Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Federal Budget And Tariffs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Federal delegation staff warn SNAP, Medicaid and farm programs face major risk; tariffs disrupting Vermont trade and maple supply chains
Summary
Catherine Van Hayes, state director for U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, and Ryan McLaren, senior advisor for U.S. Sen. Peter Welch, told the Agriculture, Food Resiliency & Forestry committee that a House‑passed budget reconciliation bill could cut SNAP and Medicaid funding and that new tariffs announced in April are already disrupting Vermont agricultural inputs and small food businesses.
Catherine Van Hayes, state director for U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, and Ryan McLaren, senior advisor for U.S. Sen. Peter Welch, briefed the Agriculture, Food Resiliency & Forestry committee on a budget reconciliation bill in the U.S. Congress and on a new round of tariffs announced in April that officials said are disrupting Vermont commerce.
Why it matters: Committee members were told the House‑passed reconciliation bill contains provisions that could substantially reduce SNAP and Medicaid support and that tariff measures and rapid changes at the border are increasing costs for agricultural inputs and small food‑sector businesses in Vermont.
Van Hayes told the committee the House passed the reconciliation bill with a late, 42‑page amendment and that it now goes to the Senate. She described provisions that could “have a pretty substantial budget impact for the state of Vermont” if Medicaid and SNAP funding are reduced, noting states must balance budgets and would face consequential shortfalls if federal support is cut.
McLaren said that, because much of the usual farm‑bill work has been deferred, elements that would normally be considered in a farm bill are being folded into reconciliation, reducing the prospect of a standalone farm‑bill rewrite this year. He warned the committee that uncertainty and rapidly changing tariff rules are already increasing costs for Vermont producers and suppliers and said the “uncertainty’s being priced in.” He summarized the border situation bluntly: “it’s absolute madness.”
Both staffers offered state‑level data. Van Hayes said Vermont imports about $3.5 billion in goods annually and that Canada accounts for a large share of that trade: roughly 35% of Vermont exports and 67% of imports. She said agricultural products make up about 30% of imports from Canada, worth just under $500 million, and that animal feed accounts for about $56 million of that total. She also said Vermont exports about $645 million to Canada and that trade with Canada supports roughly 17,000 jobs in Vermont.
McLaren and Van Hayes described specific tariff impacts: potash, a fertilizer, is subject to a 10% tariff; some animal feed is not covered by USMCA exemptions and therefore faces higher costs; and antibiotic test kits used in the dairy industry are seeing tariff pressure (Van Hayes cited 10% with the EU and 30% with China). Van Hayes also referenced a Yale Budget Lab estimate of the household cost to Vermonters from tariffs, which she summarized as tens of millions of dollars annually.
They gave manufacturing and supply examples. McLaren described maple‑sugaring equipment and parts crossing the border in complex ways that leave producers unsure what tariffs will apply when equipment reaches the customs officer: “that evaporator is made up of huge chunks of metal ... and the people moving that piece of equipment ... have no idea what they’re gonna have to pay until they get to the border.” Van Hayes and McLaren named small businesses already affected, including Gardner Supply and Caledonia Distilling, and said one producer’s glass bottles came from Italy and were caught up in tariffs. McLaren also cited Farm Credit Service of America data showing farm machinery prices rose far faster than inflation over recent decades and said those trends will be exacerbated by tariff disruption.
On SNAP and other safety‑net programs, Van Hayes warned the committee that proposed changes could shift administrative burdens to states and create large fiscal impacts if the reconciliation bill becomes law. Both staffers urged lawmakers to document state‑level impacts and constituent stories; McLaren asked the committee to collect and forward local examples because “the stories are really helpful in demonstrating ... the impact.”
No federal action was taken at the committee meeting; the session was an informational briefing. Committee members discussed next steps and the chair suggested drafting a letter summarizing state concerns for the federal delegation. Van Hayes and McLaren said Senate committees will produce more detailed analyses and that Vermont officials should press for state‑level impact estimates to send to the delegation.
