Committee package boosts farm safety‑net measures even as SNAP debate roils markup

The House Committee on Agriculture’s May 13 markup combined a series of farm program changes with broader reconciliation savings that center on SNAP. Supporters said the measure restores predictability for producers while opponents said moving farm provisions through reconciliation breaks a bipartisan tradition and risks passage of a stripped‑down farm policy.

Chairman Thompson described the measure as putting "the farm back in the farm bill," saying the package "bolsters every facet of American agriculture" and provides investments in trade promotion, research and specialty‑crop programs while updating program reference prices and crop‑insurance supports.

Why it matters: Farmers and rural communities face tighter margins after several years of higher input costs, disease outbreaks and extreme weather. Committee supporters argued that updating reference prices and improving crop‑insurance access will provide needed certainty; opponents said the partisan reconciliation route jeopardizes full five‑year farm bill priorities such as rural development and conservation.

Most important facts

- The committee print would adjust reference prices for covered commodities and expand access and cost support for crop insurance, measures supporters said are critical to stabilizing farm income.

- The package includes a multiyear reauthorization of the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program. Representative LaMalfa described the SRS authorization as "a lifeline for places like that in rural... areas that used to depend on timber harvest." Supporters called a three‑year SRS authorization a stopgap for forested counties reliant on timber receipts.

- The print contains investments in export promotion, market access and animal health infrastructure; Representative Mann said the bill "makes crucial investments to support the farmers, ranchers, and ag producers" and noted attention to livestock biosecurity and export programs.

Supporting details and debate

Proponents: Several Republican and some Democratic members praised provisions that raise reference prices, expand crop‑insurance benefits for young and beginning farmers, and invest in export promotion and market development. Representative Fincher (R‑Iowa) said improvements ‘‘help invest on the 3‑legged animal health stool’’ and flagged investments in veterinary and animal disease facilities. Representative Nunn (R‑Iowa) emphasized the need to update the farm safety net after seven years without a reauthorization.

Opponents: Democrats and some Republicans criticized the use of reconciliation to package farm priorities with deep SNAP savings, saying it undermines the chance for a comprehensive bipartisan five‑year farm bill and risks leaving out specialty programs, conservation, broadband and rural development investments that require separate negotiation.

Process notes and committee action

- The chair made the committee print the original text for amendment and said the amendment in the nature of a substitute would be considered as the original text for purposes of amendment. Members were reminded that only germane amendments were in order and that the chair could postpone proceedings on recorded votes.

- The committee set electronic voting for amendment votes. Several members indicated they will offer amendments in subsequent sessions to adjust both SNAP and farm provisions.

Ending

Members on both sides urged a durable farm bill for producers, but they sharply disagreed about procedure. Supporters said the package provides immediate, targeted support to farmers; opponents said the partisan process undermines long‑term bipartisan consensus on farm policy. The committee recessed and scheduled continuation of amendment consideration the following morning.