WASHINGTON – The feud over the farm bill ended at least temporarily in the U.S. House Thursday with a narrow vote approving federal agricultural policy for the next five years — and leaving the future of the Food Stamp program for another day.
Debate in the House was particularly bitter as lawmakers railed against the cutting of nutrition programming, which customarily accounts for 80 percent of spending in the big bill.
“In the spirit of common civility, I ask you to pass the farm bill so I can begin to work on the nutrition part of the bill,” said Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Okla., chairman of the House Agriculture Committee.
However, congressmen in favor of keeping the nutrition portion intact voiced frustration at the split regardless of Lucas’ plea.
“This bill takes from the poor and…[it] promotes hunger in the richest country in the world,” Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., said during debate.
“I finally received a copy of the bill. It appears to have no nutrition title at all, is this a printing error?” Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C., mockingly asked.
The partial farm bill that passed in a 216-208 vote calls for $2 billion in cuts annually to farm subsidies. The entire bill costs nearly $200 billion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
A farm bill that included both farm and nutrition programs failed in the House last month. This came as a surprise to conservative leaders as House Republicans demanded more than 3 percent in cuts to the Food Stamp program, arguing that a $20 million reduction in the program spending was not enough.
However, House members and special interest groups, including conservative coalitions, opposed splitting the legislation into two bills. What the House approved Thursday focused solely on farm subsidies that sustain the American agricultural industry.
“The bill passed by the House today is not a real Farm Bill and is an insult to rural America, which is why it’s strongly opposed by more than 500 farm, food and conservation groups,” said Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., chairwoman of the Senate agriculture committee.
As it stands, the pared down farm bill will continue agriculture programs for five years without covering Food Stamp and nutrition programs. It’s the first time that’s happened since the 1970s, but it is unlikely that the partial bill will survive with such strong opposition.
“Both the Senate [the Senate has approved its own bill]and House bills currently reduce payment limitations and means- testing provisions which we are not in favor of,” Mary Kay Thatcher, senior director of public policy at the American Farm Bureau Federation said Thursday.
The farm bureau prefers a bill that includes both farm and nutrition programs.
“It’s a marriage that has worked quite well for several decades,” Thatcher said.
However, as the partial farm bill moves on to a lengthy conference with the Senate, the farm organization would like to see an extension of existing law, in the event that comprehensive agricultural reform cannot be reached by the deadline of Sept. 30, the close of the fiscal year.
“The sky isn’t going to fall if we don’t get it. A bad bill would be worse,” Thatcher said.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition does not entirely agree with this stance.
“We’re on record in opposition of splitting the bill. It gets us further away from a farm bill that actually gets signed into law,” Fred Hoefner, policy director of the coalition said Thursday.
“We definitely do not want to see things expire. The extension would need to include all parts of farm bill reform. The extension last year left out the parts we care most about,” Hoefner said.
In a statement, the non-profit advocating federal food and farm policy said: “We urge an immediate start to [House-Senate] conference, with a goal of producing a final, comprehensive bill, including nutrition that can be passed and sent to the president for his signature later this summer.”
The White House announced Wednesday it would veto the House’s farm subsidy bill because it “does not contain sufficient commodity and crop insurance reforms.”