Farm Bill

House Passes 2026 Farm Bill: The Impact on U.S. Farmers

Thu, 30 Apr 2026 16:51:21 GMT

With a bipartisan vote of 224-200, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 7567 , the bipartisan Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, on April 30. In addition to extensive updates to food and agriculture programs in a budget-neutral package, this vote marks the farthest a farm bill has made it in Congress since the most recent reauthorization was signed into law in 2018.

After a series of floor debates and last-minute amendments, the bill now moves to the Senate with some notable changes, including:

Year-round E15 sales removed from bill to be voted on in two weeks
Late amendment includes language to strengthen the domestic supply of fertilizer
Pesticide liability protections were stripped from the bill

My amendment passed! Pesticide liability protections have been stripped from the farm bill. 🔥⚔️🔥
— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) April 30, 2026

“Working in Congress on behalf of our nation’s farmers, ranchers, and rural communities is an honor — even when the work requires debating the farm bill through the night,” says House Committee on Agriculture Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (PA-15). “I can think of no more important work than championing the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, and I am extremely pleased to see this bill pass out of the House of Representatives with a strong bipartisan vote.”

With a vote of 14 Democrats in favor, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 obtained the highest number of votes from the minority party on a House farm bill since 2008. Similarly, with over 96% of the GOP Conference voting in favor, this is the highest level of Republican support for a House farm bill in history, affirming the commitment of House Republicans to rural America.

“I especially want to thank all parties who were involved in the negotiations that allowed the farm bill to proceed to the floor and secure a future vote on year-round E15,” Thompson says. “Members of the Biofuels Caucus are tireless champions for rural America, and I look forward to joining them May 13 in advancing that important legislation.”

Swift Senate Action Needed

As the bill heads to the Senate for debate, Thompson reinforces that “farm country needs updated policy” that reflects current challenges in U.S. agriculture.

“The 2026 farm bill fills that gap,” Thompson says. “I look forward to seeing Chairman Boozman and the Senate make progress on this important legislation so we can get the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 sent to President Trump’s desk as soon as possible.”

U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, along with all of the Democrats on the committee, says the committee looks forward to working with Senate Republicans on a bipartisan Farm Bill that can be successful on the Senate floor.

“We have been clear that the Farm Bill must address the needs of American farmers and families,” Klobuchar says. “With a five-year high in small farm bankruptcies, the Farm Bill must address rising input costs, provide new opportunities for domestic markets, and fight for a trade agenda that works for everyone. Senate Democrats are committed to ensuring all states are treated equally by delaying the new SNAP cost shifts and addressing the needs of farm country.”

Pesticide Amendment Passes

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s (R-Fla.) highly debated bill passed the House, stripping the farm bill of pesticide liability provisions. Before the amendment, the bill’s original language reaffirmed EPA as the sole agency capable of determining the information listed on a pesticide label. Critics, including Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) advocates, worried the language would shield pesticide manufacturers from liability claims.

D.C. consultant Callie Eideberg, with the Vogel Group, saysthe provision’s controversy means the bill will likely have an uncertain future moving forward.

“This means that pesticide companies, the chemical companies, are now still going to be dealing with the status quo, dealing with different requirements from different states,” Eideberg says.

In a post on X, Rep. Luna reaffirmed her disapproval of glyphosate and other pesticides.

“I do not support giving blanket immunity to corporations at the expense of American families. Pesticides are linked to a 30% increase in childhood cancer and over 170 studies corroborate the evidence,” Luna says.

In a press release following the bill’s approval in the lower chamber, the Modern Ag Alliance, a group backed by chemical company Bayer and over 100 agriculture companies wrote, “Today, the House turned its back on the farmers who feed, fuel and clothe this country. By gutting common-sense crop protection provisions from the farm bill, lawmakers caved to anti-science MAHA activists instead of standing with those who grow our food.”

Iowa farmer Mark Jackson says it is “unfortunate” Congress could not give farmers support for chemical weed control products. Jackson said farmers should be allowed the “freedom to farm” and said glyphosate’s scientific approval process, and the product’s 50-year registration history make it a credible product for farmers to use.

“I think we need to rally around science, follow the science,” he adds.

Eideberg says as the bill moves to the Senate, the MAHA movement could continue to influence debates. She believes the smaller body of the Senate will bring a different dynamic to the issue.

“I think we’re going to see those MAHA influencers feeling very emboldened by this win today and pushing even harder in the Senate to get more of what they’re looking for,” she says.

Farmers Praise Passage of Farm Bill
Ohio farmer and National Corn Growers Association President Jed Bower says USDA programs are important to the success of corn farmers and rural communities, particularly as growers face their fourth year of net losses and struggle with high input costs.

“We look forward to working with our allies in Congress over the next two weeks to secure passage of the E15 legislation,” Bower says. “Thanks to continued efforts on this issue from our biofuel champions, Speaker Johnson promised a vote on E15, and we refuse to allow a handful of multi-million and multi-billion-dollar energy companies to derail our efforts. Allowing the year-round sale of E15 would help our growers by expanding ethanol sales while also saving consumers money at the pump at a time when fuel prices are on the rise.”

The National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) is looking forward to the Senate taking up the farm bill without delay as farmers face unprecedented challenges.

“The House-passed 2026 Farm Bill supports the farm safety net, preserves existing conservation programs that include opportunities for dairy and livestock producers, bolsters trade promotion programs while protecting common food names, recognizes the important role of dairy in nutrition, and supports animal health programs,” said NMPF President & CEO Gregg Doud. “All of these are important priorities to dairy farmers and the broader industry, and we appreciate the leadership shown by House Agriculture Committee Chairman GT Thompson and other dairy champions to get this legislation through the House.”

U.S. pork producers are praising a very significant section that provides “much-needed relief from the misguided California Proposition 12 ” in addition to expanding the Animal Health Protection Act to include improving animal disease traceability and requiring thorough documentation on USDA’s ability to protect producers from significant economic losses due to a foreign animal disease outbreak.

Prop. 12 is creating uncertainty for pork producers and raising costs across the supply chain. Congress has a role to restore regulatory clarity.

It’s time for a fix. #FixProp12

🎥 Video credit: @HouseAgGOP pic.twitter.com/lkAmG1bmAw
— NPPC (@NPPC) April 30, 2026

“Today’s House farm bill passage is a testament to the power of rural America when we stand up for our farms and future generations with a unified voice,” said Rob Brenneman, National Pork Producers Council president and pork producer from Washington County, Iowa. “We wholeheartedly thank our champions—House Agriculture Committee Chairman GT Thompson, Rep. Ashley Hinson, and others—for not backing down from the fight for what is right for rural America. He and congressional supporters on both sides of the aisle heard our plea to help America’s pork producers.”

Eideburg points out that opposition to the farm bill pork provisions in the House are coming from several fronts.

“First, it’s coming from animal welfare groups that want to see those requirements in place,” she says. “We want to see minimum standard requirements for gestation rates. This other opposition is coming from companies and farmers who have already complied with Prop 12 and they don’t want that requirement removed because then they are going to be a) at a competitive disadvantage and b) out a ton of capital investment that they made on their to comply.”

The bill reflects many of wheat farmers’ top priorities from modernizing farm credit and safeguarding international food aid programs to enhancing export competitiveness, says National Association of Wheat Growers (NAWG) President Jamie Kres.

“These provisions will help ensure America’s wheat farmers can remain resilient and globally competitive,” Kres says.

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) Senior Vice President of Government Affairs Ethan Lane appreciates how Thompson and House leadership took the time to listen to real farmers and ranchers.

“Instead of caving to attacks on the livestock industry from shell activist groups that impersonate real producers, a bipartisan group of lawmakers advanced a bill that will provide certainty and important policy fixes for cattle country,” Lane says. “We look forward to engaging with the Senate to advance this farm bill to the president’s desk.”

Industry Says This Farm Bill is Needed Now

National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) CEO Ted McKinney says this legislation supports farmers, ranchers and consumers while providing economic growth opportunities for rural communities. H.R. 7567 prioritizes provisions that strengthen local food purchasing programs, enhance international market opportunities, reauthorize the three-legged stool for foreign animal disease prevention and preserve the viability of the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program.

The American Veterinary Medical Association says the inclusion of the Healthy Dog Importation Act is just one of the many key veterinary provisions they applaud in the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026. This would improve importation standards to ensure a dog is healthy when imported into the U.S., which is especially important considering New World screwworm in Mexico continues to move closer to the U.S. border.

“The AVMA applauds the House for advancing a Farm Bill that will strengthen dog importation standards, fund and assess federal programs vital to veterinary medicine, and protect the country’s animal and public health,” says Dr. Michael Q. Bailey, AVMA president. “Enacting the Farm Bill is essential to advancing research into effective recruitment and retention strategies for veterinarians serving in rural and underserved communities. With the legislation now moving to the Senate for consideration, we look forward to working further with Congress and will continue to underscore the importance of including veterinary priorities in the final version of the Farm Bill.”

Now, Not Tomorrow

After voting in support of the bill, Congressman Rick W. Allen (GA-12) says, “Rural America needs a new Farm Bill now, not tomorrow. With today’s passage of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act, House Republicans have once again reaffirmed our commitment to American agriculture and delivered for hardworking growers and producers.”

Eideburg says funding for SNAP program will likely be a major fight in the Senate. The “One Big Beautiful Bill” shifted some costs within the program to state governments. She says the funding restructure and the combined potential vote to ban soda from SNAP could cause tension in the upper chamber.

She also says year-round E15 provisions, which were taken from the farm bill and punted for a vote in the House next week, could see as much opposition in the Senate.

“This really is a big hurdle to get E15, year-round E15 over the line.”

Don’t Be Fooled: Animal Rights Activists Pose as Family Farmers

Tue, 14 Apr 2026 16:43:41 GMT

Recently, several new activist groups have been using proclaimed farmers as prominent features in legislative campaigns aimed at preserving state “animal welfare” laws like California’s Proposition 12 . But who are these organizations – and are they really speaking for farmers?

Last fall, the Animal Agriculture Alliance noticed a trend of groups like Farm Action and Humane World Action Fund running ads claiming “family farmers” are in favor of upholding Prop12 and encouraging opposition to federal efforts to overturn the law. The ads claimed that Prop 12 “created a market that gives family-run farms like ours a fighting chance.”

Farm Action, a group with a purposely misleading name, is run by two former Humane World for Animals (HSUS) staff. The group endorses anti-animal agriculture legislation while claiming that they are working to “protect the future of family farms,” and organized a Congressional fly-in event last year to speak with legislators. Similarly, the activist-backed American Meat Producers Association, also led by a former Humane World for Animals (HSUS) staffer, was launched last year and has also been involved in similar efforts in D.C. to support Prop 12. The group said that they are working to “give a voice on policy issues and protect state laws that are good for family farmers,” while misleading lawmakers that these voices – heavily influenced by leadership that has strong ties to anti-animal agriculture organizations – speak for the entirety of producers.

These efforts in D.C. in support of California’s Prop 12 and in opposition to the EATS Act, now renamed the Save Our Bacon Act, were lauded by other anti-animal agriculture groups like Mercy for Animals, which wrote a blog in November about the “hundreds of farmers [sending] a strong message on Capitol Hill.” If you look deeper into the connections of these organizations, it’s hard to believe that these “farmers” would want to align themselves with groups that ultimately want to put all animal agriculture out of business.

In January, The Center for the Environment & Welfare issued a report breaking down some of the alleged “supporters” of California’s Prop 12 that were listed on a letter circulating on Capitol Hill. In the letter, Humane World for Animals had claimed that 5,000 farms across 39 states support Prop 12’s “animal welfare standards,” however, after a thorough review, it was found that this list included over 100 wineries, 150 honey producers, a goat yoga practitioner, and an urban garden – not a very accurate depiction of farmers that are actually impacted by these housing standards and supply chain restrictions.

Most recently, with the House Ag Committee passing a Farm Bill that includes preemption language related to Prop 12, we have continued to see animal rights activists scramble for support. Many groups have put out rapid “calls to action” on social media and through e-mail blasts asking their supporters to reach out to legislators. Some of these efforts seem to be aimed at major conservative commentators and policymakers, signaling attempts by activist groups to reach nontraditional audiences. A recent article in the LA Times claimed that “even conservatives are mad” about Proposition 12 and, while using an activist-provided stock photo from outside of the United States, referenced “intensive corporate-owned mega-farms.” In the article, an alleged farmer and “self-described conservative Republican” claimed that gestation stalls are not “proven to be good science.” This kind of content directly opposes the work that has been done in partnership by farmers, academia, and industry to make sure that pigs, whatever housing system they are in, are raised in environments that balance the best for their welfare and environmental sustainability, all while creating a nutritious, affordable protein for consumers.

It’s not hard to see why animal rights activists are trying to appear as representing farmers and ranchers. According to Gallup polling , farming and agriculture is America’s most trusted sector over the past 25 years. This new wave of organizations and tactics seems to be an attempt at distracting and confusing the public and policymakers, drowning out the perspectives of longstanding grassroots organizations who do count farmers and ranchers responsible for putting meat, poultry, dairy, eggs and seafood on American plates among their membership. It’s imperative that we look beyond the facades that these groups want you to see to understand their true intent. That second look at groups claiming to be aligned with farmers and asking for support could be hugely impactful to major legislative changes that seek to alter the future of our food supply.

Abby Kornegay is the director of issues and engagement for the Animal Agriculture Alliance.

House Ag Committee Starts Farm Bill Mark Up

Mon, 02 Mar 2026 16:24:41 GMT

The push to get a five-year farm bill has been renewed in the House Ag Committee as Chairman G.T. Thompson released language and mark up began on Tuesday.

One Big Beautiful Bill Omits Farm Bill Titles

While some question why a new long term farm bill is needed, a cross section of the nation’s farm groups explain the bill did not cover all the titles normal included in a long-term farm bill.

“We had a lot of the provisions of the farm bill that were included in the One Big Beautiful Bill — the increase in reference prices, some changes and improvements to crop insurance, etc. But there’s still some really important aspects of the farm bill that need to be passed,” says Steve Censky, chief executive officer of the American Soybean Association.

Sam Kieffer, chief executive officer of the National Association of Wheat Growers, points out the One Big Beautiful Bill did not touch the conservation title or reauthorize programs like the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Nor did the legislation deal with credit or expand farm loan limits.

“It is time to give our folks some certainty when it comes to conservation programs, when it comes to credit. The cost of doing business is drastically different than it was in 2018. And the 2018 Farm Bill was based off of data from three, four years prior. So, we want to make sure that we improve the credit section of of the farm bill, get that finished,” Kieffer says.

Farm Safety Net Needed

Kieffer adds a farm bill is also needed to provide certainty to farmers and offer a farm safety net in times of negative margins.

“There’s three years of market loss that our growers are struggling with at the moment, and they’re making hard decisions. Some of them are reducing acres, some of them are letting land go and there’s a price to be paid for that as well,” Kieffer says.

House Ag Committee Language Includes Prop 12 Ag Labeling Uniformity Act

Chairman Thompson’s farm bill language includes a Ag Labeling Uniformity Act, which covers pesticide registrations, according to Censky.

“Which means that the EPA is going to have preeminence when they make a health and safety determination of a pesticide, a crop protection product. You can’t have a state adopt different rules,” Censky says.

The House language also includes a national fix to California’s strict Prop 12 sow production standards and the possible patchwork of rules in other states.

However, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) would lose around $1 billion in budget authority over the next four fiscal years under the House Agriculture Committee’s GOP farm bill draft, according to calculations by the Congressional Budget Office. EQIP was essentially used as a funding source for other priorities in the legislation.

Include Food for Peace Program

Kieffer says NAWG also wants Congress to move the Food for Peace Program to USDA in the language of the Farm Bill.

“USDA knows how to deal with farm commodities. USDA is already in the business of engaging in food aid programs globally. They have the infrastructure. They have the personnel and they understand agriculture. So, the farm bill that is ready to be moved in the house here soon has a provision that would include that,” Kieffer adds.

Senate Preparing for Farm Bill Mark Up

While the Senate Agriculture Committee has not released farm bill language or scheduled a mark-up, chairman John Boozman told Agri-Pulse his committee will take up a farm bill of its own in the coming months. Timing will be dependent in part on how debate over a House version proceeds.

Will Congress Pass a Farm Bill?

Still there’s uncertainty about the appetite for passage of a farm bill in Congress according to Tim Lust, chief executive officer of National Sorghum Producers.

“A lot of these details honestly have been negotiated for a year or two, and it’s maybe little tweaks to them, but a lot of the main things haven’t really changed. It’s a matter of how do we get that across the finish line and find a way to get it signed into law?” he says.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Will Boost 2025 PLC Payments: Here's a Per-Acre Breakdown

Thu, 03 Jul 2025 20:11:17 GMT

Both the Senate and House GOP worked around the clock to get President Donald Trump’s massive tax bill passed this week. The One Big Beautiful Bill, which was more than 800 pages long, barely passed in both the Senate and the House, but is receiving high praise from many agricultural groups who argue the bill is a win for agriculture.

On Thursday, House GOP leaders overcame objections from even Republican lawmakers on provisions for SNAP, Medicaid and rural hospitals. All but two Republicans, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., voted for the bill, which passed 218 to 214.

.@SpeakerJohnson officially signs the One Big Beautiful Bill— sending it to @POTUS' desk to be signed into law.

Tax cuts, border security, energy dominance, and so much more are coming your way. 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/elzAg7s4LP
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 3, 2025

But for agriculture, tax provisions received high praise, including avoiding a year-end tax hike and eliminating the so-called death tax.

“America’s cattle farmers and ranchers are pleased by the final passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill. This legislation will protect family farmers and ranchers from the devastation of the Death Tax, it will avoid a massive year-end tax hike that could have put cattle operations out of business, it expands and protects many of the small business tax deductions that family producers rely on to save more of the hard-earned money, and it funds critical foreign animal disease prevention measures that protect cattle health,” says Ethan Lane, senior vice president of government affairs, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA).

The bill also provides $66 billion in new spending for farm programs. According to Agri-Pulse , that’s the largest infusion of new money into farm programs since 2002.

These are changes and enhancements many ag groups were pushing for in the next farm bill.

According to Farm CPA Paul Neiffer , a provision in the bill will pay the greater of ARC or PLC for the 2025 crop.

“Therefore, any anticipate increase in PLC payments would likely be the minimum amount paid to farmers for 2025 but remember none of these payments will begin until October 2026,” Neiffer explained in this in-depth analysis . “There will be a payment limit of $155,000 on ARC and PLC, but LLCs and S corporations will be treated the same as a general partnership.”

Based on Neiffer’s calculations, here’s how it will impact PLC. On average, it will add:

Corn: $22.52 per acre
Soybeans: $42.46 per acre
Wheat: $32.77 per acre
Sorghum: $9.90 per acre
Cotton: $93.05 per acre

Neiffer says while everyone’s PLC yield is different, he simply used an average yield to calculate these figures.

Potential extra PLC per acre payments. Click to enlarge.

(Paul Neiffer )

“You will note that based on June MYA prices, projected PLC payments are estimated at about $2.6 billion. Now, under the old law, all of the ARC acres elected would be removed from this table, however, remember that the new law pays the farmer of the higher of ARC or PLC so the first projected column shows what the minimum payment essentially would be,” Neiffer explains.

You can read Neiffer’s full and in-depth analysis here .

President and CEO of National Cotton Council (NCC) Gary Adams says this bill provides additional support desperately needed this year.

“The 2025 crop is going to be or shaping up to be the third year in a row that farmers will see both the market prices and the support levels below cost of production,” Adams says. “One of the reasons why this bill is so important is that for the reference price that applies to the PLC and ARC programs, those higher reference prices that are in this legislation apply to this year’s crop, and that is important because it will help if prices stay low, and stay where they are. This will put some additional support, in the grower’s pocket for the crop that they’re going to harvest this fall.”

American Farm Bureau applauded the work by Congress this week, saying, “More than half of farmers are losing money, so an increase in reference prices is desperately needed, and tax tools will help farmers and ranchers plan for the next season and the next generation.”

The bill now heads to Trump’s desk, which he plans to sign Friday at the White House.

250-Plus Ag Groups Ask Trump Administration To ‘Correct’ MAHA Commission’s ‘Activities’

Fri, 27 Jun 2025 19:01:08 GMT

Four weeks have passed since the Make Our Children Healthy Again: Assessment (MAHA report) was released. Since that time, the report has drawn criticism from farmers and various state and national agricultural groups that are focused on crop and livestock production.

One overarching concern the various groups and farmers cite, is what actions and practices will the MAHA Commission recommend in their follow-up report, which is due for release by Aug. 12, 2025.

Ag Groups Ask For A Course Correction

Concern about the MAHA report led 250-plus agriculture groups to ask the Trump administration to “correct” the direction of its Make America Healthy Again goals, in a letter dated June 13. The letter was addressed to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.’

Groups signing the letter included: American Farm Bureau Federation, American Soybean Association, National Corn Growers Association and the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives.

In the letter, the groups criticized the MAHA Commission’s “lack of transparency” in creating the report, adding it also did not allow any opportunity for public engagement.

“As a result, the report contained numerous errors and distortions that have created unfounded fears about the safety of our food supply,” the letter says. “Your leadership is greatly needed to correct the Commission’s activities, as well as create processes for greater transparency and input.”

In an article published by NOTUS, a digital news outlet, reporters noted the MAHA report contained a number of citation errors and “false claims” that could have been avoided with better industry input ahead of the commission’s report release.

Farmers Say ‘Use Some Common Sense’

The MAHA report, with regard to the use of crop protection products, specifically calls out atrazine, chlorpyrifos and glyphosate.

Elizabeth Burns-Thompson, executive director of Modern Ag Alliance, says the commission’s decision to call out specific chemistries, while no surprise, is concerning nonetheless.

“I think that’s something that every farmer, regardless of what part of agriculture you’re involved in, should be concerned about,” she told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory on Thursday.

Albert Lea, Minn., farmer, Brad Nelson, says he is concerned about the future of crop protection products but hopes “common sense” will prevail. He describes the finger-pointing at glyphosate, in particular, as bogus.

“We have used Roundup in the Midwest, myself personally, for 40-some years, and the retailers around me have done the same. And you know what, there’s no cancer,” Nelson says. “If it was a problem, it would be rampant. Hopefully common sense will rule the day, and the studies that have gone on for years and years and years will finally get believed.”

Burns-Thompson says she wonders whether the people involved in developing the MAHA report action plan understand how the chemistries in question have helped modernize farming practices – in some cases even helping reduce farmers’ reliance on pesticides and contributing to conservation farming efforts.

Her recommendation to other farmers at this point: talk with your local, state and federal government officials. Educate them on how the targeted chemistries support food production and consumers’ well-being.

“It’s important that we are reaching out to these individuals all the way up and down the political hierarchy, and inviting them out to our farms, talking to them about why we do things, and making it very practical, so that they understand not only the what, but the why and the how,” she says.

Where To From Here?

The 250 ag groups, in the June 13 letter to Kennedy, Rollins and Zeldin, have asked the Commission to hold a public comment period for all of its future reports and activities.

“… We urge the administration to formally include farmers, ranchers, and food producers in a collaborative stakeholder process throughout all future work of the Commission. We also advise the administration to create the opportunity for public comment on all future reports and activities of the Commission.”

For her part, Burns-Thompson wants more farmers at the table, able to share their perspective on what kind of practices the action plan should detail.

“What’s the voice of the farmer in all this? It needs to be part of this, right? It’s one thing to have the Department of Agriculture at the table, but I think there’s no such thing as too many farmer voices,” she says.

Catch the AgriTalk discussion with Burns-Thompson here:

Your next read: Is Food Inflation Heating Up July 4th Grills?

What's Missing in the Big Beautiful Bill When It Comes to Agriculture?

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 17:04:34 GMT

The fate of President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill is with the Senate. The 1,000-page bill includes nearly $4.9 trillion in tax breaks and budget cuts, and is also packed with priorities that cover agriculture . That includes one provision that will allow community banks to pass along lower interest rates to ag producers. However, not all of agriculture’s wants are in the bill.

American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) recently dug into the details of the massive bill being debated in Washington. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the House-passed version of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would increase spending for agriculture-facing programs by $56.6 billion over the next decade. Of that increase, $52.3 billion is for enhancements to the current farm safety net, including higher reference prices for ARC and PLC, and $4.3 billion is for trade promotion, livestock biosecurity, research and rural school funding.

According to AFBF, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act would increase agriculture-facing programs spending by $56.6 billion over the next decade (fiscal years 2025–2034).

(American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF) )

According to AFBF, here’s what the current version of the bill includes for farm bill provisions (Title 1, Subtitle B-Investment in Rural America):

Updates and funding for many core agriculture titles through 2031.
Enhancements to safety nets including ARC, PLC and Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) through the 2031 crop year.
Increases to reference prices for major covered commodities between 11% to 21% under the farm bill provisions of the bill.
Addition of a reference price escalator mechanism beginning in the 2031 crop year, which AFBF says would increase reference prices by 0.5% annually on a compounded basis. That increase is capped at 115% of the original statuary value.
Permits for farmers to add up to 30 million new base acres
Updates to ARC by adjusting revenue guarantee and the payment cap beginning in 2025. That would increase the coverage threshold to 90% of benchmark revenue, and increase the payment cap of 10% to 12.5%.
Enhancements to the DMC program and an increase of Tier 1 coverage eligibility from 5 million pounds to 6 million pounds per farm.

Proposed changes to the safety net

(AFBF)

Changes to Conservation Programs
AFBF’s analysis of the reconciliation bill shows long-term funding authority for USDA’s major conservation programs will continue through 2031. That includes the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) and Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP).

The levels are higher than what was included in the 2018 farm bill, but align with funding under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), making these programs permanent baseline versus new program expansions.

AFBF says the bill doesn’t retain all IRA-funded initiatives.

“For example, it rescinds $450 million in unobligated IRA funds that had been allocated for competitive forestry grants to non-federal landowners. According to the Congressional Budget Office, these adjustments collectively result in a net reduction of $1.8 billion in conservation spending over the next decade,” said the AFBF analysis. “The bill also renews smaller initiatives that were not funded in the last farm bill extension. This includes the Grassroots Source Water Protection program, which safeguards well water, and the Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive program, which rewards farmers for opening land to hunting and recreation. In addition, the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot Program, a vital initiative to combat over $1.6 billion in annual damages caused by invasive wild pigs, is extended with new funding through 2031.”

Focus on Trade
Another important element included in the House version of the Big Beautiful Bill includes establishing a new Agricultural Trade Promotion and Facilitation Program, which would be similar to Market Access Program (MAP) and Foreign Market Development (FMD), while also providing $285 million annually in permanent, mandatory funding through a separate account.

“Because the bill does not modify or replace MAP or FMD, which are typically funded at $200 million and $34.5 million per year, respectively, the new program effectively doubles USDA’s total trade promotion capacity,” said AFBF’s analysis.

National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) CEO Bryan Humphreys says the trade portion of the bill, as well as the tax provisions, are a “win” for livestock producers.

“We’re very pleased with what came out of the House version. We included in there were animal health priorities, some additional funding for MAP and FMD to promote our product internationally, and then, of course, the tax package was included in there on things like 179, bonus depreciation and estate taxes,” he says. “We are very pleased those were in there even if some of our other assets we need to be in the farm bill weren’t able to make it in there.”

Humphreys says the House version of the reconciliation bill includes funding for animal health priorities, including $233 million per year on animal disease prevention and response.

What’s Not in the Bill?
According to Humphreys, there’s one major priority that didn’t make it into the Big Beautiful Bill — and that’s provisions for Prop 12.

“We still need a farm bill to address Proposition 12 in California. At the end of the day, this is an issue that, as California continues to regulate outside of their borders, is not just a pork industry issue. It is an American agriculture issue,” he says. “We’ve been asking — along with the American Farm Bureau, Corn, Soy and others — for Congress to address this issue of California regulating farmers outside of their borders. And we still need that to be addressed.”

Humphreys says a farm bill is still needed to address Proposition 12 in California. But if a farm bill doesn’t happen this year, Humphreys says NPPC is exploring other options to do it.

“Even though there are other solutions for Proposition 12 and other potential vehicles out there that we’ll continue to explore with our friends on the Hill, at the end of the day, we still believe as American pork producers that America and the pork industry need a farm bill — a skinny version, a large version or whatever. We need to maintain that coalition not just for now, but for decades to come as well. We’re not ready to give up on that yet,” Humphreys says.

Renewable Energy In The Bill
Energy programs are another area of focus under the reconciliation bill. According to AFBF, USDA’s farm energy and biofuel programs are reauthorized through 2031 to spur renewable energy innovation in rural America. That would include the Biobased Markets Program, which is a program that promotes biobased products through federal procurement. It also addresses the Bioenergy Program for Advanced Biofuels, which provides payments to producers of biodiesel, cellulosic ethanol and other next-generation fuels.

Tax Provisions That Would Benefit Ag

Farm CPA Paul Neiffer calls the tax provisions within the House version of the bill “very favorable for agriculture,” rating them a 8 or 9 out of 10. Here’s why:

As of Jan. 20, farmers will have 100% bonus depreciation for the next four years
The Section 199A deduction that was at the 20% level will now be bumped up to the 23% level.
Cooperative deductions will still be included
Starting next year, Section 179 will increase to $2.5 million, up from $1 million
An increase in the gift tax exemption amounts to $15 million per individual and $30 million per couple, adjusted for inflation annually.

Neiffer say farmers who’ve built net worth through land or other assets, there’s a piece of the legislation that will also benefit them.

“The lifetime exemption starting next year will be $15 million, and it’s made permanent,” Neiffer says.

Lower Interest Rates for Ag Producers?

If the bill passes, agricultural producers could also see lower interets rates for loans. According to Jeff T. Kanger, president of First State Bank in Lincoln, Nebraska, there’s another provision that will allow community banks to pass along lower interest rates to ag producers and rural housing.

“The community banks have less tax exposure and can therefore pass along some interest savings to customers,” Kanger told AgWeb. “This provision is very important to a lot of our growers.”

It’s called the “Exclusion of interest on loans secured by rural or agricultural real property.” According to the provision text, it “allows for a partial exclusion of interest on certain loans secured by rural or agricultural real estate. Speciﬁcally, it allows for the exclusion of 25 percent of interest received by a qualiﬁed lender on any qualiﬁed real estate loan.”

What’s Next?
The Senate could roll out its version of bill later this week, which is expected to include changes from the House’s version that passed in May by one vote.

House Speaker Mike Johnson also said this week he still believes July 4 is a realistic target for passing President Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill.”

Big, Beautiful Bill: What's in it for Agriculture?

Thu, 15 May 2025 20:06:13 GMT

House Republicans are holding hearings this week about President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill.” The bill could benefit agriculture, including positive tax provisions for farmers, an extension for 45Z and an increase in farm bill reference prices. However, potential changes to SNAP and putting more of the burden on states are also raising concerns.

Pieces of the overall bill passed both the House Agriculture Committee and the House Ways and Means Committee this week. Committee markup is the first test the provisions had to pass. The provisions from each committee will then be inserted into the overall bill.

The House Ways and Means Committee’s portion includes making 2017 tax cuts permanent, eliminating the estate tax and reducing taxes on interest income for agricultural loans.

Farm CPA Paul Neiffer calls the tax provisions very favorable for agriculture, rating them a 8 or 9 out of 10. Here’s why:

As of Jan. 20, farmers will have 100% bonus depreciation for the next four years
The Section 199A deduction that was at the 20% level will now be bumped up to the 23% level.
Cooperative deductions will still be included
Starting next year, Section 179 will increase to $2.5 million, up from $1 million
An increase in the gift tax exemption amounts to $15 million per individual and $30 million per couple, adjusted for inflation annually.

Neiffer say farmers who’ve built net worth through land or other assets, there’s a piece of the legislation that will also benefit them.

“The lifetime exemption starting next year will be $15 million, and it’s made permanent,” Neiffer says.

The draft legislation also includes an extension of 45z tax credit. Established by the Inflation Reduction Act that was passed in 2022, it provides a tax credit for the production and sale of low-emission transformation fuels.

Increase in Reference Prices

On Wednesday night, the House Agriculture Committee passed its portion of the budget reconciliation package, but not without debate around farmer interests versus food stamps.

According to the House Ag Committee, the provisions increase Price Loss Coverage (PLC) reference prices to levels proposed last year. Those include:

$4.10 per bushel for corn
$10 for soybeans
$6.35 for wheat

“Essentially, they took the proposal from last year and are going to stick it in this bill,” Neiffer says. “We’re going to have about a 10%-to-20% increase. Since it was effective immediately, I thought it might apply to the ’24 crop, but Jim Wiesemeyer reached out to let me know it’s likely going to apply for ’25. The problem I have with that, they were talking about immediate help for farmers, which if they’re applied to ’24, they’d be getting the help in October ’25. Now, if it’s applied to ’25, their help isn’t going to be until October ’26, at the earliest.”

In the proposal, farmers would also see payment limits increase from $125,000 per individual or entity to $155,000, starting with the current 2025 crop year.

Those in favor of the increase in reference prices on the House Ag Committee argue this is a vital lifeline for farmers at a time of great financial need.

“Since 2019, SNAP costs have skyrocketed from $60 billion to $110 billion annually, an 83% increase, while enrollment has grown from 36 million to 42 million,” said House Ag Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA).

“The truth is our current farm safety net hasn’t kept up — it’s outdated and often it doesn’t even get triggered when prices drop,” says Rep. Zach Nunn, R-Iowa. “This is an investment that will provide predictability when prices fall and another provision to keep our crop insurance programs strong and intact.”

The Fight in the House Ag Committee Over SNAP

That includes a projected $290 billion cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over the next decade.

The plan also removes $290 billion from the program, redirecting some of that money to farmers by expanding support for commodities and crop insurance.

But Democrats on the committee spoke out against the cuts to SNAP benefits calling them a non-starter.

“The average SNAP benefit is about $6 per day. Let me say that again, $6 a day. You don’t build a life on SNAP. You build a bridge to the next paycheck,” says Rep. Angie Craig, D-Minn. “The cuts you are proposing to SNAP would be the largest rollback of an anti-hunger program in our nation’s history.”

Both the Committee’s portion of the legislation will also be rolled together into the bigger reconciliation package and must be reconciled with the Senate bill.

While it’s a long road until the complete bill is passed in Congress, Trump has said he wants this passed and plans to sign it on July 4.

Ag Groups React

The majority of ag groups support the tax provisions, saying this will be beneficial to farmers.

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) says the tax package must be approved by the House of Representatives as part of the reconciliation process.

“The Death Tax is a death warrant for family businesses and the top threat to family-owned cattle operations. NCBA has been working with members on and off the Ways and Means Committee for months to educate them about the needs of cattle producers and advocate for the tax provisions that are the most effective for cattle operations,” said NCBA President and Nebraska cattleman Buck Wehrbein. “This work would not have been possible without the broad participation we had in NCBA’s tax survey from producers, who detailed the struggles they have had with paying the Death Tax and what they would like to see in a broader tax package. This is a huge victory for grassroots advocacy and everyone that made their voice heard—from the producers that have not paid the Death Tax yet—to those that have paid it multiple times to avoid losing their livelihoods.”

Associations representing row crop farmers applaud the House Ag Committee’s push to adjust reference prices.

“We appreciate Chairman Thompson’s efforts to include key agricultural investments in must-pass legislation,” said Illinois farmer and National Corn Growers (NCGA) President Kenneth Hartman Jr.

However, the cuts to SNAP are a concern for others. The National Young Farmers Coalition, a group who says its vision is to create a future where farming is “free of racial violence, accessible to communities, oriented towards environmental well-being, and concerned with health over profit,” is against the proposed cuts.

“This budget proposal is a betrayal of the values that sustain our food system. These are not the investments young farmers need,” said Erin Foster West, Policy Campaigns Director of the National Young Farmers Coalition . “Instead of passing a bipartisan Farm Bill that builds resilience for farmers and families alike, this bill fast-tracks harmful cuts to nutrition programs that serve as both a safety net for families and a revenue stream for farmers. It trades long-term food security for short-term austerity.”

Rollins: First 50 Days Fighting for Our Country Has Been A Joy, But There's More Work To Do

Fri, 11 Apr 2025 18:56:39 GMT

USDA Chief Brooke Rollins is feeling pretty good about her first 50 days as President Donald Trump’s secretary of agriculture.

The Texas native, who just celebrated her 53rd birthday on April 10, is proud of what her team at USDA has accomplished since taking the reins from former Secretary of Agriculture and Iowa attorney Tom Vilsack.

But despite that progress, her list of issues to tackle soon is quickly filling up. Among those action items is deciding if American farmers will need another round of assistance payments later this year and if USDA headquarters should be relocated.

If Trump’s tariff plan proves successful, Rollins says we’ll be “shipping and selling more of our row crops than ever before.”

In that case, she doesn’t anticipate needing to sign off on additional USDA assistance payments for farmers later this summer. But there’s also a potential worst-case scenario where the agency may need to provide direct farmer aid, which also happened in 2019 during tariff disruption.

Rollins hopes to soon have answers to the rumor that USDA headquarters are being relocated. With more than 106,000 employees across 29 divisions, she says USDA is a “mammoth agency” and alluded that the agency may be better positioned to serve America’s farmers and ranchers in a location closer to the major crop and livestock producing areas of the country.

“Does it make sense for one of the bigger divisions to be in Washington, D.C.? Maybe not,” she says. “So, how do we get the government closer to the people we serve? That is one of the President’s key visions in realigning the entire government and returning the power to the people – by ensuring we have the right governance structure in place, and we’re not strangling the very people we’re trying to help with more regulation and more bureaucrats.”

Rollins also expects some reductions in the USDA workforce could be coming as the Trump administration and the Department Of Government Efficiency (DOGE) set out to “realign USDA around farmers, ranchers, foresters and ag producers first.”

Of course, the issue most farmers have top of mind today, besides low commodity prices and high interest rates, is the ongoing tariff saga.

Rollins says she can’t promise anything on that front yet, but she is confident President Trump’s negotiating chops will be able to finagle the best deal possible. Her USDA onboarding agenda included a deep dive into the global ag economy and tariffs – lessons that have proven rather enlightening for the former D.C. think-tank policy director.

“I’ll tell you what I understand now, and I’ve studied the numbers, the non-tariff barriers and what these other countries have done – not just to all American imports, but specifically to our farmers and our ranchers,” she says. “I’ve heard the President say multiple times just in the last few days how it’s unbelievable what these other countries have gotten away with for decades. And that’s what he’s changing (with tariffs).”

Your Next Read - China Increases Tariffs to 125%: What Ag Exports Will Be Most Impacted

New Food Security and Farm Protection Act Protects Farmers and Consumers From Government Overreach

Wed, 09 Apr 2025 16:24:08 GMT

After the U.S. Supreme Court left an open invitation for Congress to strike down California’s Proposition 12, U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) says it’s time to end this “unjustified and burdensome regulatory overreach” in order to protect family farms and bring down prices for U.S. consumers.

On April 8, Ernst and fellow Senate Agriculture Committee members Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) introduced The Food Security and Farm Protection Act that prohibits any state or local government from interfering with commerce and agricultural practices in another state outside their jurisdiction.

“Proposition 12 is dangerous and arbitrary overregulation that stands in direct opposition to the livelihoods of Iowa pork producers, increases costs for both farmers and consumers, and jeopardizes our nation’s food security,” Ernst says. “I’m proud to be leading the charge to strike down this harmful measure and will keep fighting to make sure the voices of the farmers and experts who know best – not liberal California activists – are heard.”

Pig Farmers Speak Out
This policy averts a disastrous patchwork of contradictory state-by-state farm regulations that would hit hardest small and medium-sized pork producers, says National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) President Duane Stateler, a pork producer from McComb, Ohio.

“U.S. pork producers have just suffered the worst 18 months of financial losses in history, and many farm families are contemplating whether they can pass along their farm to the next generation,” Stateler says. “We urge the Senate to take up this legislation immediately to provide us much-needed relief.” Learn more about Stateler’s story here.

Without certainty from the Food Security and Farm Protection Act , NPPC says there will be many consequences, including:

Widespread, damaging consequences for farmers and consumers alike.
Significant fees forced on producers to pay for outside regulators to audit their farms due to the whims of consumers outside their state’s borders.
Risk of putting farm families out of business by significantly increasing the cost of raising pigs.
Increased prices at the grocery store , as much as 41% for certain pork products.

A Dangerous Patchwork of Regulations
For reasons like these and more, bipartisan support for providing relief from a patchwork of state laws continues to grow with support from President Donald Trump, former President Joe Biden, and their respective Agriculture Secretaries Brooke Rollins and Tom Vilsack, NPPC said in a release.

“The United States is constantly faced with non-tariff trade barriers from protectionist countries, which hurts American agriculture’s access to new markets. The last thing we need is for states like California imposing its will on ag-heavy states like Kansas with regulations that will also restrict our ability to trade among the states,” Marshall says. “Midwest farmers and ranchers who produce our nation’s food supply should not be hamstrung by coastal activist agendas that dictate production standards from hundreds of miles away.”

And it’s not just the pork industry rallying around this legislation.

“Iowa soybean farmers are grateful for Senator Ernst’s leadership to address challenges Prop 12 creates for Iowa farmers,” says Iowa Soybean Association President and farmer, Brent Swart. “Not only do the increased costs of compliance threaten to put pork farmers out of business, Prop 12 increases the price of pork at the grocery store by as much as 40%. Higher prices for pork dampen demand for this high-quality protein which negatively impacts market demand for soybeans used for pig feed. This legislation gives us a chance to protect our farms, our livelihoods, and ultimately, families that need affordable food.”

Iowa Cattlemen’s Association President, Rob Medberry, points out that the Iowa Cattle industry has made it clear that government overreach and overregulation is incredibly burdensome to industries that provide safe, quality and sustainable products for the world.

“Proposition 12 has the potential to further dismantle the livestock industry with the lack of science-based measures. Proposition 12 has already proven to be an unfunded mandate with consumers unwilling to pay premiums for the products that must be compliant with the proposition,” Medberry says. “The inherent cost to become compliant is overbearing and the simple fact of dollars and cents does not add up.”

Opponents Strike Back
Opposition such as the Humane World Action Fund, formerly called Humane Society Legislative Fund, argue against this legislation.

“This bill would hand over sweeping power to a narrow segment of the agriculture industry, overriding the will of voters, dismantling state laws and eliminating hard-won voter-supported protections for the humane treatment of farm animals, food safety and farm workers,” says Sara Amundson, president of Humane World Action Fund. “Let’s be clear: this is a federal overreach that serves Big Pork, not the American people.”

Amundson claims this legislation has been driven by a small group of pork industry lobbyists.

It’s Not Just About Pigs
But Iowa Corn Growers Association (ICGA) President Stu Swanson disagrees.

“With barriers like Proposition 12 cutting off our ability to supply fellow Americans with Iowa grown pork, it’s not only those families who are being affected, but also our farm families here in Iowa,” Swanson points out.

Iowa Turkey Federation Executive Director Gretta Irwin adds that these inconsistencies create unnecessary burdens for farmers operating across state lines, hinder efficient production, and undermine well-established, science-based practices developed in coordination with industry experts.

Swanson says this is an issue for all of agriculture and one his organization plans to continue to work on with their livestock partners until it gets resolved.

“Consistent with its authorities under the Commerce Clause, it’s time for Congress to solve this problem by passing legislation,” Grassley says. “Our bill will end California’s war on breakfast and make sure delicious Iowa pork can be sold everywhere.”

Stay up to date on Prop 12 here.

Senate Overwhelmingly Confirms Brooke Rollins as 33rd Secretary of Agriculture

Thu, 13 Feb 2025 18:10:36 GMT

Brooke Rollins, President Trump’s nominee for Agriculture Secretary , was overwhelmingly confirmed by the Senate on Thursday. The vote was 72-28. Her confirmation was expected, as the Senate maintains its quick pace of confirming President Donald Trump’s key Cabinet positions.

“America’s farmers, ranchers and foresters need a leader at USDA who will be an advocate for their livelihoods and rural America and be a strong voice to address the pressing needs of our agriculture community. Brooke Rollins is that person,” Sen. John Boozman (R-AR), Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, said on the Senate floor prior to the vote.

Congratulations @USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins. We look forward to working together to serve rural America. pic.twitter.com/CIljFpYQZX
— Senate Ag Committee Republicans (@SenateAgGOP) February 13, 2025

“I congratulate Secretary Rollins on her confirmation,” said House Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-MN) in a statement following the vote. “Secretary Rollins begins her new role at a critical time for American agriculture. Family farmers are struggling with high input costs and low prices; tariffs are being proposed that will raise costs on American producers and American consumers; the agricultural workforce is being threatened; and Congress is behind schedule in passing a new, bipartisan farm bill. If we want to tackle these challenges in a way that supports family farmers and the communities they feed, we will need to work together. I look forward to building a strong working relationship with Secretary Rollins as ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee.”

Today, @SecRollins was sworn in as the 33rd U.S. Secretary of Agriculture. Here’s a snapshot of her first day at USDA! pic.twitter.com/GFpIYdnovF
— Dept. of Agriculture (@USDA) February 14, 2025

Rollins’ close ties to President Trump are viewed as a positive for U.S. agriculture as some say, “she has President Trump’s ear.”

When President Trump made the nomination announcement in November, he said her “commitment to support the American farmer, the defense of American food self-sufficiency and the restoration of agriculture-dependent American small towns is second to none.”

Important Issues in Immediate Focus

Rollins has some important issues to focus on immediately, including:

Reviewing the various USDA grants and other funding that remain frozen;
Getting ag disaster ($21 billion) and economic aid ($10 billion) payments made to eligible producers;
Working with NEC Director Kevin Hassett and others on the bird flu situation;
Monitoring the impact of Trump tariffs on the U.S. ag sector and any need for a farmer aid program
Advising key congressional members on a new farm bill;
Working with Treasury/IRS, EPA and Energy Dept. personnel on finalizing information regarding the 45Z program;
Informing President Trump and others about the impact on farm country from mass deportations relative to border security action;
Checking on and working with other agencies and departments regarding food aid;
Working with her new staff and other key USDA personnel as they officially come into USDA;
Getting ready for fiscal year 2026 budget matters for USDA;
Working with EPA and the Dept. of Energy on the 2026 RFS RVOs;
Dealing with a smaller USDA workforce via buyouts and other actions to reduce the number of government workers;
Addressing issues raised by the GAO relative to operation of the SNAP/food stamps program and other operational aspects of the program should they see any major alternations under budget reconciliation.

Rollins Gets Straight to Work

Rollins already held a meeting at 4 p.m. CT Thursday at USDA on bird flu, gathering who she said were “some of the most brilliant professionals I’ve encountered. Their insights were invaluable.” Rollins will be very visible in the days ahead, she said on X that she will be in four states, give six speeches, attend the National Farm Machinery Show in Louisville and “so much more.”

Today, I had the immense honor of being sworn in as the next Secretary of Agriculture by one of my heroes — and a true American judicial titan — Justice Clarence Thomas.

Being surrounded by my precious family as I took the oath of office is a moment I will forever cherish. pic.twitter.com/CrprXOuW7Z
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) February 14, 2025

A Look Back at Rollins’ Confirmation Hearing

During Rollins’ confirmation hearing in the Senate Ag Committee last month , she outlined several key priorities for USDA if confirmed:

Rapid deployment of disaster and economic assistance authorized by Congress.
Addressing current animal disease outbreaks.
Modernizing and realigning USDA.
Ensuring long-term prosperity for rural communities.

Rollins also clarified her stance on ethanol and RFS, distancing herself from past positions of the Texas Public Policy Foundation:

She stated the Foundation’s position on ethanol/RFS was written a decade ago and was one of 900 to 1,000 papers produced annually.
Rollins emphasized she did not author those papers.
While admitting to being a defender of fossil fuels, she insisted she would be “a secretary for all of agriculture” and a “champion for all fuels.”

Tariff Impact Aid for Farmers

During questioning, Senate Ag Committee Chairman John Boozman (R-Ark.) asked Rollins about her approach to working with President Trump’s trade agenda. Rollins responded she would prioritize working with the White House to address any challenges farmers and ranchers might face under potential tariff implementations.

Rollins committed to supporting farmers in the case of tariff-related harm:

She pledged to undertake efforts such as the Market Facilitation Program (MFP) via payments from the first Trump administration. MFP was part of a broader effort by USDA to assist farmers impacted by retaliatory tariffs and trade disruptions.
Rollins has consulted with former USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue about the implementation of such programs.

Rollins previously servied as the president and CEO of the America First Policy Institute (AFPI), a think tank established by former Trump officials to promote conservative policies.

AFPI has advocated for curbing foreign ownership — particularly from China — of U.S. farmland, an issue with bipartisan support in Congress. She served as the president and CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF) from 2003 to 2018, where she significantly expanded the organization and positioned it as a leading state-based think tank.

Economists Says Rollins is a Positive for U.S. Agriculture

How Farmers Size Up RFK Jr.

(Farm Journal )

80% of economists in the January Ag Economists’ Monthly say Rollins is a positive pick for U.S. agriculture .

“Rollins knows ag and has Trump’s ear,” said one economist.

“Her close connection the President and reasons outlined in the letter sent by 427 ag organizations and businesses on January 15th,” said another economist.

20% of economists say Rollins wouldn’t be positive for U.S. agriculture.

One economist said, “USDA focused heavily on under-served producers during the Vilsack era and my sense is that producers wanted the Secretary to come from a production ag view; whereas Rollins come at it more from an overall domestic policy view. Also, feel the administration isn’t helping her out with the Deputy Secretary nomination. Producers don’t see themselves in the upcoming USDA leadership.”

Ag Groups React to Rollins’ Confirmation

“Congratulations to Secretary Brooke Rollins on her confirmation to lead USDA. America’s pork producers are eager to work with Secretary Rollins to fix the multitude of problems caused by California Proposition 12 and ensure farm families have reasonable policies to pass down our farms to future generations,” said National Pork Producers Council (NPPC).
“On behalf of America’s farmer cooperatives, I would like to congratulate Brooke Rollins on her confirmation as Secretary of Agriculture today. In this role, Secretary Rollins will lead an agency that impacts the operations of every farm and ranch in the country and touches every local community across rural America. She will also serve as the voice of producers within the Trump administration at a critical moment. NCFC looks forward to working with Secretary Rollins on a range of issues within USDA that impact farmer co-ops and their members,” said National Council of Farmer Cooperatives (NCFC).
“Congratulations to Secretary Brooke Rollins on her bi-partisan confirmation to become U.S. Secretary of Agriculture. Clearly, President Trump has selected a highly capable and accomplished individual to lead USDA. Secretary Rollins’ commitment to returning USDA to its core mission of supporting all of agriculture is exactly the focus our country needs right now. I am confident that she will be an effective advocate for farmers, ensuring that President Trump’s policies reflect their needs and support the vitality of our rural communities,” said Mike Naig, Iowa Secretary of Agriculture.
“The National Association of State Departments of Agriculture (NASDA) congratulates the Honorable Brooke Rollins on her confirmation to lead USDA as the 33rd U.S. agriculture secretary. Rollin’s policy crafting experience and passion for opportunities for agriculture will contribute tangible impacts for American farmers and ranchers and people around the globe who enjoy U.S. food products.
NASDA is enthusiastic to work with the secretary on our priorities including increasing economic opportunities for farmers, ranchers and food producers, advancing a new farm bill, improving Americans’ access to nutrient-dense foods and ensuring American agriculture can continue to provide the most secure, affordable and nutritious food supply in the world,” NASDA said in a statement.
“Secretary Rollins understands the pain points the agriculture industry faces and has a plan to address these right away,” Hawkins said. “She understands the importance of a strong safety net and is prepared to work with Congress to implement a modernized Farm Bill. She will work with farmers to eliminate burdensome and costly regulations that hamper innovation, will spearhead animal disease prevention and mitigation, and will identify new export channels across the globe to support markets. Raised in rural Texas, Secretary Rollins knows the importance of strengthening our rural communities and making them a great place to live, work, and raise our families. We are thrilled with her bipartisan confirmation and welcome the opportunity to work with her to advance the agriculture industry,” said Missouri Farm Bureau President Garrett Hawkins.
Michael Dykes, President and CEO of the International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA), expressed confidence in Rollins’ capabilities.
“IDFA congratulates Ms. Rollins on her confirmation to lead USDA as the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture. We’re confident she will be a strong voice for the U.S. food and agriculture industry across the federal government. As USDA navigates a dynamic trade environment, we need Secretary Rollins’ leadership to expand U.S. dairy exports, support a coordinated response to animal disease outbreaks, and preserve dairy’s critical place in federal nutrition programs, including SNAP milk and dairy nutrition incentives, WIC and school meals. IDFA looks forward to working with Secretary Rollins at USDA to strengthen Americans’ dietary health, support farmers and the entire dairy supply chain in the production of wholesome food, and build a regulatory environment that promotes innovation, growth and food safety. These efforts will enable our industry to continue leading the world in the production of high-quality, nutritious dairy foods,” Dykes stated.

Congratulations, @BrookeLRollins on your confirmation to lead the U.S. Department of Agriculture @USDA . We look forward to working with you to be a strong voice for the U.S. food and agriculture industry, expand U.S. dairy exports, support a coordinated response to animal… pic.twitter.com/1pqhNrzDnc
— IDFA (@dairyidfa) February 13, 2025

Rollins and will now finish assembling her team at USDA. Here are the key appointments already made by President Trump:

Stephen Vaden: Nominated for Deputy USDA Secretary

Undersecretary Nominees

Richard Fordyce: Undersecretary for Farm Production and Conservation
Dudley Hoskins: Undersecretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs
Luke Lindberg: Undersecretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs
Michael Boren: Undersecretary for Natural Resources and Environment
Scott Hutchins: Undersecretary for Research, Education and Economics

Senior Staff Appointments:

Kailee Tkacz Buller: Chief of Staff at USDA
Preston Parry: Deputy Chief of Staff
Jennifer Tiller: Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary and Senior Advisor to the Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services
Dominic Restuccia: White House Liaison for USDA
Ralph Linden: Principal Deputy General Counsel
Audra Weeks: Deputy Director of Communications

Natural Resources and Environment Appointments

Kristin Sleeper: Deputy Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment
Tom Schultz: Chief of Staff for Natural Resources and Environment

Other Notable Appointments

Brooke Appleton: Deputy Undersecretary for Farm Production and Conservation
Tyler Clarkson: USDA General Counsel

10 Charts to Explain What's Shaping the Ag Economy to Start 2025

Fri, 07 Feb 2025 20:54:25 GMT

Last year’s initial net farm income forecast showed the two largest consecutive declines in net farm income history, the picture seems to be improving in 2025.

According to USDA’s Economic Research Service, the first net farm income forecast of the year shows net farm income is expected to reach $180.1 billion, up $41 billion from 2024, while net cash farm income is projected to hit $193.7 billion, a $34.5 billion increase. A staggering 34.5% increase in government payments, from $9.3 billion in 2024 to $42.4 billion in 2025, is the key factor behind the income boost.

Yet, when you look at the specifics, economists continue to be more bullish when it comes to livestock, specifically cattle.

Farm Journal’s January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

According to economists in the January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor survey, shrinking supplies and strong demand are the two major drivers of the historic run in cattle prices. And that’s why out of the 10 major commodities, economists are most bullish on cattle in 2025.

Recession in Row Crops?

Even with the expectation for improved net farm income, with a 34% increase in expected government payments, ag economists are still concerned about the current state of the ag economy for the row crop sector. Sixty-four percent of economists say the row crop side of agriculture is currently in a recession, 36% say it’s not.

Farm Journal’s January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

“A modest recovery in prices for some major crops has slightly improved the current state of the farm economy, and the outlook has brightened somewhat as well,” said one economist in the anonymous Monthly Monitor survey. “The prospect of economic assistance and disaster payments also improves the farm income outlook in 2025.”

“For row crop profitability, corn and soybean prices have seen some improvement recently offering some decent pricing opportunities, but some farmers may not have any old crop to sell now to take advantage of improved prices,” said another economist. “Without additional price improvement, there is still poor profitability outlook for new crop. But when you look at demand opportunities, there are a lot of unknowns about the future demand for trade and biofuels in the Trump administration. It could be positive or negative and will likely be impactful over the next 12 months.”

Those who argue agriculture is not in a recession, say it’s because:

$31 billion in direct payments and disaster aid passed by Congress in December.
The fact strong land values and rents have slowed their increases yet have not seen any significant declines

“We are not in a recession when farmers were still paying off pre-bought 2025 input expenses in 2024 to minimize 2024 tax bills, nor when land values and cash rents are holding as well as they are. There are producers that are over extended and all crop producers are making adjustments, but these are the ebbs and flows that the agricultural industry has managed for decades,” one economist said. “The expectations are changing to expect downside risk, and so people aren’t planning for the downside, and those that do are being penalized.”

Consolidation Concerns

Farm Journal’s January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

With concerns about a recession, the survey then asked economists if the current environment will accelerate consolidation, and an overwhelming number of economists, 86%, said yes.

Those economists who think it will force consolidation said:

“Probably mostly in the related industries as they try to consolidate to protect profit margins as producers maybe pull back on input choices or become much more price-conscious.”
“Farmers will think about exiting earlier, debt/income ratio”
“It’s only the most cost-efficient survive.”
“More people are exiting because they have little choice. Much consolidation would be happening even if the market situation were better.”
“Low margin producers will always be squeezed out by these type of times.”
“The ability of larger producers to spread costs over a larger number of acres.”
“Semi-retired farmers tend to call it quits during a down cycle. Farms that rent a substantial portion of their acreage find it increasingly difficult to sustain high cash rents.”

However, other economists argue the downturn hasn’t lasted long enough to force consolidation.

“If the current situation persists for several years, then yes. At this point, it’s too early and not severe enough,” one economist said.

The Main Factors Driving the Ag Economy

When asked to list the main factors driving the health of the ag economy right now, ag economists said:

Poor grain prices offset by improving livestock margins
Biofuel policies, tariffs, commodity prices
The potential for a trade war with China
South America’s crop
Ad hoc government payments
Improved grain ending stocks in the U.S.
Lower costs for fuel and interest

Trump’s Priorities and the Impact on Ag

The January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor released this week asked which of Trump’s priorities will have the most negative impact on agriculture. Seventy-nine percent said it’s trade and tariffs. Twenty-two percent said border security and deportation.

When asked which of the president’s priorities would have the most positive impact on agriculture, 54% of economists said cutting regulations, and 38% said tax changes.

January Ag Economists’ Monthy Monitor

(Lindsey Pound )

Tariffs on the U.S.'s top three trading partners could have a major impact on agriculture. The January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor asked economists which input is most at risk. The top answer was fertilizer.

“From a headline standpoint, it’s probably potash,” says Samuel Taylor, farm inputs analyst, Rabobank. “We get 85% to 90% of our potash from imports from the Canadian market. The residual is made up by Russia and Israel, in principle, with some other markets coming in.”

Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

Direct Payments to Farmers

As USDA noted in its 2025 net farm income forecast this week, Congress included economic aid for farmers in the continuing resolution (CR) . The “Economic Loss Assistance Program” earmarked $10 billion in direct payments for farmers, which is expected to improve the net farm income picture this year.

Farmers are still waiting for the payments from USDA, but it’s been called a “cash infusion” into the farm sector.

January Ag Economists’ Monthly Montior

(Lindsey Pound )

The January Monthly Monitor asked economists if those payments were needed in agriculture. Sixty-four percent said yes, and 36% said no.

In the survey, of the economists who said the payments were needed, some of the reasons why include:

Land values continue to climb
Input costs will remain elevated and inefficient farmers that overleveraged themselves the past couple years will remain in business
Delays producers cutting fixed costs, especially cash rents

But not all economists agree the payments were needed, warning of some unintended consequences, including prolonging what some economists argue are adjustments needed in the industry. In the survey, economists said:

“I think there could be some pushback when the longer-term farm bill comes up for authorization with budget hawks pointing to the $10 billion as a down payment of sorts.”
“This will slow some adjustments that arguably are needed. For example, land rents are generally higher than can be justified by current market returns. Getting approval for another round of payments in 2025 is far from certain, so unless markets improve considerably, there could be a renewed financial squeeze in 2026.”

Future of the Farm Bill

Farm Journal’s January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

The Senate and House leadership for both Ag Committees have made clear they want to see a farm bill early this year. Fifty-seven percent of economists think it will be the second half of this year before Congress passes a new farm bill. Twenty-nine percent say 2026, and 14% of economists still think Congress will pass a new farm bill the first half of 2025.

45Z and Impact on Farmers

In the Biden administration’s final days in office, USDA finally released an interim rule establishes guidelines for quantifying, reporting and verifying the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with the production of biofuel feedstock commodity crops grown in the U.S.

The Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) also issued preliminary guidance on the 45Z tax credit in January, which was created by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA/Climate Act), including the addition of sorghum as a crop that could qualify as a feedstock for a fuel that can claim the 45Z credit if certain climate smart agriculture (CSA) practices are followed.

The Treasury also released a notice that provides the emissions rate table for the 45Z credit.

Farm Journal’s January Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

The January Monthly Monitor asked if the rule becomes final, when it could impact farmers and ethanol producers. Fifty-five percent said it could impact them as soon as the second half of this year.

Trump’s Key Cabinet Picks

Rollins and RJK Jr. in Farm Country

(Farm Journal )

The future of 45Z is now up to the Trump administration.

Late last month, Brooke Rollins, Trump’s nominee for Agriculture Secretary , powered through her confirmation hearing in front of the Senate Ag Committee . The Senate still needs to vote on her confirmation, but no timeline has been given on when that vote will happen yet.

Eighty percent of economists in the January Ag Economists’ Monthly say if confirmed, Rollins is a positive pick for U.S. agriculture.

“Rollins knows ag and has Trump’s ear,” said one economist.
“Her close connection the president and reasons outlined in the letter sent by 427 ag organizations and businesses on Jan. 15,” said another economist.

Twenty percent of economists say Rollins wouldn’t be positive for U.S. agriculture.

One economist said, “USDA focused heavily on under-served producers during the Vilsack era and my sense is that producers wanted the Secretary to come from a production ag view; whereas Rollins comes at it more from an overall domestic policy view. Also, I feel the administration isn’t helping her out with the Deputy Secretary nomination. Producers don’t see themselves in the upcoming USDA leadership.”

However, economists aren’t as confident that Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Health and Human Services, will be a positive for U.S. agriculture. Ninety percent of the economists surveyed said no.

One economist said, “His disrespect for science is troubling.” Another economist weighed in by saying, “His positions on crop protection will be an interesting storyline to watch early in 2025.”

However, not all economists think RFK Jr. would be bad for agriculture. In fact, one economist thinks he could actually restore confidence in agriculture.

“Improving health outcomes, even if over a longer time period, should improve the consumer opinion of agriculture and be a net gain overall,” one economist said in the anonymous survey.

Senate Agenda to Start 2025 Includes New Farm Bill

Fri, 03 Jan 2025 20:06:18 GMT

As the 119th Congress begins, the Senate’s opening day promises to be largely ceremonial, in contrast to the dramatic House speaker election. Senators will convene at noon ET to swear in new members, hear remarks from Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), and address procedural matters.

Thune’s Filibuster Pledge
Thune will reaffirm his commitment to preserving the legislative filibuster, emphasizing its role in maintaining the Senate’s deliberative nature. This stance may clash with potential calls from President-elect Trump to abolish the filibuster, as he did during his first term.

Upcoming GOP Agenda Includes New Farm Bill
Thune will outline plans to pass individual appropriations bills, a farm bill, and focus on regular order and extended floor debates. The GOP’s initial reconciliation package, targeting border security, energy, and defense, could test the filibuster’s resilience.

Democratic Priorities
Schumer will advocate for bipartisan cooperation and outline Democratic goals, despite the GOP’s emphasis on party-line measures.

Cabinet Confirmations on Hold
The Senate will adopt its organizing resolution today, formally transitioning control of committees to the GOP. However, Cabinet confirmation hearings won’t begin until the week of Jan. 13, allowing more time for senators to meet with nominees, including former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard and Sen. Marco Rubio.

Republicans 53-seat majority will be delayed slightly because West Virginia Governor Jim Justice is waiting until Jan. 13 to allow Governor-elect Patrick Morrisey to take over before appointing a successor. This delay will affect Justice’s seniority ranking but is not expected to impact Republicans’ legislative activities significantly, given the short timeline.

Schumer Sets Democratic Agriculture Panel Member List
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has set the list of Democratic assignments on committees for the 119th Congress, with two new members of the Senate Agriculture Committee – Sens. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and Elissa Slotkin. Leaving the panel after the 118th Congress were retired Chair Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), defeated Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.). Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) was previously announced as the new Ranking Member on the panel.

More Dramatic Start for the House
House Republicans are preparing for today’s unpredictable speaker election, where incumbent Mike Johnson (R-La.) faces a challenging path to retain his gavel. With a razor-thin 219-215 majority, Johnson can afford only one GOP defection if all members vote. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has signaled opposition, while some others remain undecided. Johnson has emphasized the importance of avoiding theatrics, recalling the protracted 2023 speaker vote, and is striving for a first-ballot victory.

Johnson has secured former President Trump’s endorsement and has focused on uniting his party behind key agenda items like border security and tax reform. However, some Republicans demand assurances of a more conservative approach, citing frustrations with Johnson’s reliance on Democratic votes in the previous Congress.

Johnson’s potential ousting could create a leadership vacuum since there isn’t an obvious replacement. Removing Johnson might reignite public clashes among top Republicans, including House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (La.), Majority Whip Tom Emmer (Minn.), and Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (Ohio). These tensions could fracture party unity and complicate legislative efforts.

Political Implications for Trump and the GOP
The disruption could weaken Republican cohesion, making it harder for the party to advance its agenda or align with Trump’s interests, especially heading into the 2024 elections.

If there is a confirmed House speaker today, the schedule ahead includes:

· Saturday: House Republicans will meet at Fort McNair, Washington, D.C., to discuss reconciliation plans.
· Sunday: Republican elected leadership holds a retreat in Baltimore.
· Monday: The House will convene to certify Donald Trump’s Electoral College victory.

Your Next Read:
How is Stabenow’s Senate Farm Bill Proposal Different From the House Bill?

Congress Approves CR, Includes $31 Billion in Farmer, Disaster Aid and Farm Bill Extension

Sat, 21 Dec 2024 16:16:07 GMT

With little if any drama like the House, the Senate easily cleared the 118-page continuing resolution (CR) early Saturday morning with a vote of 85-11 (four members did not vote). The measure funds the government through March 14. The CR includes nearly $110 billion in disaster and farmer aid ($21 billion ag disaster and $10 billion in farmer aid), and a one-year extension of the 2018 Farm Bill.

The Senate vote came hours after the House passed the measure on a 366-34 vote, well above the two-thirds majority threshold required under that chamber’s suspension of the rules procedure, with no Democrats voting no along with 34 Republicans. Texas Dem Rep. Jasmine Crockett voted “present”.

Debt Ceiling

GOP leaders dropped a two-year suspension of the statutory debt ceiling that was in a previous CR version and that helped push the bill through both chambers. Democrats opposed inclusion of the debt limit provision, arguing it would make it easier on Republicans next year to cut taxes and ram through other partisan priorities. Cutting the debt limit language was enough to convince Democrats to go along with the stripped-down bill, even though it excluded their priorities contained in an i nitial 1,547-page bipartisan measure .

One ag sector lobbyist said, “Ag groups need to start playing the game… those who always vote no on everything… why not actively oppose them… they don’t support farm bills anyhow.”

Breaking Down the Votes

Here is the list of House Republicans who voted no on the CR that contained $31 billion in ag sector assistance:

House no votes on CR

(House of Representatives)

Some notable representatives who voted against the CR include Nancy Mace (South Carolina), Thomas Massie (Kentucky), and Chip Roy (Texas). The reasons for voting against the CR varied among representatives, with some citing concerns about high levels of spending, lack of reforms, or opposition to giving the current administration additional funding.

Here is the list of Senate Democrats who voted no:

Senate no votes on CR

(U.S. Senate)

Farmer Aid in the CR

This is a breakdown of the $31 billion in farmer assistance via the CR:

Farmer aid breakdown

(House Ag Committee)

Possible Payment Amounts to Farmers

The farmer aid should be available 90 days after the legislation’s enactment. Farm CPA Paul Neiffer estimated per acre payment amounts via the Economic Loss Assistance program based on his knowledge of the provisions.

Possible payments as calculated by Farm CPA Paul Neiffer

(Lindsey Pound )

While USDA will make the final calculations, based on Neiffer’s estimates, producer payments look like this per acre, using the following calculation: (USDA’s Projected Cost of the Crop – National Projected Returns) x Eligible Acres x 26% = Total Payment.

Corn: $43.80
Soybeans: $30.61
Wheat: $31.80
Cotton: $84.70
Rice: $69.66

Neiffer says there is a payment limit of $125,000 dollars, which is down from the $175,00 originally proposed in the FARM Act. He says it’s also key to note with the updated relief, if 75% of your total gross income comes from farming, which includes wages and interest and dividends, then you qualify for the double payment.

Related Story: Poll Results: 71% of Farmers Say Congress Should Approve Economic Aid Before Year-End

House Ag Committee Fact Sheet Details Payments

The House Ag Committee released a fact sheet on the farmer economic assistance that is provided in the current Continuing Resolution (CR), modeled off of Rep. Trent Kelly’s (R-Miss.) FARM Act (HR 10045). There is a list of eligible commodities, a payment formula, administrative provisions, and estimated payment rates.

House Ag panel staffers say please keep in mind that the payment rates in this document are estimates and “almost certain to change slightly once implemented. These rates are the best approximation based on the data cited in text. This does incorporate the minimum payment rate provision. You’ll see that those crops receiving payments via the minimum payment provision have an asterisk.”

The House Ag panel had the Agricultural and Food Policy Center at Texas A&M analyze the impact of the economic assistance provided through this provision. Their findings suggest that the funds will improve ending cash position on their Representative Farm system by nearly 20% by the end of 2025.

Farmer aid

(House Ag Committee)

Your Next Reads:

Poll Results: 71% of Farmers Say Congress Should Approve Economic Aid Before Year-End

Ag Gets Potential Christmas Gift from Congress: Continuing Resolution Includes $31 Billion in Aid for Producers

Poll Results: 71% of Farmers Say Congress Should Approve Economic Aid Before Year-End

Wed, 18 Dec 2024 20:35:20 GMT

Between the FARM Act originally proposed this fall, to the new Economic Loss Assistance program included in the continuing resolution (CR) released this week, financial aid for farmers has been a highly debated topic in the second-half of this year. However, a new AgWeb farmer poll shows farmers are overwhelmingly in support of financial relief before the end of the year.

As agriculture faces a recession , agricultural groups and ag lenders pushed for Congress to include emergency financial aid for farmers in the stopgap bill. The text was released late Tuesday night and included $31 billion in total aid for producers, including $10 billion in direct payments for farmers and $21 billion in ag disaster aid, a one-year extension of the 2018 farm bill and year-round E15.

The proposed CR does include an extension of the 2018 farm bill, but it does not include the push to raise reference prices.

You can dive into all the details of the stopgap spending measure here , which still needs to be approved by Congress.

Farmer Poll Results

AgWeb asked farmers in a poll whether Congress should pass economic aid for farmers before year-end, as well as if Congress should raise reference prices in a farm bill extension. The poll garnered more than 2,500 responses:

71% of respondents said Congress should approve emergency economic aid
29% responded no
81% of farmers said Congress should raise reference prices when extending the 2018 farm bill.
19% said no.

Possible Payments for Farmers

Possible payments as calculated by Farm CPA Paul Neiffer

(Lindsey Pound )

It’s still unclear exactly what the per acre payments will be if Congress approves the CR this week. Farm CPA Paul Neiffer estimated per acre payment amounts via the Economic Loss Assistance program based on his knowledge of the provisions. While USDA will make the final calculations, based on Neiffer’s estimates, producer payments look like this per acre, using the following calculation: (USDA’s Projected Cost of the Crop – National Projected Returns) x Eligible Acres x 26% = Total Payment.

Corn: $43.80
Soybeans: $30.61
Wheat: $31.80
Cotton: $84.70
Rice: $69.66

How Ag Financial Aid Will be Determined
Neiffer says there is a payment limit of $125,000 dollars, which is down from the $175,00 originally proposed in the FARM Act. He says it’s also key to note with the updated relief, if 75% of your total gross income comes from farming, which includes wages and interest and dividends, then you qualify for the double payment.

The $10 billion in direct payments, along with the $21 billion in disaster aid, could help the farm economy in the coming months, according to Neiffer.

“Bottom line is you got an extra $10 billion of injected liquidity into your system automatically,” Neiffer said. “And then for those farmers that were facing some type of disaster, like drought, wildfire, hurricane, etc., you’re going to get an extra about $10 billion for 2023 and an extra about $10 billion for 2024. There’s $2 billion automatically allocated for livestock out of that $20 billion, and then there’s some other carve outs for forestry and honeybees and so on and so forth, but this is an extra $30 billion that’s going to get pumped into the farm economy here in the next three to four months.”

Economists at the University of Illinois calculated payments, which came out to be slightly different than Neiffer’s estimates. According to U of I economists, the payments will be:

Corn: $42.94
Soybeans: $27.69
Wheat: $19.07
Sorghum: $25.11

When will payments be received by farmers?

Farm Journal Washington Correspondent Jim Wiesemeyer reports if Congress passes the measure, the economic aid will come 90 days after enactment.

As for ag disaster, the push is on to use the 2020 approach where most payments came out of USDA’s Kansas City office.

How Does This Compare to the FARM Act?

The Farm Assistance and Revenue Mitigation (FARM) Act was proposed earlier this year. The bill was authored by Rep. Trent Kelly, R-Miss., on the House Ag Committee. That payment calculation was much higher than what’s included in the CR this week and based on the following: (USDA’s Projected Cost of the Crop – National Projected Returns) x Eligible Acres x 60% = Total Payment.

Possible payments under the previously proposed FARM Act totaled nearly $20 billion, and per acre payments were estimated at:

Corn: $101
Soybeans: $53
Wheat: $73
Cotton: $195
Rice: $84
Sorghum: $97
Oats: $177
Barley: $0

Mixed Reaction to Potential Direct Payments to Farmers

Many agriculture groups and associations have released statements in favor of the potential relief in Congress. The American Soybean Association (ASA) says inflation, historically high input prices, falling commodity prices, and a spate of storms have led to tougher-than-normal times for U.S. farmers, and the price of soybeans has dropped 40% in just two years.

“We appreciate that congressional leadership heard our fourth-quarter plea and understood the very real consequences of not including economic and disaster aid in their plans,” says Caleb Ragland, president of the ASA and soybean farmer from Kentucky. “This is a much-needed win at a time that has been exceptionally hard for many of our country’s farmers.”

Pete Meyer, crops economist with Muddy Boots Ag, says with agriculture in a recession, the relief is needed, but he’s worried about what impact it could have on input prices and other inflated prices that are causing farmers to see costs below breakeven.

“It is needed,” Meyer says. “I mean, we talk to plenty of regional banks, and this is renewal season, and the banks say they are having a difficult time for sure. It’s a sad commentary on what the farm economy looks like, but the fact of the matter is, there are marginal farmers out there. And what this does is it allows the marginal farmer or the hobby farmer back in the game.”

Meyer says this aid could prove to be problematic, pointing to the Market Facilitation Program (MFP) as one reason why.

“In my opinion, that’s where the inflation cycle started, because everybody wanted their piece of the pie. So now you have you have direct payments, which is probably going to end up in the pockets of of your input supplier, because your input supplier is probably not going to lower his or her prices because now they know you have a few extra dollars in your pocket.”

Is a Reset in the Farm Economy Needed?

Meyer says what the farm economy really needs is two-fold: more demand and a reset in input prices.

“Where we could get that demand from, I can point to sustainable aviation fuel just as a as a perfect example of that,” he says. “But who knows what the rules are on 45Z or sustainable aviation fuel. So that’s still an unknown.”

Meyer says the second thing the ag economy needs to see is a reset, which he says is already starting to take place in the used equipment market.

“You see some some fairly new 2-to-3-year-old combines trading for a fraction of what they traded new just two years ago, but we’ve not seen the reset on the input side. It’s your fertilizer, your seed and everything else that goes along with it,” Meyer says. “So the problem is now is that it might this might be another year where the input supplier is going to hold tight on his or her prices.”

Continuing Resolution Includes $31 Billion in Aid for Producers

Wed, 18 Dec 2024 16:12:05 GMT

Farm groups and farm-state lawmakers had to first sell Congress on the need for substantial aid via the Continuing Resolution (CR) , now congressional leaders must sell others to pass it.

While the measure still needs to pass both the House and Senate, the stopgap deal to avoid a government shutdown includes $10 billion in direct payments for farmers, $21 bllion in ag disaster aid, a one-year extension of the 2018 farm bill and year-round E15.

Passage of CR Now in Question

Congress actually passing the stopgap spending measure is far from a done deal. Washington insiders were confident Wednesday morning Congress would pass the measure with bipartisan support, but strong opposition from the incoming Trump administration later in the day on Wednesday is now throwing that into question.

A statement from President Donald J. Trump and Vice President-Elect JD Vance:

The most foolish and inept thing ever done by Congressional Republicans was allowing our country to hit the debt ceiling in 2025. It was a mistake and is now something that must be addressed.…
— JD Vance (@JDVance) December 18, 2024

President-elect Donald Trump has asked to keep certain measures House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) supports in the continuing resolution (CR), like aid for farmers and natural disaster survivors, but also demanded the House ditch items that Democrats negotiated.

Trump has also requested that Republicans extend the suspension of the debt ceiling, a limit on how much the U.S. government can borrow, which is set to expire early in his new term next year.

Johnson’s legislative strategy has sparked significant discontent among Republicans, casting doubt on his ability to retain the gavel in the next Congress. On Tuesday, Johnson introduced a sprawling bill to extend federal funding until March 14, allocating $110.4 billion for natural disaster relief ($21 billion in ag disaster funding) and incorporating a range of unrelated policy provisions. Late-stage negotiations added $10 billion in aid for farmers, opening the floodgates to additional Democratic demands, including the transfer of RFK Stadium to D.C., a congressional pay raise, health plan regulations, and funds to rebuild Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge.

The concessions enraged GOP lawmakers across the party’s ideological spectrum, with members voicing concerns about Johnson’s leadership. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) has already pledged not to support Johnson in future leadership elections, and private discussions among Republicans suggest Johnson may face insurmountable opposition come Jan. 3. The Freedom Caucus and moderates alike criticized his handling of the bill, while high-profile figures like Elon Musk, now a Trump adviser, lambasted the legislation as “criminal.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) warned of potential Senate resistance, labeling the bill a “cramnibus.” Johnson defended the compromise as a necessary measure under a divided government, framing it as a preparatory step for Republicans to advance Trump’s “America First” agenda in the next Congress. However, with a slim three-seat majority and growing fractures within the party, Johnson’s future as speaker hangs in the balance.

Breaking Down the Proposed CR

While the fate of the stopgap spending measure is now in question, if passed, the funding would last through March 14 for fiscal year 2025 that began Oct. 1.

Highlights of the bill that will impact agriculture includes:

One-year extension of the 2018 Farm Bill, including provisions that don’t have “baseline,” or cost money to extend. Negotiators found $143 million in unspent agricultural funds to rescind to offset those extensions. GOP leaders said they would push to consider a new bill the first quarter of 2025.
$10 billion in farmer financial aid along the lines of a bill introduced by Rep. Trent Kelly (R-Miss.).
$21 billion in ag disaster aid for farmers and ranchers as part of an overall $100.4 billion disaster package. The measure sets aside $2 billion of the disaster aid specifically for livestock producers, with much of the rest available via block grants to states and territories and direct aid to farmers and ranchers. It includes $3 million specifically for regular testing of procedures in place for inspections of molasses imports at the Canadian border, a provision sought by U.S. sugar producers.
Year-round E15, including other biofuel provisions detailed below.
SNAP provision. Language extending authorization of a program that replenishes stolen Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP/food stamp) benefits, which Democrats said would prevent a $1.5 billion cut to those benefits.

Disaster Aid

The disaster crop loss program will likely operate similarly to the 2021 program without any of the 2022 quirks that made it into a debacle. The livestock program will likely operate similar to the 2022 livestock program where the Biden administration actually managed to get it right. The economic aid program is very similar to Kelly farm act with a factor applied to keep it within budget.

Direct Payments to Farmers

Paul Neiffer’s analysis of the $10 billion in financial aid included in the CR calculates what the possible payments could be, including $43 per acre for corn, $30 for soybeans, $31.80 for wheat, $85 for cotton and $70 for long-grain rice.

Possible payment calculations

(Paul Neiffer )

When will payments be received by farmers? Economic aid will come 90 days after enactment. As for ag disaster, the push is on to use the 2020 approach where most payments came out of USDA’s Kansas City office.

Here are the key details and the differences from the original FARM Act:

The same 8 crops are specifically identified (corn, wheat, soybeans, cotton, rice, peanuts, oats and barley).
You will be paid on total 2024 planted acres by crop plus 50% of prevent planted acres by crop.

How Ag Financial Aid Will be Determined

The calculation uses national avg payment yield for PLC. Regarding the legislative language on the minimum payment rate calculation for economic assistance, we previously used 8% of the reference price multiplied by the national average yield. The legislative calculation uses the national average payment yield for PLC instead.
The payment limit is lowered from $175,000 to $125,000 and if your Farm AGI exceeds 75% of total AGI, then this is doubled to $250,000. Definition of AGI remains the same and this limit is per entity/ per person. This means an LLC has one payment no matter the number of owners. AGI is based on a three-year average of 2020-2022 tax years.

Here is a table of Neiffer’s estimated per acre payment amounts based on his knowledge of the provisions:

Year-Round E15

CR package includes nationwide year-round sales of 15% ethanol gasoline (E15) and offers short-term biofuel blending relief to small refiners.

Previously, E15 was restricted during summer months, though eight Midwestern states had already been granted year-round sales earlier this year. The inclusion of the E15 language, based on a bill by Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), marks a major win for ethanol producers and farm state lawmakers who have spent years lobbying to permanently allow year-round E15 sales.

The bill would also provide short-term relief to some small refiners under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) that retired renewable identification numbers (RINs) in 2016-18 in cases when their requests for “hardship” waivers remained pending for years. The bill would return some of those RINs to the small refiners and make them eligible for compliance in future years.

Enacting the stopgap funding bill would also make it unnecessary for eight states to follow through with a costly gasoline blendstock reformulation — set to begin as early as next summer — they had requested to retain year-round E15 sales in the midcontinent. Oil industry groups last month petitioned EPA to delay the fuel reformulation until after the 2025 summer driving season, citing concerns about inadequate fuel supply and the prospects that a legislative fix would make required infrastructure changes unnecessary.

Ethanol Groups React

Ethanol groups say the E15 legislative change could pave the way for retailers to more widely offer the high-ethanol fuel blend, which is currently available at 3,400 retail stations and last summer was about 10-30¢/USG cheaper than 10% ethanol gasoline (E10).

Offering the fuel year-round would be “an early Christmas present to American drivers,” ethanol industry group Growth Energy chief executive Emily Skor said.

Monte Shaw, executive director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, said biofuels “champions” are fighting for the provision allowing the sale of E15 year-around. “We have been working to get a year-round E15 solution for over 10 years,” he said in a statement. “It would be monumental for ethanol demand to support rural farmers and would save drivers 10 to 20 cents at the pump.”

Calculating What It Means for Corn Demand

The potential increase in ethanol consumption and corn use due to year-round E15 sales is relatively modest based on the available information. The additional ethanol consumption from year-round E15 sales is estimated to be approximately 15 million gallons. This represents a small fraction of the total U.S. ethanol production. The 15-million-gallon increase in ethanol consumption would translate to an additional corn use of about 5.6 million bushels. It’s important to note that the impact of year-round E15 sales is limited by several factors:

Distribution network: E15 has a small distribution network, available at only a fraction of gas stations.
Consumer adoption: The shift to E15 may be gradual and dependent on factors such as price differentials and consumer awareness.
Seasonal demand: While year-round sales are now permitted, demand may still fluctuate seasonally.

Looking ahead, maintaining current corn use levels for ethanol (around 5.5 billion bushels) would require increasing the national average ethanol blend rate to 15-17% by 2042, given projected declines in gasoline consumption. This suggests that year-round E15 sales alone may not be sufficient to significantly boost corn use for ethanol in the long term. However, others note the quickest way to get consumer attention is with price and E15 is the cheapest option for most cars… in many markets it’s cheap enough that consumers seek it out. Also, some think it’s not even a question for new facilities to include E15 … it’s the easiest way to be competitive in a market. Either way, year-round E15 sales represent a symbolic victory for corn ethanol advocates, the immediate impact on ethanol consumption and corn use is expected to be minimal in the short run, but differences of opinion are in place regarding long-term impacts.

A bewildering assessment of the year-round E15 impact came from some traders, based on a Reuters article.

The concern expressed by traders regards a potential shift in demand from biodiesel to ethanol due to year-round E15 sales. That is a questionable conclusion. Consider:

Separate products with different applications. Ethanol and biodiesel are distinct biofuels with different uses and markets: Ethanol is primarily blended with gasoline for use in standard gasoline engines. Biodiesel is typically blended with petroleum diesel for use in diesel engines. This fundamental difference makes a direct substitution between the two unlikely in most applications.
Potential market impacts. While the products aren’t directly interchangeable, there are some potential indirect effects to consider:
- Fuel blending choices: Refiners and fuel blenders might adjust their overall biofuel strategy, potentially favoring increased ethanol blending if E15 becomes more widely available year-round.
- Feedstock competition: Both ethanol (from corn) and biodiesel (often from soybean oil) compete for agricultural resources. Increased demand for corn-based ethanol could impact crop planting decisions and prices.
- Policy uncertainty: The combination of year-round E15 approval and the upcoming change in administration adds complexity to the biofuels policy landscape, which could affect investment decisions in both ethanol and biodiesel sectors.
- Market reaction may be premature. The sharp drop in soybean oil prices mentioned in the Reuters story likely reflects short-term market uncertainty rather than a definitive shift in demand. Several factors suggest this reaction may be overblown:
  - Infrastructure limitations: Widespread adoption of E15 will take time due to the need for compatible fuel pumps and consumer education.
  - Separate mandates: The RFS has separate volume requirements for different biofuel categories, including biodiesel.
  - Diesel market stability: Demand for biodiesel is also driven by the diesel fuel market, which has different dynamics than the gasoline market.

Additional Details From the Bill

Democrats celebrated inclusion of priorities like funding for childcare and 9/11 survivors’ health care benefits; restrictions on China-related investments; legislation intended to crack down on publication of artificial intelligence-generated “deepfakes,” and on “junk” fees charged for hotel stays and concert tickets; new safety standards for lithium-ion batteries; and more.

Taxpayers would recoup some of the bridge rebuilding cost through proceeds from insurance and litigation payouts by the owner of the cargo ship Dali, which crashed into the bridge in March.

Also included is $25.6 million for residential security and protection of Supreme Court justices.

Negotiators also agreed to a 100% federal cost-share for Francis Scott Key Bridge reconstruction in Baltimore, a key demand of the Maryland delegation — who elsewhere in the bill had to accept language paving the way for a new Washington Commanders stadium on the old Robert F. Kennedy Memorial Stadium, while transferring a D.C. National Guard fighter squadron to Maryland.

Appropriators threw in an unrequested $300 million for fisheries disaster aid, which Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and others sought.

The deal omits language that Democrats were seeking to unfreeze $20 billion in IRS enforcement funding.

What’s Next?

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) is expected to turn to Democrats to supply the bulk of votes needed to get the bill to the Senate. It appears lawmakers would have at least a day to review the package. It looks like Johnson will bring the CR up under suspension of the rules, which requires a two-thirds majority for passage.

A floor vote has yet to be scheduled, but the initial assessment is that the House will take it up as early as Thursday or more likely on Friday. That leaves the Senate little time to clear the measure before Friday’s midnight deadline. But even if the final action does not occur Friday, there is wiggle room on the weekend to get it done.

House Ag Panel Says Ag Economic Aid in Current CR Would Improve Ending Cash Position by 20% By End of 2025

The following is a quick fact sheet released by the House Ag Committee on the economic assistance that is provided in the current Continuing Resolution (CR), modeled off of Rept. Trent Kelly’s (R-Miss.) FARM Act (HR 10045). There is a background portion, a list of eligible commodities, a payment formula, administrative provisions, and estimated payment rates.

House Ag panel staffers say keep in mind that the payment rates in this document are estimates and “almost certain to change slightly once implemented. These rates are the best approximation based on the data cited in text. This does incorporate the minimum payment rate provision. You’ll see that those crops receiving payments via the minimum payment provision have an asterisk.”

The House Ag panel had the Agricultural and Food Policy Center at Texas A&M analyze the impact of the economic assistance provided through this provision. Their findings suggest that the funds will improve ending cash position on their Representative Farm system by nearly 20% by the end of 2025.

Additional Analysis on Potential Aid for Producers

The following is what Combest-Sell and crew put out about the ag financial aid and disaster aid:

Crop Loss Assistance

For crop loss disaster assistance for the 2023 and 2024 calendar years, the measure makes provision for nearly $21 billion.

The language is pretty wide open with slight refinements of prior years’ disaster bills. There are some carve-outs including: $2 billion of the total amount is provided for livestock losses in 2023 or 2024 due to drought, wildfires, or floods; block grant authority to compensate producers with timber losses, citrus, pecan, and poultry losses (including poultry infrastructure losses); and a special provision for agricultural producers who suffered losses due to Mexico’s failure to adhere to its water rights treaty with the U.S.

For the bulk of the disaster program, the eligible causes of loss are the same as those under the 2022 program, including losses of revenue, quality or production losses of crops (including milk, on-farm stored commodities, crops prevented from planting, and harvested adulterated wine grapes), trees, bushes, and vines, as a consequence of droughts, wildfires, hurricanes, floods, derechos, excessive heat, tornadoes, winter storms, freeze, including a polar vortex, smoke exposure, and excessive moisture occurring in 2023 and 2024.

Please note that while the 2022 statute was used again as base text (and it used 2020 which used 2019, etc.), that is not an endorsement of the badly flawed implementation used by the Vilsack USDA. We would say that the disaster program from 2020 and 2021 is more of the standard bearer to think back to.

Losses are to be covered under terms and conditions determined by the Secretary but subject to previous requirements that: (1) smoke tainted wine grapes due to wildfires are covered; (2) losses due to drought are eligible if in a county with a D2 drought for 8 consecutive weeks or D3 drought or higher at any time during the calendar year but excessive heat as a cause of loss can cover lesser drought if it meets STC parameters; (3) sugar beet and sugar cane disaster be implemented through processors that elect to deliver aid to their producers; (4) not more than 1 percent of funds may be used for implementation; (5) payment limitations required under previous ERP programs apply (i.e., $125,000 per entity, or $250,000 if not less than 75% of AGI is derived from farming); (5) higher pay limits for specialty crops and high valued crops under previous ERP programs apply (i.e., $125,000 per entity, or $900,000 if not less than 75% of AGI is derived from farming) (Note: there is *no* AGI means testing for disaster aid; the portion of AGI derived from agriculture is just used as a measure to determine eligibility for the higher pay limit)] ; (6) prescribed pay limits are separate for each of the 2023 and 2024 calendar years; (7) payments under the program plus crop insurance and/or NAP (less premiums or fees paid) cannot exceed 90% of the loss; and (8) the same future crop insurance purchase requirements under previous ERP programs apply. In addition, to the extent that any factor must be applied to stay within budget, one single factor must be applied to the eligible benefit of each producer (i.e., no progressive factor).

No gender or race-based components are expected to be applied either in light of the federal court’s injunction.

The Secretary may use $30 million to provide equitable relief for specialty crop A&O for 2022 and 2023 reinsurance years.

The Secretary shall use $3 million to test product coming into the country under the molasses tariff line to ensure that it is molasses.

USDA is required to report to Appropriations Committees on progress of implementation within 120 days of enactment and quarterly until all payments are made. We will be pushing with the new Administration at USDA to get the FSA back on track with a quick and clear implementation that treats a loss as a loss regardless of the gender or race of the producer. Federal courts will also be ensuring this.

Economic Loss Assistance

For economic loss assistance for the 2024 crop year, the measure provides $10 billion in relief.

The program is not as robust as the Rep. Trent Kelly (R-MISS.) bill (the “FARM Act”) that was introduced this fall and spread in popularity like wildfire. But it is still generous, and we hope that when coupled with disaster relief it will go a long way in helping producers until Congress reauthorizes a new Farm Bill next year with a strong, meaningful safety net.

The measure uses the Kelly model, with a 26% factor to keep overall costs within budget, and another factor (8% of reference price) that creates minimums that improve the payment rates for certain crops (barley, rice, peanuts, minor crops).

Eligible commodities are commodities eligible for a marketing loan, except wool, mohair, and honey.

Under the program, if the Secretary determines that the expected gross return per acre for an eligible commodity is less than the expected cost of production per acre for that eligible commodity, the Secretary shall make a 1-time economic assistance payment to each producer of that commodity within 90 days of enactment of the supplemental.

The expected gross return per acre for an eligible commodity is equal to the following:

For wheat, corn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, cotton, rice, and soybeans, [the projected average farm price for the commodity for the 2024–2025 marketing year contained in the most recent World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates published before the date of enactment of the Supplemental by the World Agricultural Outlook Board] X [the national average harvested yield per acre for the commodity for the most recent 10 crop years, as determined by the Secretary].

For other loan eligible commodities, a comparable estimate of gross returns, as determined by the Secretary.

The expected cost of production per acre for an eligible commodity is equal to—

For wheat, corn, grain sorghum, barley, oats, cotton, rice, and soybeans, the total costs listed for the 2024 crop year with respect to the commodity contained in the most recent data product entitled “national average cost-of-production forecasts for major U.S. field crops” published by the Economic Research Service.

For other loan eligible commodities, a comparable total estimated cost-of-production, as determined by the Secretary.

The amount of an economic assistance payment to a producer for a commodity is equal to [the economic loss for the commodity] X [the eligible acres of the commodity on the farm] X [26%].

The economic loss for a commodity is equal to the difference between the expected cost of production per acre for the commodity and the expected gross return per acre for the commodity.

Eligible acres of a commodity on a farm is equal to the sum of the acreage planted on the farm to the commodity for harvest, grazing, haying, silage, or other similar purposes for the 2024 crop year and an amount equal to 50% of the acreage on the farm that was prevented from being planted during the 2024 crop year to the commodity because of drought, flood, or other natural disaster, or other condition beyond the control of the producers on the farm, as determined by the Secretary.

The Secretary shall consider acreage planted to include any land devoted to planted acres for accepted skip-row planting patterns, as determined by the Secretary.

In determining the payment rate for a crop for which there is no sufficient available data, the Secretary shall use the data related to a similarly situated crop to establish a comparable rate.

In no case shall the amount of an economic assistance payment to a producer for an eligible commodity be equal to less than [8% of the PLC/ARC reference price for the commodity] X [the national average payment yield for the eligible commodity] X [the number of eligible acres for the commodity].

As for pay limits and means tests, the total amount of payments received, directly or indirectly, by a person or legal entity (except a joint venture or general partnership) under this section may not exceed —

(A) $125,000, if less than 75% of the average gross income of the person or legal entity for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 tax years is derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture activities; and
(B) $250,000, if not less than 75% of the average gross income of the person or legal entity for the 2020, 2021, and 2022 tax years is derived from farming, ranching, or silviculture activities.

Please note the “average” is different from “adjusted.” Recall the scenario where a farmer grosses $1 million on the farm but had expenses that exceeded this, so his AGI (adjusted gross income) was negative. He or his wife also had a job teaching history and science at the local school creating a situation where his non-farm income was more than 75% of his AGI and he was therefore not eligible for the higher limit to address the losses. Using “average” gross is meant to correct that problem.

The pay limits for economic assistance are separate from the pay limits for crop loss assistance described above. And, just like the crop loss portions, this economic assistance is not subject to the AGI means test to determine eligibility that traditional farm bill benefits are subject to.

We are sure that you have seen estimated payment rates floated in various publications. These are certainly within the range, but it is important to note that final numbers have not yet been determined.

Beyond Crop Loss/Economic Assistance

Besides the aforementioned economic and disaster aid, the CR/Supplemental also includes other priorities for agriculture, including year-round E15.

The package also extends the current authorities in the farm bill for one year; makes investments in the FFAR research program; provides scholarships to 1890 universities; and addresses problems with fraudulent skimming of food stamp benefits from EBT cards.

Ag Sector Could Score Big in Stopgap Spending

Tue, 17 Dec 2024 19:53:55 GMT

The House of Representatives released its Continuing Resolution (CR) text today, which includes:

A one-year extension of the 2018 farm bill
Around $10 billion in farmer economic aid
$21 billion in ag disaster funding for 2023 and 2024, which is part of the $100.4 billion to help the hurricane-stricken Southeast
Year-round E15 sales, which is a major victory for the corn and ethanol industries

The plan will offer credits to small refiners that petitioned for exemptions from the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) mandates (2016 to 2018 compliance years) but were denied or had pending petitions as of Dec. 1, 2022. The RFS requires refiners to blend biofuels such as ethanol into gasoline or purchase compliance credits.

The provision would override a previous U.S. government decision allowing year-round E15 sales only in eight Midwestern states (set to begin in 2025).

Extension of Orphan Programs in 2018 Farm Bill
There also appears to be an extension of orphan programs in the 2018 farm bill extension and a permanent 1890s scholarship program. The icing on the cake is a four-year extension of SNAP fraud via the skimming reimbursement language.

Orphan programs are ones that were authorized in the 2018 farm bill but did not have funding beyond a specified year. The extension provides $177 million of new mandatory funding for programs that did not have a budget baseline. This ensures these programs can continue to operate during the extension period.

The 1890s scholarship program provides scholarships for students attending 1890 land-grant universities, which are historically Black colleges and universities that were established under the Second Morrill Act of 1890.

The SNAP Fraud Reimbursement extension is the continuation of reimbursements for stolen Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. This provision protects SNAP recipients from losses due to benefit theft via card skimming, cloning and other similar methods. States will continue to be required to replace stolen benefits under this measure.

One source said, “Good policy would be emphasizing the need for states to transition to more secure measures for SNAP recipients, including stronger identity verification practices.”

Of Note
Senate Ag Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) did not get her wish to move conservation/climate funding into a one-year extension of the 2018 farm bill. That discussion will occur next year.

Economic Aid and Disaster Funding
Disaster aid for crop losses due to natural disasters for 2023 and 2024 will total $21 billion.

The discussions for economic aid centered on a $10 billion package to help farmers cope with price declines and rising input costs. House Agriculture Chairman GT Thompson (R-Pa.) indicated that $10 billion is the minimum he would accept. He mentioned Republican support for reallocating conservation program funds from the 2022 legislation into the farm bill baseline, but that Republicans are disputing the “guardrails” that require funds to support “climate-smart” projects.

Thompson also noted concerns that some critics want to ensure President-elect Donald Trump would have access to funds to compensate farmers for potential retaliation stemming from new Trump import tariffs.

Year-Round E-15
Year-round sales of E15 ethanol has been a long-standing goal for corn growers and ethanol producers, particularly in states such as Iowa, Illinois and Minnesota where a significant portion of corn production goes into ethanol.

Currently, E15 is available at more than 3,200 gas stations in the U.S., indicating room for growth (there are more than 196,000 fuel stations in the U.S.). About 95% of model year 2024 vehicles are explicitly approved for E15 use by manufacturers.

The actual increase in ethanol usage would likely be gradual as E15 adoption expands. While the theoretical maximum ethanol usage through year-round E15 sales could reach 20,586 million gallons annually, the actual increase would depend on factors such as consumer adoption and infrastructure development — separate fuel handling and storage for E15.

Now What?
A vote in the House won’t happen until at least Thursday night if House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) sticks to his plan to honor the rule giving members 72 hours to review the bill.

Other House Happenings
House Democrats removed Rep. David Scott (D-Ga.) as their senior Agriculture Committee leader after he received just 5 votes in Monday’s influential steering panel vote. Rep. Angie Craig (D-Minn.) emerged as the frontrunner with 34 votes, while Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.) trailed with 22 votes. Craig now heads into Tuesday’s full caucus vote, seeking additional support. Craig plans to rally House colleagues for the final vote. Meanwhile, Costa vowed to keep pushing and will try to supplant Craig in the full caucus. Lawmakers had anticipated Scott’s ouster amid growing skepticism of his leadership — Scott has dropped out of the race.

Craig indicated part of her pitch to the panel was that there are no other Ranking Members for Democrats from the U.S. Midwest.

“There’s not a single ranking member from the middle of the country right now, and that was certainly part of my pitch to my colleagues, is that if we want to represent this whole country, then we need ranking members and leaders in the Democratic Party who are from the whole country,” she stated.

Craig came into Congress in 2019 while Costa and Scott were elected in the early 2000s.

GOP Eyes Strategic Appointment to Boost House Majority
Republicans may have found a way to temporarily expand their narrow House majority: appointing a Democrat to the Trump administration. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-Fla.) is reportedly being considered to lead the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) next year. The move would leave Democrats short a vote for weeks, bolster the GOP’s edge, and possibly help Republicans flip Moskowitz’s seat. Moskowitz, who previously served as Florida’s emergency management director under Gov. Ron DeSantis, could gain significant recognition if he pursues a 2026 gubernatorial bid. While his office and House Democratic leadership declined to comment, the appointment’s political ramifications are being closely watched ahead of Monday’s internal party elections.

Take our Poll: Do you think Congress should pass emergency relief for farmers in the CR? You can voice your opinion in our AgWeb poll.

A Farm Bill Extension Without Economic Aid for Farmers Sparks Intense Negotiations and Debate in Congress

Mon, 16 Dec 2024 23:05:38 GMT

A one-year extension of the 2018 Farm Bill, tied to the continuing resolution (CR), has sparked intense negotiations over economic assistance to farmers. Initially, leaders considered diverting Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) funds intended for the National Resources Conservation Service in exchange for farmer aid. However, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) opposed this, aligning with President-elect Donald Trump’s intent to dismantle the IRA in the next Congress.

Sensing an opening, Democrats pushed for concessions in return for their support, proposing initiatives like 100% federal funding for Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key Bridge, duty-free trade benefits for Haiti and Africa, funding for museums honoring women and Hispanics, and re-entry support for former inmates under the Second Chance Act.

AFBF Calls for a No Vote If Congress Ignores Ag Recession 📰 https://t.co/ejlB4kQZh4 https://t.co/WaArdCYkdw
— American Farm Bureau (@FarmBureau) December 14, 2024

Farm-state lawmakers, pushed by farm group lobbyists, said they would not support a CR without farmer aid. American Farm Bureau Federation publicly called on lawmakers to oppose the stopgap bill if it doesn’t include farm aid. “I call on members of Congress who represent ag to stand with farmers by insisting the supplemental spending bill include economic aid for farmers and voting it down if it doesn’t,” AFBF President Zippy Duvall said Saturday.

The Dilimma

Democrats know Johnson wants farmer aid language and must rely on them to help pass it, perhaps a majority of votes. House GOP leaders may have to take the CR up under suspension, meaning it will need a two-thirds majority to pass. If congressional leaders release CR bill text today, the House may not vote until Thursday. If so, the Senate could follow on Thursday or more likely on Friday.

Unlocking the farm aid package is the key to a broader CR deal. Both sides want to get aid to farmers, but they differ on the funding mechanisms. Republicans rejected a Democratic offer to include about $10 billion in aid to farmers while moving several conservation/climate programs into the farm bill baseline, which technically scores as deficit neutral. Republican leaders opposed continuing the conservation programs beyond their 2031 expiration, as they’d like to claw back as much of the 2022 law’s climate-related spending as possible once they have full control of the House, Senate and White House next year. Democrats in turn rejected a GOP counteroffer of $12 billion in unoffset economic aid, saying it came at the expense of some of Biden’s requested $21 billion in emergency agricultural assistance for farmers and ranchers impacted by natural disasters

The American Soybean Association (ASA) and other farm groups announced opposition to any year-end spending package that excludes economic assistance for agricultural producers. ASA President Caleb Ragland emphasized the urgent need for aid as farmers grapple with inflation, soaring input costs, and declining commodity prices.

Ragland, a soy farmer from Kentucky, called on congressional leaders to re-engage in negotiations to deliver both economic and disaster relief. He warned that failing to act would exacerbate the financial struggles of farmers, potentially leading to widespread impacts on rural communities and the broader U.S. economy. Soybean prices have fallen 40% over two years, with many farmers citing an insufficient safety net to weather the crisis.

ASA and other agricultural groups argue that without meaningful support, the nation risks an escalating agricultural recession that will reverberate through households across the country.

Meanwhile, the National Cotton Council (NCC) said it also strongly opposes any supplemental spending package that lacks meaningful short-term assistance for farmers. An NCC statement said the failure of Congress to provide short-term support to producers will mean that many farm families will go out of business in 2025, leading to devastating impacts throughout the rural economy. “We urge Congressional leadership to return to the negotiating table to find a path forward on economic assistance. If not, we will vigorously oppose a supplemental spending package that does not provide the immediate support our producers need. The current stalemate is a completely unacceptable outcome,” said NCC Chairman Joe Nicosia.

American Cotton Producer Chairman David Dunlow of North Carolina said, “Our producers will lose as much as $300 per acre on this year’s harvest due to soaring production costs and low market prices. Unfortunately, political gamesmanship has resulted in legislators turning their back on farmers during our hour of greatest need.”

Senate Democrats Respond

House Ag Committee Ranking Member David Scott (D-Ga.) and Senate Ag Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) issued a statement ( link ) condemning Republican Leadership for rejecting a $10 billion farm bill extension proposal. They said the Democrats’ plan aimed to provide economic aid and bolster conservation programs without diverting funds from disaster relief. They warned that the GOP’s counteroffer falls short, jeopardizing farmers’ livelihoods and risking widespread foreclosures.

Congressional Democrats are proposing $9.8 billion in economic assistance to farmers that is completely paid for and doesn’t add a penny to the deficit. This is real help that will reach farmers by the spring planting season. pic.twitter.com/9ty2uSKDFJ
— Senate Ag, Nutrition, & Forestry Committee Dems (@SenateAgDems) December 11, 2024

“For weeks, congressional Democrats have provided a pathway to a farm bill extension that will deliver tens of billions of dollars in economic assistance and investments in farm bill programs that farmers rely on,” Stabenow said in a statement. “Republican Leadership turned down this $10 billion proposal, rejecting needed economic assistance and increased conservation spending for decades. It is important to stress that this proposal is paid for and does not take any funding away from the critical natural disaster aid that has been requested. Their eleventh-hour offer fell short of what farmers need, shortchanged critical farm bill programs, and steals from critically needed assistance to address recent natural disasters. We can and should do both economic and disaster assistance, not pit one against the other.”

Senate GOP Lashes Out

House Ag Committee Chair GT Thompson (R-Pa.) and Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), ranking on the Senate Ag panel, criticized Democrats for neglecting rural needs and announced their opposition to any package lacking robust farmer assistance.

.@FarmBureau calls for prioritizing emergency assistance for farmers.

"We lost 141,000 farms in five years and if Congress fails to include economic aid for farmers, the sad reality is that we’ll lose more."

Read the statement: https://t.co/lQuJ35f2R1
— Senate Ag Committee Republicans (@SenateAgGOP) December 14, 2024

”America’s farmers have lost over $30 billion this year. And for the last few months we have led many of our colleagues in raising the concerns of the farm community in meetings, in hearings, on the House and Senate floors, and in private conversations with other Republicans and Democrats. We are deeply disappointed to learn that congressional leadership is failing to provide our farmers with the economic assistance they need to weather the crisis they are currently facing,” Boozman and Thompson said in a release “Last week, Republican leaders offered Leader Schumer and Leader Jefferies a $12 billion economic aid package for our nation’s farmers, which they rejected. It appears that congressional Democrats have not learned the lessons of the most recent election and continue to neglect the needs of rural America.”

Take Our Poll: Should Congress Pass Emergency Relief for Farmers?

Mon, 16 Dec 2024 21:39:33 GMT

According to the latest Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor , 56% of economists think U.S. agriculture is already in a recession and 81% believe agriculture is on the brink of one.

The bleak outlook for row crop producers has ag groups pleading to lawmakers: Don’t pass a farm bill extension or continuing resolution without also including emergency relief for farmers and/or an increase in reference prices in Title I of the farm bill.

A one-year extension of the 2018 farm bill, tied to the continuing resolution, has sparked intense negotiations over economic assistance to farmers .

Time is running out to grant such relief. Should Congress approve economic aid for farmers before year-end? Should Congress raise reference prices in a farm bill extension? Answer those two questions here , or tap on the green “Take Poll Here” button at left.

Your Next Reads:

A Farm Bill Extension Without Economic Aid for Farmers Sparks Intense Negotiations and Debate in Congress

Majority of Ag Economists say U.S. Agriculture is Ending the Year in a Recession

K-State Mourns Loss of Esteemed Agricultural Economics Professor

Tue, 26 Nov 2024 15:56:34 GMT

Barry Flinchbaugh, whose remarkable career in agricultural policy at Kansas State University spanned nearly a half-century, died Nov. 2 at Stormont Vail Hospital in Topeka.

He was 78 years old.

The charismatic Flinchbaugh was well known as one of the United States’ leading experts on agricultural policy and agricultural economics. For more than four decades, he was a top adviser to politicians of both major political parties, including secretaries of agriculture, chairs of the U.S. House and Senate Agriculture committees, and numerous senators and state governors.

Flinchbaugh was involved to some degree in every U.S. farm bill written since 1968, and served on many national boards, advisory groups and task forces, providing input on domestic food and agricultural policy.

He served as the chairman of the Commission on 21st Century Production Agriculture, which was authorized in the 1996 Federal Activities Inventory Reform, or FAIR, Act, also known as the Freedom to Farm Act.

“Barry Flinchbaugh will be deeply missed by many generations of the K-State family,” said K-State President Richard Myers. “His expertise and vast contributions to the university, the state and agricultural economics will have a lasting impact on the world for years to come through those whom he taught and counseled. His experiences have touched the lives of many and his wonderfully feisty, thoughtful, helpful and kind personality will be his legacy forever.”

“Agriculture has and always will be the backbone of Kansas’ economy,” said Gov. Laura Kelly said. “Dr. Flinchbaugh helped shape agriculture policy for more than a half-century. While we will miss him and his enormous contributions to our state, he leaves behind a legacy as a Kansan who improved the livelihoods of Kansas farmers, ranchers, producers — and agriculture workers across the nation.”

U.S. Sen. Pat Roberts, Kansas, who worked closely with Flinchbaugh on farm bill legislation, wrote his condolences on Twitter.

“Franki and I are deeply saddened by the news of Dr. Barry Flinchbaugh’s passing earlier today,” Roberts said. “Dr. Flinchbaugh was nothing short of a legend in his field. His expertise made him one of the most coveted and trusted advisers for agricultural policy for decades.

“Dr. Flinchbaugh’s legacy as an educator and advocate will live on through his work at K-State and his lifetime of dedication to agriculture. I will not only miss his guidance, but I will also miss his friendship, wit and humor.”

Flinchbaugh grew up in York, Pennsylvania, and earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Penn State University. He earned a doctoral degree in agricultural economics from Purdue University before joining the K-State faculty in 1971.

At the time of his death, he was professor emeritus in K-State’s Department of Agricultural Economics, teaching a 400-level course in agricultural policy each fall. He also served several years as chair of the Landon Lecture Patrons, who support the university’s prestigious Landon Lecture Series.

A dynamic speaker, it was reported that Flinchbaugh would receive as many as 100 speaking invitations per year. He authored more than 100 publications and co-authored a textbook on agricultural policy.

Flinchbaugh’s no-nonsense style was both loved and cursed; he was known to lay out the facts of an issue whether it was politically correct or not. In a biographical sketch detailing his speaking qualifications, a farmer in Colby once said about Flinchbaugh: “I do not agree with a damn thing you said, but the next time you are in town making a speech, I will be here.”

K-State honored Flinchbaugh with its prestigious Outstanding Teacher Award three times during his career. It is estimated that he taught agricultural policy to more than 4,000 undergraduate students. He connected the university to hundreds of thousands of people by giving presentations to farmers, agricultural business groups and more through its extension mission.

“Our students, faculty and staff are deeply saddened by the news of the passing of Dr. Barry Flinchbaugh, and our thoughts are with the Flinchbaugh family during this challenging time,” said Ernie Minton, dean of the K-State College of Agriculture and director of K-State Research and Extension. “Barry was known as the absolute authority on agricultural policy for decades. Few faculty members have had the opportunity to impact so many students and at the same time affect national agricultural policy as Dr. Flinchbaugh.

“We are going to miss his presence on campus, his expertise, his direct talk, his friendship and his affable personality and wit,” Minton said. “We will never forget the mischievous smile underneath his white beard and the bump of his walking cane on the floor following the delivery of a good one-liner.”

Upon his retirement in 2004 as the state leader of agricultural economics, a news release from K-State Research and Extension quotes Flinchbaugh as saying he wants college students and experienced farmers alike to have fun while they’re learning.

“But I also want them to be uncomfortable… to think outside the box. Occasionally you’ll make somebody mad. That’s one of the risks. But they’ll remember what you said.”

Flinchbaugh said one of his proudest professional moments came in 1971-1974 when he worked on a farm tax issue. During that time, he gave 300 presentations and visited all 105 counties in Kansas at least once.

“Barry Flinchbaugh was a man who loved his family, students, university and country,” said Mark Gardiner, Gardiner Angus Ranch, Ashland. “He cared about all people, from the president of the United States to young people trying to learn. We all were better educated after learning from Barry, yet we were better people from experiencing his zest for life.”

Flinchbaugh is survived in the family’s Manhattan home by his wife, Cathy. Flinchbaugh’s family will conduct a private family burial and plans to host a public celebration of his life sometime after the pandemic. Contributions in honor of Flinchbaugh may be made to the Flinchbaugh Scholarship Fund, the Flinchbaugh Agricultural Policy Chair, or a charity of their choice in his name.

In a statement, U.S. Sen. Jerry Moran, Kansas, said the following:

“Dr. Barry Flinchbaugh was an icon of agricultural policy in Kansas and throughout the nation. Dr. Flinchbaugh was well known for his involvement in helping craft farm bills for nearly five decades, and his authority on agriculture issues made him a trusted advisor to me and many prominent federal officials of both parties throughout his lifetime.

“More importantly, Dr. Flinchbaugh was my friend. We met when I called him more than 30 years ago to ask a question about Kansas tax policy. Ever since, I’ve admired and respected (loved) him. He spoke his mind, told me what he thought and made me a better senator and person. His death is a huge loss to me and all of his many friends, and it is hard to find the words to capture a man revered by so many. There may be no Kansan whose company I enjoyed more.

“Each year I would make a surprise visit to his ag policy class at K-State. His trademark sarcasm, wit and quips that made him a talented professor and a sought-after speaker was always on full display at the front of the classroom. I saw he loved and cared about his students and these feelings were mutual.

“There is no doubt Dr. Flinchbaugh’s presence in ag policy will be felt for generations to come through the thousands of students he taught and mentored during his decadeslong career as a professor at K-State. His loss will be felt deeply within the ag community, and Robba and I will be praying for Dr. Flinchbaugh’s family and loved ones during this time.”

Amy Button Renz, president and CEO of the K-State Alumni Association, said, “Barry Flinchbaugh was a wonderful member of the K-State family and a friend to not only the K-State Alumni Association but to me and many of our staff. He led multiple Traveling Wildcats tours for the association and had a very loyal following. His kindness, wit and infamous personality will truly be missed. My heartfelt sympathies are with Cathy and his children.

“Each year, the K-State Alumni Association presents the Flinchbaugh Family Wildcat Pride Award to a current or emeritus K-State faculty or staff member for his or her advocacy of alumni relations, with a special emphasis on support and participation in alumni programs that engage members of the Wildcat family. An original recipient of the award in 2011, Barry and Cathy endowed the award with a gift in 2015.

“Barry’s family was very important to him and he loved to share stories about his children,” Renz said. “We are honored to have an award named in honor of his family at the Association. Barry had unbelievable pride in Kansas State University and understood the important role that faculty and staff hold in strengthening the bond between alumni and their alma mater.”

Stabenow Finally Releases Full Text of Senate Farm Bill; Here's What It Means for Agriculture

Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:35:09 GMT

Stabenow unveiled 1,397-page details of her long-awaited farm bill Monday morning. This comes as early Sunday evening Pro Farmer broke the news that Senate Ag Chairwoman (D-Mich.) had briefed Democrats but not Republicans on her coming farm bill text, which was expected to be released Monday.

Stabenow said in a news release and summary of the bill , “The foundation of every successful farm bill is built on holding together the broad, bipartisan farm bill coalition. This is a strong bill that invests in all of agriculture, helps families put food on the table, supports rural prosperity, and holds that coalition together.”

BREAKING: Chairwoman @SenStabenow Introduces Rural Prosperity and Food Security Acthttps://t.co/qRunZlk6zj
— Senate Ag, Nutrition, & Forestry Committee Dems (@SenateAgDems) November 18, 2024

The Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act includes $39 billion in new resources “to keep farmers farming, families fed, and rural communities strong.” The bill builds on the proposal Stabenow released in May by investing new resources and including innovative, new ideas to deliver the assistance farmers need faster.

It provides farmers with the certainty of a 5-year farm bill and the immediate help they need to manage the urgent needs of the present. It doubles down on our commitment to rural communities, ensures that the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) keeps up with the realities of American life, and brings the historic investments in climate-smart conservation practices into the farm bill. These new investments include:

$20 billion to strengthen the farm safety net to support all of agriculture and establishes a permanent structure for disaster assistance so emergency relief reaches farmers faster;
$8.5 billion to help families make ends meet, put food on the table, and improve access to nutrition assistance;
$4.3 billion to improve quality of life in the rural communities that millions of Americans call home.”

Farm CPA Paul Neiffer has already combed through the bill, and says, “This is our first preview of the Senate Farm Bill Proposal. There appears to be some benefit to production Ag, however, many of the proposals seem to penalize production ag such as the following:

Very limited increase in base acres
Restriction on payments due to ownership of farmland by higher AGI individuals or entities
Reduction in AGI limits
No change to definition of farm income
Possible limit on PLC payments
Items that may benefit production ag include:
Permanent ERP (although this is a very messy program)
Partial advance payments of ARC and PLC
Automatic 2023 and 2024 ARC or PLC decisions”

Senate GOP Ag Committee Ranking Member Reacts

Senate Ag Committee ranking member John Boozman (R-Ark.) on X wrote: “An 11th hour partisan proposal released 415 days after the expiration of the current farm bill is insulting. America’s farmers deserve better.”

“An 11th hour partisan proposal released 415 days after the expiration of the current farm bill is insulting. America’s farmers deserve better.” RM @JohnBoozman
— Senate Ag Committee Republicans (@SenateAgGOP) November 18, 2024

Meanwhile, the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) issued the following statement:

“Though America’s pork producers appreciate Chairwoman Stabenow’s efforts to publish Farm Bill text, this is simply not a viable bill, as it fails to provide a solution to California Prop. 12,” said NPPC President Lori Stevermer, a pork producer from Easton, Minn. “Pork producers have continually spoken up about the negative impacts of this issue, and it is a shame these conversations were disregarded.”

In May, NPPC secured 100 percent of pork producers’ priorities in the House Agriculture Committee-passed bipartisan 2024 Farm Bill. In June, producers once again secured all policy priorities in Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member John Boozman’s 2024 Farm Bill framework.

NPPC said it urges both chambers of Congress to swiftly consider and pass a Farm Bill this year that includes a fix to California Proposition 12, a state law that places arbitrary housing standards on the pork industry, creating uncertainty for pork producers as they look to continue their operations to the next generation.

Additional Impact on Agriculture from Farm CPA

In a post this morning, Paul Neiffer of Farm CPA Report included a quick preview of the items that jumped out at him relative to the farm bill details released by Stabenow.

Reference Prices: The House proposal raised reference prices by approximately 10-20%. The Senate proposal appears to raise reference prices by a flat 5% (rounded). Although it appears that Cotton only went up by 4% instead of 5%.
Increase in Base Acres
- Only underserved and disadvantaged farmers may increase base acres
- Based on average of 2018-2022 plantings
- Includes prevent planted acres
- Maximum increase of 160 acres per farm
- If disadvantage farmer does not farm acres during 2025-2029, then increased base acres are eliminated
- Special 2023 and 2024 ARC/PLC election
- Automatic election to be paid the highest amount for 2023 and 2024 crop year even if the farmer originally elected ARC or PLC.

Limit on PLC Payment: The maximum amount of payment for PLC will be 15% of the effective reference price. As example, assume a farmer has a PLC yield of 200 bushels for corn and the effective reference price is $4.30 and the final corn harvest price is $3.50. Under the old PLC rules, the farmer could receive 200 bushels times 80 cents per bushel or $160. Under this proposal, the farmer is limited to 65 cents or $130 per acre.
Partial PLC Payments: Instead of waiting until after October 1 to collect a PLC payment, the farmer, in certain situations may elect to receive up to 50% of the crop beginning February 1. This is based on firm projections by USDA that the final harvest price will be below the effective reference price. If USDA pays too much, then the farmer must pay it back.
Agricultural Risk Coverage: As expected, the Bill increases the guarantee from the current 86% to 88%, less than the 90% in the House Bill. However, not expected, the Bill increases the maximum payment to 12.50% of benchmark revenue, matching the House Bill and makes this retroactive to the 2024 crop. 2023 crop remains at 10%.
Partial ARC Payments: Provides same mechanism for partial payments as under PLC.
Increase to Marketing Loan Rates: For 2025 crops and subsequent years, the loan rate will be the lesser of 110% of current loan rates or an adjustment based on current input costs versus a five-year average.
Sugar Program: Increase sugar cane payment to 24 cents per pound for 2025-2029. Sugar beet growers will receive 136.5% of sugar cane payment rate.
Permanent ERP: Emergency Relief Program would be made permanent (at least until next farm bill). Payment limits of $500,000 for specialty crops and $250,000 for all other crops.
Terms appear similar to old ERP programs, but it does not mandate how USDA will administer it, etc. Also, no extra payment limit if you can prove you are a farmer. This may still be messy for CPAs to help farmers calculate their claim. Also, requires farmers to insure all acres.
Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) limits: AGI limits dropped from $900,000 to $700,000.
- Increases AGI limits to $1.5 million for specialty and high-value crops.
- What happens if a farmer grows both? The Bill does not address this, other than likely leave it up to USDA to come up with rules.
- Waiver of AGI rules available to economically distressed producer.
- It appears that no payments will be allowed if the land is owned by someone or an entity whose AGI is over $700,000. This means that a farmer who is cash renting that ground will not qualify for any payment on that ground. Under current rules and the House Farm Bill proposal, any farmer who is cash renting the ground and their AGI is under the limit will qualify for a payment. This is a major change and will create the law of unintended consequences. They seem to want to not have an incentive for wealthier individuals to purchase land since their high AGI will not qualify them for any payments but under current rules they get no payment anyway.

Increase in CCC Scoring: Section 1708 indicates that for purposes of CBO scoring, the restrictions on utilizing CCC funds shall be $6.7 billion per year for 2024-2033. The last scoring by CBO was $400 million per year.

CRP Rentals Limit Increased to $125,000 from current $50,000

Crop Insurance Changes: Increases subsidies for beginning and veteran farmers and ranchers to essentially match House proposal.
- Increases SCO to allow for payment at 88% instead of 86% of guarantee. House was at 90%.
- Increases premium subsidies.
Makes improvements to Whole Farm and Micro Farm insurance plans.

Comments:

Several contacts, asked to respond to Stabenow’s late farm bill details, used the same words: “Wow, finally, but too late.” Stabenow is departing Congress after this session ends, and veteran farm bill watchers say this late-entry farm bill is not a positive chapter in her long career. Most are asking why she chose today in releasing the details, and why she took a partisan approach in briefing about the matter.

Why John Thune's Election as Senate Majority Leader is Considered Beneficial for U.S. Agriculture

Wed, 13 Nov 2024 19:50:43 GMT

Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) wins Majority Leader race. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) was eliminated on the first ballot. And Thune beat Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) 29-24 on the second ballot.

The Thune selection is good for the U.S. ag sector. He has one of the best staff in Congress.

The leadership race unfolded in two rounds of voting: 

In the first ballot, Scott was eliminated. 
In the second and final ballot, Thune secured 29 votes, defeating Cornyn, who received 24 votes.

Donald Trump stayed out of the contest but did make public demands that the incoming majority leader allow him to make recess appointments to his Cabinet. All three men quickly agreed.

Thune’s election as Majority Leader is considered beneficial for the U.S. ag sector for several reasons: 

Agricultural background: Thune has a deep background in ag policy and is a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee. 
Farm bill experience: He has been involved in writing several farm bills, demonstrating his expertise in agricultural legislation. 
Conservation programs: Thune is an avid supporter of conservation title programs like the Conservation Stewardship Program and Conservation Reserve Program.
Bipartisan approach: He is a skilled negotiator, working for the benefit of all.
Constituency focus: Coming from South Dakota, an agriculture-based state, Thune is likely to keep agricultural interests at the forefront of his agenda.  • Experienced staff: Thune has one of the best staffs in Congress, which can be crucial for effective policymaking and implementation.

Of note: This leadership change marks the end of Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) 18-year tenure as the Senate’s Republican leader. Thune will assume the role of Majority Leader for the next two years, coinciding with President-elect Donald Trump’s second term. While Thune has had differences with Trump in the past, he has recently worked to improve their relationship and has pledged to advance Trump’s legislative agenda.

Which Presidential Candidate Is More Likely to Tame Inflation or Support Farm Policies and Biofuels?

Mon, 04 Nov 2024 19:29:27 GMT

The presidential race is a close one , according to election analysts. And when it comes to agriculture, there’s an immense focus on the potential impact on trade, inflation, farm policy and biofuels.

Ahead of the election, the October Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor asked economists which presidential candidate will be better for agriculture on taming inflation, providing more certainty on farm policy, as well as more likely to support biofuels policies. The Monthly Monitor is an anonymous survey of 70 ag economists from across the U.S.

On the question of which candidate would be more effective at taming inflation, 53 percent said Donald Trump.
When it comes to providing more certainty on farm policy and crop insurance, 61 percent of economists said Trump will provide more certainty.
However, when looking at policies that benefit biofuels, 53 percent of economists said Kamala Harris.

45Z and Biofuels Tax Credit in Question

Today, there is no clarity on 45Z that’s causing soybean processors like Cargill and Bunge to possibly slow or even idle production by the end of the year.

“We have industry looking to shut down production of biofuel. If we don’t get the 45Z requirements here released soon, and that doesn’t look likely, unfortunately, that’s going to hurt demand for soybean crushing for soybeans per se,” Suderman said.

“The fact that we don’t have those today, I think, is impeding investment in the sector. And people are asking for that before they spend millions of dollars to do that. And I think that has been a hiccup,” said Brown.

Role of the Federal Government

Heading into a crucial election with not just the presidential race, but also the House and Senate, the October Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor asked, “What is the most important role of the federal government?”

Forty-six percent of economists ranked financial aid as the top priority. Nearly 43 percent said it’s passing a farm bill.

October Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound)

“There’s all this discussion that the safety net is inadequate relative to commodity programs, and there’s the potential for some rather large ARC and PLC payments to come,” said Brown. “But are they too late? That’s the question. Is it too late in the cycle? Does any type of ad hoc support through a farm financial package bridge that gap?”

The October survey of economists also asked them to weigh in on the fate of the farm bill. The majority of economists think Congress will pass a new farm bill in 2025, but 21 percent think it could be 2026 before it crosses the finish line.

Farm Bill Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor

(Lindsey Pound )

Your Next Reads:

Presidential Poll Results: How Farmers and Economists View Candidates’ Impact on Agriculture

Will USDA Fumble The 45Z Football?

Which Presidential Candidate Would Have the Biggest Impact on Ag?

A Possible Recession Still Hangs Over the Ag Economy, But Positive Shifts Are Starting to Surface

Time is of the Essence for the Farm Bill, Vilsack Says

Mon, 28 Oct 2024 18:57:06 GMT

“Time is of the essence. We need a farm bill now,” U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack said during a conversation with members of the American Farmland Trust.

He said that time is running short for Congress to come together to address the farm bill in a bipartisan way.

“Either we have a real bipartisan deal on a new farm bill, or, at a minimum, an extension of the existing farm bill,” Vilsack said.

A farm bill would at least add some certainty for farmers and their lenders, he pointed out. So far, Vilsack has been fairly general in saying just what exactly he would like to see in a farm bill, pointed out Gary Crawford, reporting for USDA.

“The farm bill needs to be one that is not leaving anyone behind, whether that be farmers concerned about losing their farms in tight times or working families struggling to get by,” Vilsack said.

Vilsack added that lawmakers need to get together in a bipartisan way to craft a realistic, practical farm bill.

“Frankly, the longer we wait, the harder it is to get this done,” Vilsack said.

Your Next Read: It is Time to Pass to Farm Bill Now, Pork Producers Say

Is Agriculture on the Brink of a Farm Economy Cliff? The Emotional Testimonies from Capitol Hill this Week

Thu, 12 Sep 2024 15:40:14 GMT

Is agriculture on the brink of an impending farm economy cliff? A panel of experts testified before the House Ag Committee this week about the severe challenges facing agriculture, all the way from the farmer to the supply chain.

The hearing on Capitol Hill comes as net farm income is forecast to decrease by $43 billion from 2023 to 2024, marking the most significant two-year decline in history. Meanwhile, production expenses are forecast to increase by $17 billion.

During the hearing the Chair of the House Ag Committee expressed his concerns about another farm financial crisis brewing.

“We are living through the largest two-year decline in farm income in history,” said Rep. G.T. Thompson (R-PA), House Agriculture Committee Chair during the hearing on Tuesday. “At the end of 2024, total farm sector debt will be the highest the U.S. has seen since at least 1970. 3:45 Most farmers and ranchers, including those here with us today, are likely to be worse off financially by years’ end.”

Dana Allen-Tully provided insightful comments and testimony during the hearing that captured the anxiety and price downturn in U.S. agriculture She and her family run a diversified farm in Eyota, Minnesota, producing dairy, corn, soybeans, and alfalfa. She also serves as President of the Minnesota Corn Growers Association, representing 7,000 farm families across the state.

“Unless conditions change we’re facing a ‘perfect storm’ although I don’t think it will be fully understood until next year when farmers are unable to secure loans because they can’t cash flow,” said Allen-Tulley. “Plummeting crop prices, high production costs, doubling interest rates, natural disasters and tightening credit are just some of key culprits, as well as depleting working capital.”

She discussed the importance of passing a stronger farm bill this year, and shared the economic challenges producers are facing. We’re heading into a “perfect storm” of plummeting crop prices, high production costs, rising interest rates, natural disasters, and tightening credit, leading to depleted working capital, she stressed.

She noted recent analyses by the Federal Reserve Bank and the Farm Bureau highlight the brewing trouble, with John Deere’s layoffs as an early warning sign. An extension of the current farm bill won’t prevent economic issues, she informed, and a new farm bill, while essential, may not be timely enough. She said Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) recently emphasized the need for a disaster supplemental to address these challenges.

Alley-Tully cited USDA estimates projecting a drastic fall in farm income this year, marking the largest year-to-year drop ever recorded. From 2022 to 2024, net farm income will have fallen by 40%, explaining the declining farmer sentiment and increased mental health issues in rural America.

For farmers to break even this year, she detailed, national average corn yields must be 219 bushels per acre, and soybeans 56 bushels per acre — both significantly higher than the past 10-year average. Losses per acre are projected to be over $150, with even higher losses in Minnesota.

Her bottom line: Farm and ranch families need help. The Commodity Title and Crop Insurance provisions in the House farm bill, she concluded, provide a meaningful safety net, with a $4.10 PLC/ARC reference price and improved revenue thresholds. These measures are crucial, especially under current conditions, she said. While she supports these provisions in the next farm bill, she added it’s important to resume ERP payments for 2022 and consider a disaster supplemental for near-term assistance.

Other witnesses pointed out a host of economic issues are converging to lower net farm income by 25 percent from 2023 to 2024, which is depleting working capital and worsening credit conditions.

“With rising input costs and lower commodity prices farmers and ranchers have worked through the liquidity and working capital they built up over the past few years at a more rapid rate than anticipated and are now beginning to leverage equity through refinancing debt,” said
Tony Hotchkiss, Chairman, Ag and Rural Bankers Committee, American Bankers Association. “This has made ag bankers feel like they are looking over the cliff when it comes to the farm economy.”

Other witnesses urged policymakers to enhance risk management tools through a new farm bill to avert a crisis. And the Chairman agreed that is his goal.

“There are a few pundits that have taken the last few months to spread misinformation about this committee’s bipartisan product in an attempt to sow division. 5:00 Let me be clear; this is a farm bill that provides significant improvements for all producers,” Thompson said.

Thompson also said resources dedicated to the total farm safety net have declined 30 percent in the last 22 years with the commodity title seeing an 81-percent reduction. He says they want to change that with the new farm bill and he’s still open to trying get a bill passed in 2024 to avert a farm financial crisis.

Beyond the farm bill, Allen-Tully noted issues like trade deficits and flawed regulations impact farm families. She urged new trade agreements and better rules for biofuels to support domestic producers. “We face high stakes in farming, risking everything annually for thin margins. This discourages young people from farming, posing a problem for food security. Policies must reflect modern farming realities to address global hunger.”

South Dakota Ranching Couple In A High-Stakes Fence Line Dispute With U.S. Forest Service

Wed, 28 Aug 2024 16:49:56 GMT

For ranchers who rely on public lands grazing for their cattle, a recent indictment of a South Dakota couple brings up concerns.

Kaitlynn Glover, Public Lands Council (PLC) Executive Director, recently shared about a land dispute between Charles and Heather Maude and the U.S. Forest Service with AgriTalk’s Chip Flory.

“This situation is almost unfathomable,” Glover says. “You have a husband and wife, mother and father to two young children. They have been grazing permittees, not only demonstrating the value of grazing, but being really good partners with the Forest Service for quite some time. They have grazing allotments. They have a small hay operation to put up some forage for the winter. Earlier this year, that really productive relationship with the Forest Service took a hard left turn when they were sort of the victim of an overzealous law enforcement pursuit and federal criminal charges for theft of federal land.”

Glover says the details of the case defy reality.

“These charges are the result of a boundary dispute between private ground and the Forest Service grasslands,” she explains. “This poor family is really trying to defend not only themselves, but their right to graze adjacent to federal lands, and that’s really, really troubling.”

This situation is normally resolved through administrative means, she adds, but the agency moved outside of the normal process, Glover says. The Maudes have each been indicted on separate criminal charges.

What Triggered the Dispute?

“Law enforcement typically deal with things like human trafficking and drugs on federal land,” Glover says. “They don’t deal with fence line disputes. Those fence line boundary survey issues go through an administrative process. But the law enforcement team in South Dakota decided this was going to be their issue of the day, took it out of the administrative process, targeted this family and set about a course of events that has made a lot of federal grazing permittees, those cattle and sheep producers, questioning their own relationships with the Forest Service across the West.”

This sort of dispute might make other ranchers hesitant to work with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), another federal agency with federal lands

“BLM and Forest Service are sort of painted with the same brush because they’re both federal agencies,” Glover says. “They’re both supposed to be federal partners. These federal grounds mean the forage on these acres is incredibly valuable for Western ag production.”

Nearly 40% of the western cattle herd and about 50% of the nation’s sheep herd spend time on public lands, Glover says.

“If you compromise those relationships, it has rippling consequences that are felt, not just by the families who have stewarded these grounds forever, but also by rural communities, and then ultimately by people, even here in Washington, D.C., who look up at the sky in the fall and wonder why there’s smoke in the air,” she adds.

At this time, the Maudes have each had to hire separate counsel and are going through the legal process.

“We here in Washington, the Public Lands Council, our national affiliates, the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, the Association of National Grasslands have been working with the congressional delegation from South Dakota and other partners in Congress to bring attention to this situation, making it clear this absolutely should not be a criminal case,” Glover says. “These parents, this husband and wife team, should not be facing 10 years in prison over a fence line. Finding a resolution that’s suitable for this family is a huge priority.”

Additionally, PLC and other organizations want to make sure this case doesn’t set a precedent.

“We’re making sure the agency doesn’t make this a policy where you go to law enforcement before using all of the other tools at your disposal,” Glover says. “There is a two pronged approach here. That’s why our national associations are here. We have the avenues to have these conversations and to get some things done. We’re using all the tools at our disposal to make sure we’re not going to see a whole-scale change in how federal lands are managed and how disputes are resolved.”

Listen to the entire AgriTalk episode.

Statement from U.S. Forest Service
Wade Muehlhof, spokesperson for the U.S. Forest Service, shared this following statement with Drovers: “The Forest Service values its relationship with our neighbors and where possible we try to resolve any issues through administrative actions prior to taking any legal actions. It is important for us to work together to steward these lands and that work depends on strong relationships between the Forest Service and permittees. If permittees have concerns or issues with the terms and conditions or other aspects of their permit that need to be resolved, they are encouraged to work with their local District Ranger.”

Additional background on timeline of events:

The USDA Forest Service handled this situation according to normal operating procedures for lands trespass situations.
The Maudes were first informed in December 2020 that their plan to install a pivot sprinkler would trespass on National Forest System lands. The Forest Service provided notice of trespass to the Maudes in March 2024 after they installed an unauthorized fence and pivot sprinkler impacting the Buffalo Gap National Grasslands. Subsequently, the Forest Service observed crops had been planted and an irrigation system installed on National Forest System land without authorization, despite the Maudes having been informed that they were trespassing.
The agency was unable to resolve this matter through administrative means and therefore referred it to the US Attorney’s office, which as is normal protocol.
The Department of Justice is the agency responsible for determining whether to bring criminal charges.
In June 2024, a Grand Jury issued a True Bill of Indictment on Charles and Heather Maude for violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 641 and 2, Theft of Government Property.
In June 2024, Forest Service Law Enforcement served Charles Maude and his wife, Heather Maude, a summons in the criminal case at their residence. At no point during this contact was anyone placed under arrest or taken into custody, nor did any officer utilize any tactical uniform, gear or assault weapons.

Your Next Read: Dealing With Wildfires One Day At a Time

Ag Secretary Vilsack Has A Clear Message For Farm-State Lawmakers On Passing A New Farm Bill: 'Get Realistic'

Fri, 21 Jun 2024 22:21:13 GMT

During an interview with USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack on AgriTalk Thursday, the focus was on the farm bill. He was asked to start with Title I regarding the differences between the Republicans and Democrats relative to the farm bill negotiations. Are those differences negotiable? Vilsack’s response:

“I don’t think we’re close to getting a farm bill done until the folks who are negotiating the farm bill are realistic about what’s doable within a constrained resource environment. The Republican proposal, whether it’s the House version or the Senate version, essentially requires a significant amount of additional [funding] coming into the farm bill, in order to pay for all of the various promises that have been made from reference prices to crop insurance premium assistance to all the other proposals that are contained in those bills. It can amount to over $50 billion of additional resources that CBO identified within the existing farm bill or new money coming in.”

“The reality is they just don’t have it [the funding]. First of all, they’re taking resources from nutrition assistance which is a red line for Democrats. They’re also essentially playing fairly fast and loose with the amount of savings from reducing liability and future secretary’s ability to use the CCC. The Congressional Budget Office we believe is probably going to score that about $8 billion in savings. They need $53 billion to be able to make it work. So at the end of the day, if we’re really serious about getting a farm bill done, I think we have to lower people’s expectations and we have to really take a look at what is absolutely necessary in order to provide help and assistance to the farm to farm country. We’re not there yet. I think Senator Debbie Stabenow’s (D-Mich.) approach is more realistic, and more reasonable. [Stabenow] has identified additional resources outside of the farm bill that Senator Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has promised would be available, so she’s identified some real money to put into the farm bill. I think there’s some serious concerns on the House side and I think that’s a problem.”

Watch the full interview here:

Contentious Areas of the Farm Bill

Asked if there was any give in some contentious areas, Vilsack said: “There’s going to have to be give. I think that there is a genuine desire on the part of perhaps both Republicans and Democrats to see the potential for the conservation resources that are in the inflation Reduction Act (IRA) moved into the farm bill, but with the guardrails intact in terms of the directing it for climate smart agricultural purposes. If you take the guardrails out, I think then you lose Democratic support for moving that into the baseline. So, I think there’s an opportunity there for conversation.”

“I think there’s an opportunity to creatively use the CCC in a way that actually does provide some additional resources or capacity. But I don’t think it’s anywhere near $53 billion. And as a result, that means that you have to lower expectations. Look, you know, the reality is when you talk about reference prices, you’re talking about roughly 22 commodities out of 130 commodities we have that are covered by crop insurance. We’re talking about the fact that over 50% or so of those benefits go to the top 10% of agricultural sale farms in the country in terms of sales. There’s a real serious question here, especially given the fact that we’re seeing so many farms that we’ve lost over the course of the last 30 or 40 years. Can we continue to sustain the number of farms we’ve lost? Its 544,970 farms since 1981. I mean, are we okay with that? Are we okay with losing 151 million acres of land in 1981 that’s not in farming today. Are we okay with the impact on rural communities. This is one aspect of this. When you look at the fact that a disproportionate share of the military comes from rural communities and now you see the military having concerns about whether or not they have adequate resources and people to draw from in terms of an all-volunteer military and they’re thinking about, you know, expanding who could qualify and so forth. My gosh, you know, these are serious issues.

“So that’s a long way of saying I think there’s a way to get to yes, but people have to lower the expectations. They have to really look at what’s going on in the countryside, and tailor a farm bill in a way that responds to the challenges of more farmers, many farmers, not just a few.”

Snap Overpayments?

We noted that Sen. John Boozman (R-Ark.), ranking member on the Senate Ag Committee, put out an interesting graphic on the overpayments, etc., in the SNAP program and it was a rather large figure. We asked if there was wiggle room on looking into that as far as better enforcement and moving some of that potential funding or not into the farm bill. Vilsack’s response:

“Let’s be clear about that number. First of all, it isn’t necessarily overpayments. It’s also under payments. That is a function of state government. And we are working with the state governments because they’re the ones who administer the SNAP program. And there’s an opportunity for us to work collaboratively with them to shore up and to begin returning back to where things were before Covid, where there were ongoing interviews and things of that nature, and that’s going to happen, but that’s not necessarily going to be the resources sufficient to pay for $53 billion of increases in reference prices.”

(Farm Journal)

Conservation Funding

Noting if there is any area where there is some agreement, it’s on conservation. We asked Vilsack if the Democrats and Republicans in Congress can find common. His response:

“I think we could get to yes easily if the understanding was we’ll move the balance of the IRA conservation resources into the farm bill with the understanding that the climate guardrails remain. I don’t think there’d be any disagreement on the part of folks to do that.

“There’s roughly somewhere in the neighborhood of $14 billion to $15 billion left of what was allocated in the IRA that’s available. There’s tremendous demand and interest as we had 45,000 contracts last year, a record number of contracts in the various programs, and we’ve got waiting lists. We’re hiring more people for NRCS (Natural Resource Conservation Service). So, there’s a real interest there. I think we can get to yes.”

Using CCC Funding in Question

Regarding the CCC program, Vilsack said: “There’s probably a way that you can put some restraints or utilize the CCC in a way that generates some savings, but it’s just not $53 billion. Let’s get real about it.”

We then turned our focus on past remarks Vilsack has made that climate smart programs could be the next revenue stream for farmers. We told him farmers are in the prove-it stage and asked him for an update. His response:

“We’re beginning to see products that are actually generating value added. I use the rice product that was produced by Louisiana and Arkansas rice producers, getting a premium for producing climate smart. I’m told that there are dairies that are now lined up to get a value- added premium for potential export opportunities. I’m told that there are also a number of producers that are also now seeing increases as a result of climate smart practices. We’re seeing interest in sustainable aviation fuel. That’s a new market opportunity and we are in the process of working with Treasury and with the Department Transportation and EPA to craft guidance for the 45Z tax credit, which is really the significant tax credit for individual and bundled activities on the climate smart side that will allow us to qualify ethanol that’s produced from those crops to benefit from sustainable aviation fuel. That’s a new opportunity. We’re spending resources from the IRA to better align our tools to measure, monitor and verify the results of climate smart practices which are going to allow folks to qualify and participate in ecosystem markets. That’s a new revenue source. We’re seeing interest in renewable energy in terms of trying to do it in a way that doesn’t reduce productive agriculture, but it actually adds to productive agriculture. I was out in Colorado recently, hearing from folks who are now seeing solar panels being raised instead of three feet now 10 feet off the ground so that you can actually have dairy cows grazing underneath the solar panels. So, the innovation and creativity are there to increase the level of income that small and midsize producing farms can produce. At the end of the day, they’re going to have to figure this out because we can’t continue to lose farms.”

New Poll: Farmers Want Congress to Protect Climate-Smart Agriculture in Farm Bill

Sun, 16 Jun 2024 12:38:43 GMT

A new Farm Journal poll conducted on behalf of Invest in Our Land across 10 leading agricultural states shows that American farmers and ranchers overwhelmingly believe conservation funding has an important role to play in building their operations’ resilience to increasingly extreme weather and addressing the effects of climate change.

The poll — which surveyed 1,019 farmers, ranchers and producers across Pennsylvania, Arkansas, Georgia, Minnesota, Iowa, Colorado, South Dakota, Michigan, Montana, and Wisconsin — also revealed that, by a double-digit margin, farmers and ranchers want Congress to protect $20 billion in conservation funding originally authorized by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and ensure those funds remain dedicated to climate-smart practices in the upcoming Farm Bill.

Commissioned by Invest in Our Land and conducted by Farm Journal’s Trust In Food initiative , the survey shows that:

A supermajority of farmers believe conservation funding has an important role to play in building farms’ resilience to extreme weather and addressing the impacts of climate change. 85% of respondents said that conservation funding plays an important role in helping farmers and ranchers adapt in the face of increasingly extreme weather. Similarly, two-thirds (67%) said that conservation funding plays an important role in protecting our planet from the effects of our changing climate.

(Farm Journal)
Two-thirds of farmers say conservation programs increase farms’ resilience to extreme weather. 66% of respondents said they agree that conservation programs “help farmers implement practices and make on-farm upgrades that can increase operational resilience in the event of extreme weather events (such as droughts, floods, etc.)”

(Farm Journal)
6 in 10 farmers support the IRA’s investment in conservation funding. Sixty percent of respondents indicated that they support the IRA’s $20 billion investment in agricultural conservation programs. By contrast, only 18% oppose this investment.

(Farm Journal)
Farmers oppose removing climate-smart requirements from IRA conservation funding by a double-digit margin. 41% of respondents said they would oppose congressional efforts to remove the requirement that the $20 billion in IRA conservation funding be directed only toward conservation practices that have proven to be more effective in reducing carbon emissions (the so-called “climate guardrails”), while only 28% said they would support such an action — representing a 13-point margin in favor of keeping the dollars dedicated to climate-smart conservation. (24% of respondents had no opinion.)

(Farm Journal)

Toplines are available here .

In 2022, Congress made a historic investment through the IRA to help America’s farmers and ranchers adopt tried-and-tested conservation practices that boost their businesses and strengthen their farms for the long haul. In 2023 alone, demand by farmers for conservation programs exceeded the additional funding allocated to them .

Farm Bill reauthorization is underway now, which could affect these programs. The House Committee on Agriculture recently reported out a bill that diverts funds away from climate-smart conservation practices.

“Nobody works harder than the American farmer. But right now, many of them are facing serious challenges — including drought, floods, and other increasingly extreme weather that not only threatens our farmers’ livelihoods today, but also puts the future of their farms and their families at risk,” said Joe Hack, spokesperson for Invest in Our Land. “The data is clear: America’s farmers and ranchers know firsthand that climate-smart conservation funding is a crucial tool in helping their farms weather these storms, along with other impacts of a changing climate. As Congress continues to work on these issues in the weeks ahead, we encourage them to continue to listen to the voices of our hard-working farmers and protect climate-smart conservation in the Farm Bill.”

“Time and again, we see U.S. farmers and ranchers stepping up to be good stewards of our nation’s land, air, and water. What this data tells us is that they consider the Farm Bill’s conservation programs to be an important tool in helping them meet these goals,” said Amy Skoczlas Cole, President of Trust In Food at Farm Journal. “While the private sector is increasingly involved in climate-smart agriculture, our experience is that the USDA conservation programs play a steadying and reliable role in helping farmers manage a changing market environment.”

Farmers and ranchers across the country are facing serious challenges, from plummeting profits to skyrocketing costs to increasingly extreme weather. According to the American Farm Bureau Federation, major disasters and extreme weather events — such as drought, floods, and wildfires — caused over $21 billion in crop losses for American farmers and ranchers in 2023 alone.

This new survey shows that farmers and ranchers want to address these issues in the Farm Bill — and they see climate-smart conservation as a key tool for doing so.