Please, lawmakers: attitudes, not platitudes about stalled Farm Bill

The election’s over, and even the introduction of the gang of flying monkeys nominated for cabinet posts is getting tedious (if terrible for the country).

Also maybe tiresome: The Farm Bill hasn’t progressed; people who eat and grow food must be interested and wonder, “More politicking?!” There are more than 2,600 farms in the Tri-County area, the USDA says – 72,000 in Illinois, the Number-5 state for exporting ag products.

The bill’s temporary extension expired Sept. 30; its Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) ends Dec. 20. (Merry Christmas!); if nothing’s done, U.S. agriculture will revert to a pricing model from before the first Farm Bill, in 1933.

Meanwhile, this summer Illinois Congressman Darin LaHood (R-16^th) responded to a reporter’s question about the Farm Bill by saying, “It is vitally important we have a Farm Bill that helps protect our farmers.”

Ah.

After House Ag Committee deliberations of the massive Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2024, U.S. Rep. Eric Sorensen (D-17^th) said, “The substantial increase in reference prices for Southern states does nothing to help my farmers back home. We need to level the playing field for Midwestern producers who are more susceptible to drought, flash flood and heat.”

Still, Sorensen’s didn’t vote against the measure, which passed committee 33-21 in May.

U.S. Rep. Nikki Budzinski (13^th Dist.) seems like a lawmaker who doesn’t just posture but gets into the weeds of the Farm Bill, votes against proposals, and explains why. One of three Illinois Democrats on the Ag Committee, along with Sorensen and Jonathan Jackson (1^st), plus Illinois Republicans Mike Bost (12^th) and Mary Miller (15^th), the Peoria native has continued to campaign to restore and improve the Farm Bill.

Enacted about every five years, Farm Bills affect how the nation farms and eats, and how we use and protect the land and rural America. The last Farm Bill had assistance for rural development and farm-loan aid plus four entitlements: income and price-support subsidies for farmers; crop insurance for disasters, conservation, and nutrition (including SNAP, formerly food stamps).

“SNAP is the only social benefits program available to all low-income Americans,” writes Northwestern University economist Dianne Whitmore Schanzenbach.

The House measure contains “important provisions regarding the Rural Energy Savings Program, funding and updates that support Illinois’ flourishing bioeconomy, a definition for sustainable aviation fuel, increased research facilities funding, a new Specialty Crop Advisory Committee and doubled funding for the Market Access Program and the Foreign Market Development Program,” Budzinski conceded. “But what sticks with me is that these strides are made alongside concerning changes to our farm safety net, and they come at the expense of hungry families and our climate.”

One beneficial change could be incentivizing crop-insurance policy writing in areas with high loss ratios.

“Unfortunately,’ Budzinski said, “they’ve decided to arbitrarily cut Illinois and four other Midwestern states out of these improvements,” but not Southern cotton, peanut and rice growers.

“I want to make sure that our corn and soybean farmers [are] getting their fair share,” she continued.

“I’m deeply disappointed that the Farm Bill released by Committee Republicans fails by harming our ability to respond to emergencies and deepening regional disparities in our safety net,” she added. “We’ve established safety net programs in the event of things like drought, natural disasters and trade instability. These aren't the only safety net programs weakened in this Farm Bill, [which] privatizes SNAP, pulling back nearly $30 billion from the program over the next 10 years.”

The House version also would seize $14 billion in Inflation Reduction Act conservation funding to transfer elsewhere.

The League of Conservation Voters also blasted the House bill, commenting, “House Agriculture Committee Chair GT Thompson caved to the demands of extreme MAGA Republicans.”

Indeed, the House Republican Study Committee, whose members include LaHood, also has recommended additional cuts: removing SNAP, eliminating “duplicative” crop insurance programs, stop funding National School Lunch Standards, eliminate the Rural Water and Waste Disposal Program account, and dismantle the bipartisan Bob Dole/George McGovern Food for Education program.

Budzinski, who last month won her second term on Capitol Hill, seems determined.

“I want to make sure family farmers have a seat at that table when the Farm Bill is being negotiated,” she said.

“Any farm bill that has passed over the last few decades has been done on a bipartisan basis,” she said. “That’s what I think we need to get to: coming back to the table, negotiating these sticking points and getting the bill done.”