. There’s no real bearing or implications that I see with a small group of folks who have really tried to hold the House hostage here. Speaker McCarthy has been a great ally in the farm bill process so far. He understands the seriousness, the logistics to make it happen, what’s needed. One important point is: We’ve never had Republican leadership rowing in the same direction when it comes to a farm bill as it now is with Speaker McCarthy, Scalise, Stefanik and Whip Emmer. We’re working together on everything from member education to future whip operations. As our Budget Views and Estimates letter said, there really is no better return on investment when it comes to federal funding.”

Q: You listed those figures and they’re good ones for the ag sector. Does that mean you’ve convinced House Speaker McCarthy for additional funding beyond the baseline because some mainstream farm groups say they’d rather have an extension than a baseline farm bill?

Thompson: “An extension is short sighted, and it really falls short of us making the refinements needed. I use a baseball analogy when it comes to the farm bill: We’re rounding first base, and that means we’re really doing a great job and probably beginning to wrap up the fact-finding, audit phase. We’re going to be on course to do this by what I’ve always committed to--completing a farm bill on time. We’ve made the case again that a successful farm bill enhances our farm safety net for our producers and a baseline funded bill does not mean that we can’t make program improvements. But I’m not rooting for the extension. We must invest in the safety net for our farmers and ranchers. I think the Speaker heard that loud and clear from those in attendance in Tulare, California, when we were at the world ag exposition.”

Q: What does the farm bill spending game plan look like?

Thompson: “We need to find new dollars. And I think one of the allies that we haven’t had is quite frankly Budget Chairman Jody Arrington (R-Texas). He’s a great aggie himself. I think there are efficiencies that can bring us some new dollars, just as we look at incorporating some of the disaster relief that we normally spend in an emotional way. Anytime you do that you don’t do it efficiently. The Senate usually puts in some additional legislation on must-pass pieces of legislation. It would spend a lot of money and not all that very smartly. By incorporating some of that disaster relief into crop insurance, we will enhance crop insurance, making it more attractive for more subscriptions. At the same time. I think we can do that by spending less money. We’ll bring new dollars in and that’s just one of a number of ideas we have when there’s a recognition that in certain areas, certain titles of the farm bill, we need to find some new dollars.”

Q: You can move around dollars even though Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) has said don’t go into one area to get more funding elsewhere?

Thompson: “The House will chair the farm bill this time around. But I think there’s dollars to be had and common sense tells us especially when we’ve been going through such an emotional time of spending, look at the trillions of dollars just in the past two and a half years. We’re talking trillions of dollars. You can’t tell me some of that was not spent emotionally and was appropriated. The funding is sitting out there in different corners of the federal government. And I’m talking things specific to agriculture.”

Q: Will some of those refinements include a voluntary update of base acres chairman, because soybean and other grower groups want that, while others don’t. But getting base acre data is like looking into a black hole trying to get accurate data. We understand your committee staff is working with USDA to get some information. Is that correct?

Thompson: “We definitely are working on a deep dive on all the information we need, and base acres is one of those areas. This is something you need to have good data to be able to do. Having base acres is like winning the lottery. What about those new young and beginning farmers that do not have base acres, but we’re relying on them to feed us well into the future for decades? Their base acres is something that has come up a lot in our listening sessions across the country and it’s certainly something we’re looking at right now. We really don’t have any conclusions at this point.”

Q: On food stamps, we know you’ve been wanting to expand language beyond what the debt limit package included… you want to expand career and technical education to those excluded from the work requirements for food stamps. Is that correct?

Thompson: “There’s a lot that we need to look at. I was pleased that the Speaker came to me and asked me what we should put forward in the debt ceiling. He wanted something that was going to perhaps save some money and at the same time, not blow up the farm bill process. We were able to accomplish that. The fact that we reduced the percentage of waivers that states can use. We zeroed out as of the first of the year… hundreds of thousands of waivers states stockpiled basically exempting anyone from having access to the SNAP employment and career and technical education benefits.

Q: What implications from the debt ceiling will spill over to titles in the farm bill, such as the biggest piece of the funding pie, SNAP?

Thompson: I was very disappointed in what the president and his people put into the debt ceiling package related to this. They basically excluded folks who are homeless, people who are veterans and young adults 18 year old… foster youth who all of a sudden overnight become adults and therefore some of them leave their foster homes with all their life belongings in a garbage bag. This is a pretty sad situation. They essentially put language into the debt ceiling measure that prevented anyone within those three groups of having access to the SNAP employment, career and technical education benefits that we provide by waiving that opportunity for them. That’s something we need to look at.”

Q: Will you seek to get language in the farm bill to curtail USDA’s ability to tap the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act for funding. House Republicans in the FY 2024 appropriations bill includes this language. Will that also be a topic in the farm bill debate?

Thompson: “It’s certainly going to be a topic. As you noted, the current proposed bill from the Ag Appropriations Subcommittee reinstated some guardrails that would limit the Secretary’s discretionary authority to use the CCC and then, quite frankly, that’s where it belongs. That could be very, very helpful if it survives the appropriation process. A recent GAO report reinforced the fact that the climate smart commodity pilot program should have gone through a rulemaking process. And Secretary Vilsack circumvented Congress and while I like working with the secretary, I was not happy with what happened there. From the Ag committee’s perspective, I’m concerned that using the farm bill to legislate sideboards around USDA interpretations of the CCC authority would impede the ability of a future Ag Secretary so we should exercise our oversight authority, and we are definitely doing that at this point.”

Farm Bill Will Not See an Increase in Funds

Wed, 07 Jun 2023 20:00:50 GMT

Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow, (D-Mich.) said in a Senate Ag Committee hearing that there will be no new funding for the new farm bill. This means any increase in funding for programs will require reallocating money from other parts of the bill.

Related story: 3 Reasons the Farm Bill is Behind Schedule

She expressed her disappointment at new savings from the debt ceiling bill not being allocated to the farm bill. Despite asking the House and Senate Budget Committee for even a few billion dollars, their requests were unmet.

Stabenow specifically warned the audience at the Nutrition Incentive Hub’s National Convening Tuesday that they should not expect additional funding for the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program, which aims to provide fresh produce to low-income individuals. She emphasized that a win in this scenario may look like preserving the current funding to maintain the program before moving forward.

Related story: Conservation and CRP Rates Discussed in Latest House Panel Hearing

Stabenow stressed she will not allow conservation funding from the Inflation Reduction Act to be redirected, highlighting the importance of addressing the climate crisis and mitigating risks faced by farmers.

3 Reasons the Farm Bill is Behind Schedule

Wed, 07 Jun 2023 17:00:00 GMT

The Senate and House Ag committees are facing delays in drafting the next farm bill, and it is expected to be the most expensive farm bill to date, clocking in at around $1.5 trillion.

The process is “behind schedule” judging by past experiences with previous farm bills. Neither of the committees have established a timeline for crafting the legislation, although whispers have a draft coming before the August recess, or no later than September.

1. Budget issues

According to Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow, (D-Mich.), there will be no new funding for the new farm bill. This means any increase in funding for programs will require reallocating money from other parts of the bill.

2. Debt ceiling negotiations

House republicans could push for more changes in the food stamp program. However, if that’s the case, I’m not as upbeat on the impact of the debt limit bill.

3. Updated CBO projections

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in February estimated the 2023 farm bill would come with a $1.5 trillion price tag, up from $867 billion in the 2018 farm bill. With no additional funding available, this will set the bill negotiations back.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy last week signaled that House Republicans would likely seek further changes in work requirements or other reforms relative to some programs. Previously, the 2014 and 2018 Farm Bills experienced delays, both due to conflicts over the SNAP program, which represents $4 out of every $5 in the legislation.

Senate Ag chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) has stated that the issue of work requirements is settled and will not be altered. However, the House Ag Committee plans to hold a hearing discussing “opportunities for modernization” of SNAP and other programs that are part of the farm bill.

Lawmakers Meet with Biden to Discuss Farm Bill 2023

Thu, 11 May 2023 18:31:17 GMT

President Biden invited a bipartisan group of lawmakers to the White House this afternoon to discuss the upcoming farm bill reauthorization. Invitees include Rep. G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.), Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.), and USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack.

Stabenow labeled the session as a chance to “have a broader discussion about the farm bill and all the implications for it,” and that it will show “we are working together in a bipartisan way.” She also noted it was a chance for both sides to share their priorities for the bill.

Thompson signaled he wants to hear a “commitment from everyone including the president that we will get this done and done in the manner I’ve been speaking about. Bipartisan, bicameral, on time and highly effective.”

Boozman said the session is a “step in the right direction” and he wants to see the discussion focus on “the fastest path forward” for the omnibus legislation.

Farm Bill Meeting Perspective

It’s always good to have a president’s attention on a big topic like the farm bill. It will be interesting to see if Biden/Vilsack detail any must-haves in a new farm bill.

Food stamp funding and implementation flexibility, conservation and climate-smart programs are key possible administration topics.

History has a lot of examples of how some White House officials wanted to take a more active role in a farm bill only to find that lawmakers write it, not the executive branch. However, a president must sign the omnibus bill and if it is vetoed, override votes are needed--a situation that has occurred before.

Ag Bankers Stress Crop Insurance, Farm Lending Link in Senate Ag Hearing

Fri, 05 May 2023 18:00:00 GMT

A Senate Ag subcommittee heard from agricultural bankers Thursday. Consensus: Crop insurance programs often make the difference in farmers being able to stay in business.

One of the bankers noted that crop insurance was critical since the safety net programs under the farm bill have become outdated with provisions linked to costs from 2012. The liabilities covered by crop insurance are “the element of crop insurance that allows farmers and ranchers to obtain credit, invest in their operations, to better market their crops,” a crop insurance agent from Mississippi told the panel.

William Cole, a crop insurance agent testifying on behalf of the Crop Insurance Professionals Association (CIPA), agreed, saying crop insurance was not only an important tool for farmers but provides stability to the wider rural business landscape.

“It’s so important to our small rural communities, not just the farmers relying on it, these lenders here rely on it heavily, and the tractor dealerships, the seed and chemical dealerships, so it’s the underpinning of all of our rural communities to a certain extent,” he told lawmakers.

An Industry Plea

Cole and other insurance industry representatives called on USDA to increase administrative reimbursements, which have not been increased for inflation since 2015. A cost-saving Standard Reinsurance Agreement (SRA) that USDA negotiated with the industry set minimum and maximum subsidy levels of subsidy in 2011 and adjusted them for inflation through 2015.

Regarding banking failures seen this year, Compeer Financial’s Jase Wagner said the impact in agriculture “is not real acute right now, it is around the edges.”

Other lenders noted impacts have not been seen in their regions, but they are monitoring conditions very carefully.

Many of those lending to ag can be small community banks and they have not made riskier investments like “megabanks,” according to Gus Barker, president of First Community Bank in Newell, Iowa. “We have not seen withdrawals of major deposits or anything like that,” he added.

A topic where lenders disagreed was a proposal from the Farm Credit System to allow its lenders to go beyond farmers and related businesses to financing things like community infrastructure. Those in the community banking side called for lawmakers to reject the proposal, arguing that goes beyond the scope of business the system was established for.

The lenders seemed to agree on a need to boost the lending limits on USDA guaranteed loans as lawmakers ready for the next farm bill.

Phillip Morgan, CEO of Southern AgCredit, who testified on behalf of the Farm Credit Council, and Barker both said the limits should be bumped to $3.5 million for guaranteed real estate loans and $3 million for guaranteed operating loans — from current levels of roughly $2 million.

“The price of land and inputs have just skyrocketed for us,” noted Barker, who said the bump would help accommodate some of those higher costs. Besides increasing the rate, he said ICBA supports indexing loan limits to inflation going forward.

Morgan said increasing the limits is especially important given the high levels of capital investment required for farmers to earn median income levels and would especially help young and beginning farmers.

Upshot

All the bankers agreed that the increased interest rates are going to have an impact on farm borrowers ahead.

“The rapid rise in interest rates over the last 12 months will impact every operator that we have,” said Morgan. “In some cases, we will have a number of producers who will face both higher operating line costs plus real estate interest rate costs.”

Still, Morgan said the Farm Credit System (FCS) is “very well positioned to be able to weather that adversity.”

New Conservation Funding and CRP Took Priority in Senate Ag Hearing

Thu, 02 Mar 2023 23:01:16 GMT

Another farm bill hearing took place Wednesday by the Senate Ag Committee . This time the focus was on conservation and forestry issues. Key topics include:

1. How USDA is planning to implement around $20 billion in new climate-oriented conservation funding from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

Ranking Member John Boozman (R-Ark.) frets that IRA provisions tying the new funding to climate might leave out certain types of crop producers, or certain regions where climate and carbon sequestration projects are not feasible.

Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Chief Terry Cosby said the agency’s methodology is based on data from across the country to ensure the programs are responsive to local and regional considerations.

2. Ways the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and other programs can be adjusted so they better serve a wider array of producers.

Farm Service Agency (FSA) Administrator Zach Ducheneaux said he viewed the program’s 27-million-acre cap as a goal. The Congressional Research Service estimates the next farm bill will include at least $57.5 billion for conservation and forestry programs.

Boozman noted current conservation programs have been successful because the efforts are “voluntary, incentive-based and locally led.” He said if federal officials guided program priorities it could threaten the success of conservation efforts.

“Conservation needs and the needs of our producers are as diverse as the crops they grow and the land that they grow them on. Our programs must reflect this reality and provide the flexibility our farmers and ranchers need,” Boozman said. “The prioritization of resource concerns must be left to the local level where producers decide how they can best address their unique and varied landscapes and needs.”

Commodity Programs Might See a 12% Cut in the Proposed $1 Trillion Farm Bill

Fri, 17 Feb 2023 19:59:17 GMT

The Congressional Budget Office unveiled its 10-year cost estimates (2024 to 2033) for existing farm bill programs on Wednesday, with a projected $1.5 trillion price tag, up from $867 billion in the 2018 farm bill.

Jim Wiesemeyer, Pro Farmer policy analyst, advises not to put too much weight in these estimates, as they are the reason the farm bill is out of date so soon after it is written.

“CBO’s farm bill forecasts are frequently well off the mark in either direction,” he says. “It’s a lot like USDA’s farm income projections in February for the year head. CBO looks out 10 years … good luck taking these forecasts too seriously.”

So, will this amount of money keep the programs ahead of their time? Some aren’t convinced. And it starts with the farm bill’s largest funded program—Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

SNAP Spending

Based on the 10-year period, SNAP spending is nearly 82% larger than what it was granted in the 2018 Farm Bill at $663 billion.

(Farm Journal)

A large portion of the increase is due to the administration’s re-evaluation of SNAP’s the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP), which resulted in a quarter-trillion-dollar increase in SNAP benefits from July 2021 to the May 2022 baseline.

In the most recent baseline, CBO increased its estimate of outlays for SNAP by $93 billion over the 2023–2032 period for “technical” reasons.

According to Sen. Boozman (R-AR), these reasons are rooted in “unacceptable” $250 billion spending by the USDA on TFP—which was supposed to have cost nothing—in the previous farm bill. Boozman made his sentiments known at a Senate Ag Committee farm bill hearing on nutrition on Thursday.

“Congress had no intention of your team spending that, and if you understood that was going to happen, you should have alerted Congress,” Boozman said to Cindy Long, USDA administrator. “How can we trust you going forward to give us advice? Spending a quarter of a trillion dollars from this committee is totally unacceptable.”

Related articles: How Long Does it Take to Write a Farm Bill?

While Boozman is adamant other program will suffer funding losses due to the “unsustainable” TFP increases in the coming bill, Senate Ag Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) says that’s not the case.

“Whether commodity or SNAP programs go up or down, these monies aren’t traded. So, cutting SNAP won’t add money to the commodity title,” Stabenow says.

The 2018 bill enacted policy for a “thorough” farm bill update that hadn’t been done since 1975, according to Stabenow. She says the TFP increases fall under that update umbrella.

“The Trump administration chose not to use that [update and funding] because that was 2018—they chose not to proceed,” Stabenow rebutted. “The Biden administration came in and chose to proceed with those funds, and I’m glad they did.”

The General Accountability Office (GAO) has since determined USDA failed to submit the TFP food basket increase to Congress as a rule as required by the Congressional Review Act.

Row Crop Safety Net

Disaster programs such as the Market Facilitation Program (MFP), Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP), Wildfire and Hurricane Indemnity Program Plus (WHIP+) and Emergency Relief Program (ERP) saw billions of dollars moved from taxpayers to producers in the past 10 years, with USDA reporting the largest spike in 2020 at $45 billion.

According to estimates from the House Ag Committee, CBO’s 2023 baselines compared to the 2018 farm bill will cause changes over the five-year period in:
• Commodity programs—12% decrease
• Conservation—19% increase
• Nutrition—82% increase
• Crop insurance—26% increase

However, CBO’s latest baseline provides no built-in ad hoc for these programs.

“If Congress doesn’t provide more funding/investments for Title 1, it puts pressure on farm-state lawmakers to continue the billions in ad hoc aid,” Wiesemeyer says. “Some analysts say reforming Title I would mean spending far less than continuing ad hoc assistance. If Title I is not made more effective, farmers will keep wondering if Congress will fund more emergency aid.”

Related articles: The Cost of a Farm Bill: 2023 Row Crop Priorities

GAO released a report stating that those wanting to change crop insurance program features will try to use to their advantage.

Here are the changes GAO says Congress could make to mitigate the programs costs:

• Reduce subsidies to high-income participants by creating an income limit.
• Adjust compensation to insurance companies to better align with market rates.

Livestock Safety Net

Dairy and livestock did, however, receive a safety net mention in CBO’s baselines.

Under the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) program, CBO forecasts FY 2023 payments will total $194 million in FY 2023, with those increasing to $248 million in FY 2024 and $266 million in FY 2025. For the rest of the period—through FY 2033—they are forecast between $196 million and $265 million, for a total of $2.531 billion.

Livestock disaster payments are expected at $621 million in FY 2023 and forecast between $562 million to $591 million over FY 2024 to FY 2033, for a total of $6.333 billion.

How Long Does it Take to Write a Farm Bill?

Tue, 14 Feb 2023 21:49:18 GMT

World Ag Expo kicked off in Tulare, Ca. on Tuesday with a farm bill listening session—hosted by House Ag Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.)—taking place at the event.

To set the stage for the hearing and bill, Chip Flory, AgriTalk host, sat down with Thompson for an update on where the farm bill 2023 stands. According to Thompson, most of the legislation has already been penned.

“We don’t need to rewrite the entire farm bill,” Thompson says. “We’re comfortable with many parts in the 2018 bill and there aren’t many tweaks or changes, instead things we need to protect and invest in more.”

Thompson’s words on the farm bill carry more weight than most congressional leaders. With the House taking the reins in writing the bill this year, he says the pen is “firmly” in his hand.

Related articles: Crop Insurance, Production Costs, ERP Among Key Topics at Senate Ag Farm Bill Hearing

But that doesn’t mean the Senate is sitting idle in the writing process.

Senate’s Seat at the Farm Bill Table

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Ia.) told Flory last week that Senate Ag Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) has already made “significant progress” in writing the Senate’s version of the bill.

“Our committee has been working on the bill since late last year as our members are out and about engaging with stakeholders,” Ernst says. “We’re compiling all that work to get a bipartisan bill written and to the finish line this year.”

Budget Estimates Released this Week

Farm bill discussions will continue momentum this week as the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) will release its 10-year cost estimate for current farm bill programs, including commodity supports and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which reserves 80% of farm bill funds.

Related articles: Stepped-Up Basis Leaning in Favor of Rural America on House Ways and Means Panel

Jim Wiesemeyer, ProFarmer policy analyst, advises against putting too much weight in these numbers.

“CBO’s farm bill forecasts are frequently well off the mark in either direction,” says Wiesemeyer. “It’s a lot like USDA’s farm income projections in February for the year head. CBO looks out 10 years… good luck taking these forecasts too seriously.”

According to Wiesemeyer, these estimates are the reason the farm bill is frequently out of date so soon after it is written.

Crop Insurance, Production Costs, ERP Among Key Topics at Senate Ag Farm Bill Hearing

Fri, 10 Feb 2023 21:00:25 GMT

A Senate Ag Committee hearing Thursday on the new farm bill raised a issue that is now evident: the Title 1 farm bill safety net can no longer deal with the current ag environment of rising production costs and relatively high prices for some commodities. USDA officials also faced criticism about its handling of Phase 2 payments via the Emergency Relief Program (ERP).

Other topics that have previously surfaced included Republican concerns about climate and conservation changes to crop insurance, while Democrats continued to urge expansion of the program to more producers.

Need for change

Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) said the 2018 Farm Bill largely lived up to expectations, but she suggested its successor must deal with several challenges: increasingly damaging natural disasters and accelerated costs of production.

“There are still gaps in the farm safety net as farmers continue to face global market uncertainty and climate-fueled weather disasters,” she said. “While many commodity prices are at historic highs, which is good, we also know that land and fertilizer and input costs are also near record highs.”

Farm safety net gaps

Ranking Member John Boozman (R-Ark.) said a focus on boosting nutrition and climate programs has obscured the fact that farm safety net programs like Price Loss Coverage (PLC) are ill equipped to deal with the current situation.

Related articles: Stepped-Up Basis Leaning in Favor of Rural America on House Ways and Means Panel

“Prices for many of our major commodities would have to drop sharply before the current Title 1 Price Loss Coverage safety net would start to work,” Boozman said, noting corn prices would need to plummet 46% before PLC would provide enrolled farmers any assistance. “By the time corn prices fell that low, the significant damage would have already been done.”

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) asked if USDA had looked at how the two safety net programs respond to inflation, such as adjusting reference prices — which trigger payments under the PLC program.

“I will tell you my legislative staff is always quick to tell me to emphasize that Congress writes the farm bill, and then that’s going to be important here too, obviously those reference prices are in statute,” USDA Undersecretary for Farm Production and Conservation Robert Bonnie told Tuberville. “When we talk to producers, there’s lots of concern about obviously rising input costs,” he added, but then emphasized USDA can only operate farm safety net programs as dictated by Congress.

USDA disaster aid implementation was both praised and criticized

Democrats and Republicans agreed with farmers who have complained about USDA’s methodology for payments under Phase 2 of the ERP, saying they do not adequately compensate farmers for their losses. “I appreciate USDA’s efforts through Phase 1 of ERP, which generally worked well in supporting producers with crop losses and [2020 and 2021],” said Sen John Thune (R-S.D.). “But the Phase 2 methodology… often does not accurately reflect crop losses that Congress meant to cover.”

Thune urged USDA consider reverting to the approach used in Phase 1 of the ERP effort for 2022 losses, a suggestion echoed by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who said farmers in her state “are grateful for the quick and effective approach taken during the implementation of ERP Phase 1,” but “a number of them have been less enthusiastic of the income tax-based approach taken during the rollout of ERP Phase 2.”

Bonnie said USDA’s approach on ERP Phase 2 focused on ensuring more producers had access to aid, but said if there are resources remaining after the effort the department may look at a shallow loss effort to address some of the concerns with Phase 2.

Related articles: The Cost of a Farm Bill: 2023 Row Crop Priorities

Bonnie said ad hoc programs like ERP have helped farmers facing disaster-related losses, but he stressed that federal crop insurance remains a key risk management tool, and that USDA has worked to expand the program to cover more producers.

Crop insurance and climate intersect

Boozman again raised a concern voiced by many Republicans about any move to use crop insurance to incentivize climate or conservation practices — which GOP members contend could undermine the actuarial soundness of the program and move it away from its core focus as a risk management tool.

“Can you commit to making sure that any efforts to expand the crop insurance programs are science based, peer reviewed, and protect the integrity of the program,” he asked Bonnie, saying a “one-size fits all” approach that elevates certain practices like cover cropping could disadvantage farmers in areas where those practices are not practical.

Bonnie responded that “with respect to crop insurance, everything we have to do has to be actuarially sound as we’ve got to maintain the integrity of crop insurance.” He said recent incentives offered to farmers for cover cropping have taken the form of premium rebates — not changes to premiums or the overall premium subsidy paid by the government.

Stabenow praised federal crop insurance, calling it “the number one risk management tool for producers.” However, improvements are needed, she said, promising improvements to the program, “including specialty crop growers, organic producers, beginning and diversified farmers.”

Regarding prevent plant coverage

Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) asked if USDA was looking at expanding prevented plant coverage under crop insurance, which pays farmers when they are unable to plant an insured crop due to extreme weathers. He noted eligibility currently hinges on a farmer being able to plant, insure and harvest crops in one of the four preceding crop years — known as the four-in-one rule — and some farmers in the West are at more risk of losing coverage due to prolonged drought conditions.

“One in four is very regionalized in a lot of cases,” acknowledged USDA Administrator Marcia Bunger. “So, for this coming year, we’ve made an exception for several western states to step outside of that one and four,” adding USDA would consult with stakeholders over the next year about a potential long-term solution to the issue.

Related articles: How USDA’s $2.8 Billion Climate-Smart Investment Might Impact Your Operation

USDA climate program efforts were raised by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who noted concern over USDA’s move to tap more than $3 billion from the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to fund its Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities (PCSC) effort that funds climate-smart ag pilot projects.

“Spending over $3 billion without input from Congress is a serious concern for everybody in the Congress,” Grassley stated.

Grassley then asked Bonnie if USDA had any plans to tap CCC for additional USDA programs. Bonnie reiterated what USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack has said — that PCSC falls within the CCC’s charter as it looks to expand and create new markets for ag commodities.

However, Bonnie ultimately said there were no plans for new CCC-backed programs under the Farm Production and Conservation (FPAC) mission area.

Senate Confirms Alexis Taylor as USDA Trade Under Secretary

Fri, 03 Feb 2023 01:49:11 GMT

The Senate on Wednesday confirmed Alexis Taylor for the role of Under Secretary of Agriculture for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs.

Background

An Iowa farm native, Taylor went on to serve in the U.S. Army Reserves before taking office as Oregon’s Department of Ag director since 2016. She also served on the 2020-2021 NASDA Board of Directors to sharpening states’ impact on federal ag policy.

In a Sept. hearing with the Senate Ag Committee, Taylor outlined her past positions and laid-out her main priorities, if confirmed for the role:

1. Food insecurity

2. Strengthen export markets

3. Expand market opportunities

What They’re Saying

Following the appointment of her as trade under secretary, Senate Ag Committee emphasized the “invaluable” role Taylor will play for USDA, farmers and rural communities in a press release.

“I am confident she will work to increase export market access for our farmers and ranchers while working to ensure our international partners abide by the spirit of our existing trade agreements,” said Ranking Member John Boozman (R-Ark.).

Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) echoed Boozman, saying Taylor is a “dedicated” public servant.

“Throughout this process, she has proven that she understands trade and agriculture and will be an invaluable asset to USDA as they help farmers and rural communities recover from the pandemic,” she said.

Ted McKinney, NASDA CEO, penned a letter in support of Taylor’s nomination prior to her taking the role. In the letter, McKinney underscored Taylors work in expanding market opportunities not only for Oregonians but for farmers and ranchers across the country.

“Alexis’ work as Under Secretary of Agriculture for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs is needed now more than ever as increasing trade is an important element to alleviating supply chain challenges and curbing inflation. We know her efforts are sure to have a meaningful impact on consumers and families nationwide,” said NASDA CEO Ted McKinney.

Two More Confirmations to Come

The nominations of Jose Emilio to be USDA undersecretary for food safety and Doug McKalip to be the chief agricultural negotiator at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative are still pending as holds remain on their nominations.

Signals surfaced they are likely to be lifted and cleared by the Senate before the end of the year.

More on policy :

USMCA as a Framework: New Talks Between U.S., Ecuador, Uruguay
Ag Commodities Transformed into New Bioproducts

Senate Ag Committee Chairwoman Will Not Run for Office in 2024

Fri, 06 Jan 2023 16:20:18 GMT

The House Ag Committee’s chairman seat flipped from Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) to Rep. Glenn Thompson (R-Pa) this term, following Republican’s taking control of the House.

The Senate Ag Committee looks to also have a leadership role change within the next two years, as Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) announced on Thursday she will not pursue re-election in 2024.

“Inspired by a new generation of leaders, I have decided to pass the torch in the U.S. Senate,” she said in a press release .

As the first woman to be elected for Senate in the state of Michigan, Stabenow says her years of “blazing trails and breaking barriers” in her home state are what brought her to the Senate floor in 2001.

But these final two years might prove the most important of all her time in office.

“For the next two years, I am intensely focused on… leading the passage of the next five-year Farm Bill, which determines our nation’s food and agriculture policies. It is also key in protecting our land and water and creating jobs in our rural and urban communities,” Stabenow says.

Upon her exit from office, Stabenow says she will “begin a new chapter” of serving Michiganders outside of elected office, while also spending time with family.

More on policy:

House Speaker Vote Could Extend into Coming Months
Policy and Payments: What Producers Can Expect in 2023

Senators Propose Eliminating Tax Liability for IRA Assistance for Distressed Farmers

Wed, 14 Dec 2022 17:47:41 GMT

Legislation that would remove the tax liability for distressed farmers and ranchers who received assistance provided in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) has been introduced by four members of the Senate Agriculture Committee. Currently, farm loan borrowers who are already at financial risk are facing tax liability on the IRA assistance.

Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), and Tina Smith (D-MN), all members of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, said in a release that distressed borrowers with qualifying USDA farm loans have already received nearly $800 million in assistance as part of the $3.1 billion for distressed farm loan borrowers provided through Section 22006 of the IRA. Those farmers are now facing the “imminent threat of hundreds of millions of dollars of IRS tax liability if Congress does not act.” The Family Farmer and Rancher Tax Fairness Act exempts these payments from federal income taxes.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was passed in August and signed by President Biden totaling roughly $770 billion. The IRA includes nearly $40 billion for agriculture, forestry and rural development. That includes nearly $20 billion in funding for the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP), Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP), Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), plus technical assistance. In addition, it includes $14 billion for rural development to support the development of renewable energy and spending on biofuels infrastructure. The bill also provides $4 billion to mitigate the impacts of drought in the Western Reclamation states, with priority given to the Colorado River Basin and other basins experiencing comparable levels of long-term drought.

“The critical financial assistance we fought to include in the Inflation Reduction Act is a lifeline for distressed farmers around the country,” said Senator Booker. “But now those same farmers are facing a burdensome tax liability. Congress needs to quickly cut these taxes to ensure that farmers who received assistance stay on the path back to financial stability.”

The legislation is supported by the following groups: National Farmers Union, Farm Action Fund, Farm Aid, Federation of Southern Cooperatives, Intertribal Agriculture Council, National Family Farm Coalition, Pennsylvania Farmers Union, Rural Advancement Foundation International-USA, Rural Coalition, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees, Justice for Black Farmers Group, Black Belt Justice Center, Black Farmers of Chilton County, Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association, Mississippi Minority Farmers Alliance, Reed-Wright Black Farmers Coalition, African American Agriculturalist Association, Brown Family Farm, Sustaining Environments Through Education and Economic Development, Inc. (SEED), Independent Black Farmers, African American Agriculture Association, Black Men in America, Cowtown Foundation, No Fear Coalition, Acorn8 and Coalition for Change, Inc.

The full text of the Family Farmer and Rancher Tax Fairness Act can be found here .

Research in Ag-Tech Top-Of-Mind in Farm Bill Hearing

Mon, 12 Dec 2022 20:03:24 GMT

The Senate Ag Committee met on Tuesday to hear testimony surrounding the need for ag research funding in the coming farm bill. According to Katy Rainey, associate professor at Purdue University who gave testimony, the hearing showed “signs of hope” for ag research.

Representing the American Seed Trade Association , Rainey underscored farm bill ag research and technology funding needs:
• Public-private partnerships
• Better program support in the National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS)
• Regulatory space that allows technology to come to market.

“There is a misconception that the private sector has the basic and applied research needs for row crops,” Rainey said in her testimony. “We rely on the support of farm bill funding and programs to ensure continued U.S. leadership as the provider of the best seed to the world.”

Outside of sharing her own message, Rainey heard four other testimonials as well as questions from senators. While the on-air discussion proved informative, Rainey says she was most intrigued by the conversations happening off-air.

“Senators are concerned with farmers’ bottom line, but they’re also concerned about global events,” Rainey says. “My takeaway from the senators is that there’s actually a hopeful outlook for global food security because there is so much technology. If we can support the research to get that technology to the field or to the plate that could dispel concerns across the board.”

Rainey is confident research funding will come through in the farm bill to deliver that technology.

View Across the Table

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) was also in attendance of the hearing. In Ernst’s view, there are two highlights from the hearing that deserve a spotlight on Capitol Hill.

1. Cybersecurity in Ag

“We know that our adversaries are targeting our farmers [through cyberattacks] and that does affect our nation’s food chain,” said Ernst in the hearing. “What we want to see is additional work in university ag systems through research, education and outreach activities.”

Chavonda Jacobs-Young, undersecretary for research, education and economics at USDA, said the agency is working to deliver on that additional work.

“We first need to raise the awareness for needs in cybersecurity,” she says. “We also need to train — and retain — the generation of professionals who can help us in this space. That involves high-performance computing, AI and cybersecurity.”

Jacobs-Young and Ernst plan to meet and establish a partnership, along with other groups recommended by Jacobs-Young, to make a gameplan for cyber-awareness in rural America.

2. Carbon Credit Opportunities

In the research corridor, Ernst feels there are carbon questions that still need answers.

“I hear about this all the time from Iowa farmers — they want to participate in carbon markets and create healthy soils,” Ernst says. “Getting the right type of information and translating that so producers can measure carbon on their farms and in their production activities is the bigger issue.”

Ernst and Young both agree the outreach chord needs to be reconnected to rural America, but Jacobs-Young isn’t sure what tactic will flip the ignition switch.

“It’s critically important to talk to producers about what they need and how that can be delivered in a way that they will be receptive to,” said Young in the hearing. “Adoption is part of the issue we have. We can develop wonderful technologies, innovations and tools, but we struggle with producers being receptive.”

For her part, Ernst says she’ll work to allocate farm bill funding toward such programs and communicate with Young on ways to relay the program messages to farmers.

Producers with carbon questions can also seek answers in Farm Journal’s Carbon Innovation Center .

More on farm bill 2023:

Rep. G.T. Thompson Lists His 3 Farm Bill Objectives
Opinion: The Value of Partnerships Between the Agriculture and Energy Industries

Senate Ag Committee

Will Congressional Inaction Force Farmers to Choose Between Health Insurance and Their Farm Budget?

Another Temporary Fix: Stopgap Bill Includes Farm Bill Extension — Is This the New Normal for Ag Policy?

Senate Votes 60–40 to Advance the Measure

Boozman: “Critical USDA Services Resume”

Is This the New Norm?

Key Farm Bill-style Provisions in the OBBB

Opposition to the Farm Bill Extension

Breaking Down the Biggest Differences in the Big Beautiful Bill Proposals and Potential Impact on Agriculture

Senate Agenda to Start 2025 Includes New Farm Bill

Ag Groups Say Stabenow’s Lame-Duck Farm Bill is Lame; Gets Lambasted for Timing, Details

Stabenow Finally Releases Full Text of Senate Farm Bill; Here's What It Means for Agriculture

Why John Thune's Election as Senate Majority Leader is Considered Beneficial for U.S. Agriculture

Expert Shares What Could Spark Progress On The Farm Bill

Ag Secretary Vilsack Has A Clear Message For Farm-State Lawmakers On Passing A New Farm Bill: 'Get Realistic'

Watch the full interview here:

Contentious Areas of the Farm Bill

Snap Overpayments?

Using CCC Funding in Question

Senate Draft of the Farm Bill Includes FMD Bank, But Lacks Funding

Will Congress Pass a New Farm Bill in 2024?

What’s Next for the Farm Bill?

Related Stories:

As Farmers Look to Cut Costs for 2025, Machinery and Technology Could Take the Biggest Hit

A Margin Squeeze is Setting in Across Row-Crop Farms, and 80% of Ag Economists Are Now Concerned It’ll Accelerate Consolidation

A Contentious House Ag Committee Markup of a New $1.51 Trillion Farm Bill Passes Out of Committee

What You Need to Know About the Key Differences Between the House and Senate Versions of the Farm Bill

House Agriculture Committee Set to Mark Up 942-Page Farm Bill Draft

What You Need to Know About the Key Differences Between the House and Senate Versions of the Farm Bill

Farm Bill 2023 Draft is Expected by Mid-September

Prepare for big changes in the farm bill

McConnell: Extra funding for farm bill ‘hard to come by'

Bottom line

How Does the Farm Bill Funding Process Work?

Q: Do the current issues between House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the far-right House GOP members mean no additional funding for a new farm bill?

Q: You listed those figures and they’re good ones for the ag sector. Does that mean you’ve convinced House Speaker McCarthy for additional funding beyond the baseline because some mainstream farm groups say they’d rather have an extension than a baseline farm bill?

Q: What does the farm bill spending game plan look like?

Q: You can move around dollars even though Senate Ag Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) has said don’t go into one area to get more funding elsewhere?

Q: On food stamps, we know you’ve been wanting to expand language beyond what the debt limit package included… you want to expand career and technical education to those excluded from the work requirements for food stamps. Is that correct?

Q: Will you seek to get language in the farm bill to curtail USDA’s ability to tap the Commodity Credit Corporation Charter Act for funding. House Republicans in the FY 2024 appropriations bill includes this language. Will that also be a topic in the farm bill debate?

Farm Bill Will Not See an Increase in Funds

3 Reasons the Farm Bill is Behind Schedule

Lawmakers Meet with Biden to Discuss Farm Bill 2023

Farm Bill Meeting Perspective

Ag Bankers Stress Crop Insurance, Farm Lending Link in Senate Ag Hearing

An Industry Plea

Upshot

New Conservation Funding and CRP Took Priority in Senate Ag Hearing

1. How USDA is planning to implement around $20 billion in new climate-oriented conservation funding from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

2. Ways the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and other programs can be adjusted so they better serve a wider array of producers.

Commodity Programs Might See a 12% Cut in the Proposed $1 Trillion Farm Bill

SNAP Spending

Row Crop Safety Net

Livestock Safety Net

How Long Does it Take to Write a Farm Bill?

Senate’s Seat at the Farm Bill Table

Budget Estimates Released this Week

Crop Insurance, Production Costs, ERP Among Key Topics at Senate Ag Farm Bill Hearing

Need for change

Farm safety net gaps

USDA disaster aid implementation was both praised and criticized

Crop insurance and climate intersect

Regarding prevent plant coverage

Senate Confirms Alexis Taylor as USDA Trade Under Secretary

Background

What They’re Saying

Two More Confirmations to Come

The nominations of Jose Emilio to be USDA undersecretary for food safety and Doug McKalip to be the chief agricultural negotiator at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative are still pending as holds remain on their nominations.

Signals surfaced they are likely to be lifted and cleared by the Senate before the end of the year.

Senate Ag Committee Chairwoman Will Not Run for Office in 2024

Senators Propose Eliminating Tax Liability for IRA Assistance for Distressed Farmers

Research in Ag-Tech Top-Of-Mind in Farm Bill Hearing

View Across the Table