WASHINGTON – Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack strongly criticized the draft farm bill authored by U.S. House Republicans on a call with reporters Wednesday, calling it damaging to the coalition that has traditionally rallied behind the farm bill. “This increases the real possibility that agriculture will not be acquired,” he said. Bill through the process. ”
The massive five-year bill governing agriculture, nutrition, commodity and conservation programs is scheduled for a raise starting Thursday morning in the House Agriculture Committee, chaired by Pennsylvania Republican Glenn “GT” Thompson. There is.
The bill is likely to clash with proposals in the Democratic-controlled Senate due to disagreements over anti-hunger and environmental protection programs. Additionally, the bill is certain to pass, although Republicans hold a narrow 217-213 majority in the House.
Vilsack expressed frustration over an eight-month delay in working on the $1.5 trillion package and said he had “deep concerns” about the policy proposals Thompson unveiled last week. Lawmakers battling for spending and the speaker’s post in the House of Representatives passed an extension last year to the 2018 Farm Bill, which expires Sept. 30.
“I appreciate the fact that people are working hard. I appreciate the fact that they listened to rural people,” said Vilsack, a former Iowa governor.
“But I think what we have is a situation where this proposal being advanced by Republican members of the House, Agriculture Committee, is actually designed not to have a path to passage. I’m worried…unfortunately, I think it’s designed to cause further delays as the route is congested. ”
Nutrition, disaster program cuts
Vilsack said he opposes provisions that would cut spending for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provides food assistance to more than 40 million low-income households.
The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the bill would save $30 billion over 10 years by restricting future updates to the food frugality programs that form the basis of benefit levels. Mr. Vilsack put the number at $27 billion.
“Historically, there’s been a coalition that has been central to getting the farm bill through and understands the importance of addressing nutrition programs and agriculture programs,” Vilsack said. “This is essentially a rift in the coalition that is absolutely necessary to get the farm bill through… The fact that we’re crossing that line really raises the possibility that we won’t be able to get the farm bill through.”
He said he also has problems with parts of the House bill regarding the Commodity Credit Corporation, which implements various agricultural programs.
This bill would limit USDA’s authority to use Section 5 of the CCC, tying USDA’s hands in responding to natural disasters that affect farmers and forcing USDA to rely on Congress to enact disaster assistance. It’s gone, Vilsack said.
“There is no guarantee that such a bill will pass,” Vilsack said, “and secondly, Congress often underfunds these bills, as was the case most recently with the 2023 disaster.”
He said Thompson was proposing to “essentially eliminate the Secretary of Agriculture’s ability to use the CCC, for example, in the face of a market-distorting natural disaster.” He also said he believes the bill overstates the savings that would be gained.
Vilsack said he preferred a farm bill proposed by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., calling it “more realistic” and “workable.” Stabenow, who has released an outline of her bill but not the text, includes provisions such as expanding eligibility for SNAP and other nutrition programs.
Chair defends proposal
In a statement after the call, Thompson pushed back against Vilsack’s comments, saying his bill would make a “historic investment” in agriculture.
“It’s clear from this 11th-hour pursuit that the Secretary, if left unchecked, is determined to use all available borrowing authority to circumvent Congress,” he said. “The Committee reaffirms Congress’ authority over the Commodity Credit Corporation, which will curb reckless administrative spending and provide funding for important bipartisan priorities in the Farm Bill.
“The sudden outrage over the use of the CCC as a reward is just the latest partisan attempt to divide the committee and slow the passage of the Farm Bill.”
In its press release on Wednesday, the committee also cited statements from several individuals praising Thompson’s proposal, including the president of the American Federation of Agriculture Societies, the CEO of the National Conference of State Legislatures, the CEO of the National Association of State Agriculture Departments and leaders of various commodity and trade associations.
