The House Agriculture Committee approved its version of the farm bill (H.R. 6083) on July 12. The bill has not moved to the House floor for a vote because of funding debates over the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), better known as food stamps. The House farm bill would cut SNAP $12 billion more than the Senate version of the bill. The 2008 farm bill expired on September 30 and if no deal on a five-year farm bill is reached, Congress may have to pass a temporary extension of the 2008 farm bill during the lame-duck session.

Although both Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) publically stated this week that their chambers will act on the stalled legislation when Congress returns in November, neither leader provided details on how they intend to negotiate a final farm bill during a lame-duck session. Leader Reid said he would push the House for a five-year farm bill, while Speaker Boehner said the House would consider a multi-year measure or even an extension of the current law.

When they revisit the matter in November, negotiations will not be easy. The Senate passed a five-year farm bill (S. 3240) in June that would save $23 billion over 10 years while the House Agriculture Committee approved a five-year bill (H.R. 6083) in July that would save $35 billion over 10 years. House Republican leaders have not allowed floor consideration of the measure over disagreements among GOP members over the level of proposed reductions to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The House bill proposes $16 billion in cuts to the program over 10 years, while the Senate bill proposes $4.5 billion in cuts.  While House conservatives want much deeper reductions, most House Democrats do not support any cuts to the program and would be unlikely to provide GOP leaders the votes they need to offset lost Republican votes.

The letter urges House leadership to bring the farm bill to a floor vote in early September (the House Agriculture Committee approved its version of the farm bill, H.R. 6083, on July 12), or go directly to a conference with the Senate (the Senate passed its version of the farm bill, S. 3240, on June 21).

The letter also urges Agriculture Committee leaders to support mandatory funding levels for Rural Development in the new farm bill and outlines several rural development priorities that NADO and other coalition groups hope to see included in a final bill:

• The Senate bill organizes the Rural Development title into a more simplified format that is easier for rural stakeholders to understand and will ensure better program delivery by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The coalition urges conferees to support this approach.
• Sec. 3702 of the Senate bill makes rural development programs more focused on funding the strategic economic and community priorities of rural stakeholders. This is a critical policy change that will assist all rural communities.
• The House bill requires USDA to improve program metrics that will lead to better program evaluations and increased effectiveness of funding decisions. The coalition supports this policy change.
• Both the House and Senate bills require the application process to be streamlined for rural communities, people, and businesses, and this policy change should be maintained in a final bill.
• The Senate bill’s authorization of Technical Assistance funding for the Community Facilities Program is critical to helping communities build capacity to apply for sophisticated facilities projects.
• The coalition supports the set aside for local and regional food systems under the Business and Industry Loan Program that is found in both versions of the bill, but opposes the seven percent cap found in the House bill.
• The Rural Business Opportunity Grant Program and Rural Business Enterprise Grant Program are effective at leveraging local resources to create rural jobs. At a minimum, the functions of each program should be maintained in a final bill and the coalition supports the Senate authorization level of $65 million annually.

The disaster assistance measure was originally part of a one-year farm program extension (H.R. 6228) that House leaders hoped to approve before the August recess; however, that measure was pulled from the floor because it lacked enough support to pass.

Senate leadership has indicated that they will not take up a disaster measure before the August recess. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) has publically stated that the Senate will not pass the House drought assistance measure, but may instead use it as a vehicle to negotiate a multi-year farm bill. Click hereto view the full text of H.R. 6233.

Although the Senate already passed a five-year farm bill reauthorization (S. 3240) on June 21 and the House Agriculture Committee approved its version of the farm bill (H.R. 6083) on July 12, major differences between the two chambers’ bills are delaying further progress.

While the House Agriculture Committee bill would save $35 billion over 10 years, the Republican caucus does not support the overall cost of $958 billion with almost 80 percent of that funding directed towards the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps. Even though the committee bill reduces the SNAP program by $16.1 billion over ten years, House Conservatives say that the program should be cut by at least $33 billion, the level approved in a House budget reconciliation bill in May. House Democrats also oppose the bill, wanting to preserve the SNAP program.

In the Senate, Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has already stated that his chamber will not consider a one-year extension of farm programs, and that the House should consider the Senate-passed five-year measure.

While disagreement over the SNAP program will undoubtedly continue to stall farm bill reauthorization, the House Republican Study Committee (RSC) is strategizing on how to remove food stamps from the farm bill when Congress returns in September. RSC leaders are also hoping to convert food stamp funding from mandatory spending to discretionary spending, making it easier for Republican appropriators to reduce food-stamp spending in future appropriations cycles.  The RSC is the largest caucus within the House Republican Conference (164 of 240 House Republicans are members) and is made up of lawmakers who favor small government, low taxes, and reduced federal spending.

Although no agreement was reached on the farm bill or a short-term extension before Congress adjourned for the August recess, the issue will certainly be re-visited in September.

Like the Senate bill, the House draft legislation (FARRM) repeals or consolidates more than 100 programs.  According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the House draft would cut mandatory spending by approximately $35 billion from fiscal 2013 to 2022, which is $12 billion more than the CBO score for the committee-approved Senate bill (S. 3240). The Senate passed its bill on June 21.

The majority of savings from FARRM ($16.1 billion) would come from cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (formerly food stamps). An estimated $23.6 billion in savings from changes to commodity programs would be offset by an increase of $9.5 billion in spending on crop insurance, providing a net savings of approximately $14 billion. Much of the remaining savings (about $6 billion) would come from consolidating 23 conservation programs into 13.

Under the Rural Development title (Title VI of FARRM), 14 programs are eliminated and funding levels are reduced by more than $1.5 billion over five years, a 50 percent reduction in authorizations. In addition, the draft House bill includes only $50 million in mandatory funding, approximately $100 million below current levels.

In comparison, the final Senate bill (S. 3240) provided $150 million in mandatory funding divided among four Rural Development programs:

• Value-Added Producer Grant Program  (Provides $50 million)
• Rural Micro-entrepreneur Assistance Program (Provides $15 million)
• Water/Wastewater Backlog (Provides $50 million)
• Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (Provides an additional $35 million, bringing total BFRDP funding to $85 million)

The House draft measure reauthorizes the Intermediary Relending Program, the Rural Micro-entrepreneur Assistance Program, the Broadband Loan Program, the Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program, Rural Cooperative Development Grants, several community facilities loans and grants, and several Water and Wastewater Programs including the Water, Waste Disposal and Wastewater Facility Grants, the Circuit Rider Program, Imminent Community Water Assistance Grants, and grants to finance individual wells.  The draft also provides $50 million in mandatory funding for Value-Added Producer grants.

In addition, the draft requires USDA to develop simplified application forms wherever practical for rural development programs to reduce administrative burdens and make the programs more accessible to small, rural communities. The draft also directs USDA to update a previous study on rural transportation issues to provide policy makers with current data on the state of transportation systems which move commodities and processed goods throughout rural America.

Moving forward, NADO continues to work with committee staff on both the House and Senate Agriculture Committees, and with over 100 other organizations as part of the Campaign for a Renewed Rural Development to ensure that strategic investments continue to be made in rural America.  Click here to view a coalition letter signed by NADO which applauds House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-OK) and Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D-MN) for their leadership in moving the bill forward, but asks them to correct several issues in the Rural Development title of the bill.

Resources:

• Click here to view a draft of the House Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act (FARRM)
• A committee summary of FARRM can be found here
• Click here to view a letter from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas on the estimated spending effects of FARRM
• For additional information on the House Agriculture Committee markup scheduled for July 11, click here
• For more information on the Senate farm bill (S. 3240), including bill text and Senate Agriculture Committee summaries, click here
• On June 6, NADO and 185 other organizations, as part of the Campaign for a Renewed Rural Development, sent a letter to the Senate requesting increased investment in rural development. To view the letter click here

Every five years, Congress passes a bundle of legislation, commonly called the “Farm Bill” that sets national agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and forestry policy. The last Farm Bill was passed in 2008, and is set to expire this year on Sept. 30.

Among many policy changes, the Senate-passed Farm Bill ends direct payments, streamlines and consolidates programs, and reduces the deficit by $23 billion by cutting crop subsidies (which provide the majority of savings), conservation funding and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program “SNAP” program (food stamps). Specifically, the bill would terminate $5 billion in annual direct payments to grain and cotton growers and replace it with a revenue-protection plan that would offer “shallow loss” coverage for farmers who experience price and crop losses. The bill would also cut the SNAP program by $4.5 billion over the next five years.

Among the amendments, amendment #2445 offered by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) passed by a vote of 55-44 which would strengthen rural communities by providing $150 million in mandatory funding divided among four rural development programs:

• Value-Added Producer Grant Program  (Provides $50 million)
• Rural Micro-entrepreneur Assistance Program (Provides $15 million)
• Water/Wastewater Backlog (Provides $50 million)
• Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (Provides an additional $35 million, bringing total BFRDP funding to $85 million)

The House Agriculture Committee is expected to mark up its version of the bill July 11.  The House bill is expected to be $10 billion below the Senate measure.

For more information on S. 3240, including bill text and Senate Agriculture Committee summaries, click here.  On June 6, NADO and 185 other organizations, as part of the Campaign for a Renewed Rural Development, sent a letter to the Senate asking them to invest in rural development and to support Sen. Brown’s amendment.  To view the letter click here.