The dust hadn’t settled from the dozens of last minute amendment proposals, a cloture vote, and talks of delay last week when the Senate suddenly passed its version of the farm bill. Despite the storm of heated arguments earlier in the week, the support was overwhelming.
The farm bill, formally HR 2, the “Agriculture and Nutrition Act of 2018,” passed the Senate with an 86-11 vote late on Thursday evening, June 28. All dissenting votes came from Republican senators. Despite his vow the day before to block additional amendments unless the Senate removed a provision that would allow USDA funding that would promote agricultural trade with Cuba, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) also voted to pass the bill.
Prior to the vote, Pat Roberts (R-KS), chairman of the Senate Ag Committee, said, “The goal, the responsibility, the absolute requirement is to provide farmers, ranchers, growers and everyone within America’s agriculture and food value chain certainty and predictability during these very difficult times.”
He added, “This is paramount to many other concerns. It is not an exaggeration to say our nation’s food and fiber production capability hang in the balance with what we do here on this legislation. Let us get this done.”
“We are one step closer to providing farmers and ranchers a farm bill with the certainty and predictability they deserve,” Roberts said after the passage. “I am proud we have a strong, budget neutral farm bill with broad support.”
“The 2018 Senate Farm Bill proves that bipartisanship is a tried and true approach to getting things done,” said Ranking Member Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) in her joint announcement with Roberts.
“By working across the aisle, we crafted a farm bill that strengthens our diverse agricultural economy and all the jobs it supports in Michigan and across the county.”
Every five years, Congress passes farm bill legislation that sets national agriculture, nutrition, conservation, and forestry policy. The current legislation expires on Sept. 30, 2018.
Congressional differences
The Senate passage comes less than a week after the U.S. House of Representatives passed its version of the bill. After failing to pass the 2018 Farm Bill on the first attempt in May, representatives met again and narrowly approved HR 2 by a vote of 213-211. The vote was held up, in part, due to language involving immigration.
Now leaders from both the House and Senate will meet in conference committees to work out differences in language coming from each chamber. This could take time as the two versions of the bill differ on some key points, particularly regarding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
The House version would require able-bodied adults between the ages of 18-59, who participate in SNAP, to find at minimum a part-time job within one month of receiving benefits, beginning in 2021. The Senate bill does not add work requirements for SNAP recipients. The motion to table discussion on the matter was agreed to a few hours before the Senate passed its version.
There are also differences in funding for some areas of the conservation title, including changes to the Conservation Reserve Program. Details will also need to be ironed out regarding eligibility requirements for commodity program payments.
Immediately following the passage of the House version of the bill, House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D-MN) said, “The partisan approach of the majority has produced a bill that simply doesn’t do enough for the people it’s supposed to serve. It still leaves farmers and ranchers vulnerable, it worsens hunger, and it fails rural communities.”
He additionally said he was looking forward to conference with the Senate on its version, which he described as not being perfect, but praised for having avoided a “hardline partisan approach.”
“I look forward to working with conferees to produce a conference report both parties can support, which is the only way to get a farm bill enacted into law.”
Once the differences are worked out between both branches of Congress, the bill will be sent to President Donald Trump for his signature.
Checkoff amendment
Prior to passing the whole bill, the Senate voted down what has been called “the Lee Amendment” on a 57-38 vote. The amendment sought “to prohibit certain practices relating to certain commodity promotion programs and require greater transparency by those programs” according to the official summary.
The amendment was presented by Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT) and Cory Booker (D-NJ). It was identical to their proposed legislation S. 741, the “Opportunities for Fairness in Farming Act of 2017 (OFF Act).”
Heavily supported and lobbied for by the Humane Society of the U.S., the Lee Amendment would have limited the use of checkoff funds.
“The rejection of this amendment is a win for America’s cattle producers, who voluntarily created and continue to overwhelmingly support the beef checkoff system,” said Kevin Kester, president of the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, in the group’s response to the amendment’s defeat.
“Legislation like the Lee-Booker amendment is largely pushed by militant vegans and extreme political organizations that essentially want to end animal agriculture.”
Given how late the vote happened on Thursday, June 28, complete information about the amendments that made it into the bill was not yet available prior to WLJ’s print deadline. Look for more coverage of the farm bill online at wlj.net and in next week’s paper. — Rae Price and Kerry Halladay, WLJ editors
