Ag Committees Preview a Summer of Agricultural Policy

The season of summer blockbuster releases is finally here – this time in the form of dueling farm bill proposals! Last week saw the much-hyped release of House Ag Committee Chairman GT Thompson’s bill overview, as well as a very substantive release of a “starting point for negotiations” from Senate Ag Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow. Much ink has been spilled over the two tent poles of these proposals – agriculture conservation investments and any sideboards that may guide how they’re used, and nutrition spending and any limitations on future changes to the calculations that form the basis of what recipients receive each month from the SNAP program.??

In this post, I'm highlighting several areas within these proposals that didn’t get as much attention but may become pivot points on which swing votes get made or broken.??

• Dollar amounts: The scores of the current proposals are not yet public and will tell more, but right now it appears that neither proposal is aimed at sending money back to the Treasury. How will fiscal hawks react in our current political climate???
• Animal welfare: A complex issue that cuts across party lines – the House Republican proposal previews that it will clarify that states and local governments cannot impose a standard of production for covered livestock unless the livestock is located in that state or local area. Secretary Vilsack has stated that he thinks that the Supreme Court ruling upholding Prop 12 last year reflects an incomplete understanding of the pork market, however, multiple Senate Dems have made it clear that they support California’s right to make these rules.??
• Tying nutrition to health: The House Republican proposal notes that the bill will “create a stronger, more sustainable connection between health and federal feeding programs.” Will we see more fights like we saw in last year’s Approps package where Republicans tried to create a pilot to test what would happen if only “nutrient-dense” foods were available to SNAP customers??
• Realigning base acres: The Stabenow proposal suggests giving beginning farmers a chance to add base acres and the Thompson proposal would provide an opportunity to expand base acres to include producers who currently cannot participate in ARC/PLC – the first major expansions of this part of the safety net in 20 years – likely opening a Pandora’s box of questions, including just who has base acres now.?
• Competition: The Stabenow proposal would create a USDA Special Investigator for Competition and a Farmer Seed Liaison to expand competition in the industry, reigniting an old fight over who has jurisdiction in this space.??

There is still so much that we don’t know about the path forward here – how will Ranking Member Boozman respond as he crafts his priorities and response to this public proposal from Senator Stabenow? House Democrats made a counterproposal to the House Republican offer and rejected this proposal as not meeting their asks – what comes next and what will the Committee vote look like???

All this to say, bring your popcorn for the House Agriculture Committee markup expected at the end of May – it will be a must-watch!??