If you’ve ever been to a church potluck, you’ve probably pondered a giant bowl of fluffy white salad. What is in that thing?
Marshmallows? Definitely. Probably Cool Whip. Mixed fruit, perhaps. Wait, is that a raisin and carrots? Is that an olive? Couldn’t be.
Now you know what it’s like trying to figure out what’s in the Farm Bill.
“it's not just a Farm Bill. It's a, you know, climate bill. It's a water bill. It's a soil health bill, a human health bill,” said Kate Hansen, who directs the agriculture program for the national Izaak Walton League. “At the end of the day, our lawmakers are making decisions that could have real impacts and make real investments in our natural resources and that's going to benefit all of us.”
So if you’re curious, and hungry, you’ll risk a big helping. A version that cleared the House Agriculture Committee would cost $1.5 trillion over 10 years. It’s opposed by Democrats who run the Senate.
Speaking of hunger, nutrition is the largest single “title” in the Farm Bill. Much of that goes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP.
We called it “food stamps” back in the day.
The melding of agricultural policy and food aid for low-income households in a single bill was by design. Farm state lawmakers could join with members from urban states to pass a bill that provided a safety net for agriculture and food for the hungry.
Now, food is one of the main partisan battle lines preventing the passage of a Farm Bill. A new bill should have been approved last year. Now, members of Congress have set a deadline for Sept. 30. But with an election looming, that’s no likely to happen.
You might have noticed hunger is a big problem in Iowa.
SNAP aid was pared back after the pandemic. Food pantries in many communities are being pushed to the breaking point by growing demand. Gov. Kim Reynolds rejected seeking $29 million in federal food help for kids during summer months in Iowa. The Legislature passed a bill that includes a new asset test for SNAP households that could shove many Iowans out of the program.
The current version of the Farm Bill in the Republican-controlled House would constrain SNAP’s rate of growth, cutting expected future funding by $30 billion over the next decade. Funding is curtailed by halting regular revisions in what’s called the Thrifty Food Plan, which sets SNAP benefits.
Luke Elzinga, board chair of the Iowa Hunger Coalition and advocacy manager at the DMARC Food Pantry Network, said the move would reduce Iowa SNAP funding by $170 million, while cutting household benefits by $67 monthly.
“Anti-hunger advocates in Iowa stand ready to oppose any legislation that would undermine SNAP’s proven effectiveness in helping 265,000 people in Iowa afford to put food on the table,” Elzinga said in a letter from 18 Iowa groups opposed to lower funding. “History has repeatedly shown that the only viable path to passing a Farm Bill is a strong bipartisan effort that involves all stakeholders engaged at the table.”
Another partisan struggle involves conservation funding.
The Farm Bill provides $6 billion to an alphabet soup of conservation programs, including the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, EQUIP, The Conservation Stewardship Program, CSP and the Regional Conservation Partnership Program. RCPP, to name a few.
The programs mainly provide incentives to landowners who want to establish farming practices that improve water quality and soil health. You may scoff at taxpayers paying for mitigating pollution caused by farming, but these programs are just about the only game in town when it comes to driving conservation.
The programs are underfunded. In 2023, 3,898 Iowa landowners applied for funding through EQUIP, Hansen of the Izaak Walton League said. But only 890 were enrolled in the program.
What the Izaak Walton League and other environmental groups want is money for climate-smart ag practices paid for by the Inflation Reduction Act to be rolled into the Farm Bill. There’s about $13 billion available from the IRA, but baking the program into the Farm Bill could fund climate-smart projects for years to come.
It’s an idea that has some bipartisan support. But there are also some Republicans who would rather not mention climate change in the Farm Bill, even as more frequent, intense droughts, flooding and wildfires destroy untold acres of crops.
“These are practices that are not just impacting climate, they're impacting a whole host of things, wildlife, water quality, soil health,” Hansen said.
Climate-smart practices may or may not be effective. But in Washington, D.C., those concerned about our climate crisis have learned to take what they can get.
Chris Jones, a former research engineer at the University of Iowa and one of the state’s top experts on water quality, contends “climate-friendly” efforts leave a lot to be desired.
For one thing, “climate-smart” doesn’t include stemming the loss of nitrous oxide from topsoil due to agricultural practices. Nitrous oxide has a climate impact 300 times greater than carbon dioxide. But Jones said reducing those emissions means using less nitrogen fertilizer, a prospect opposed by some powerful corporate ag interests.
“It’s Kabuki theater intended to show the public agriculture is doing something. And we ignore a herd of elephants in the room,” Jones said.
So, hunger and climate are the main events. But wait, there’s more.
A potential provision of the bill could make it illegal for states to pass measures promoting animal welfare if those rules alter how livestock is raised in other states. It’s mainly aimed at California’s Proposition 12, which brazenly requires gestation pens for hogs big enough for them to turn around. Iowa hog producers say the change is too expensive.
Lawmakers, particularly from states where cattle production is king, want the Farm Bill to require mandatory country of origin labeling on meat products. Consumers would then know where cattle or hogs are born, bred and processed. But the move would increase costs for the packing industry.
And, pertaining to an issue familiar in Iowa, House Republican Rep. Mary Miller of Illinois gained passage for an amendment aimed at tightly restricting hemp-infused products, such as seltzer, that contain intoxicating THC levels. A similar Iowa law is being challenged in court.
Someone is having fun. Politicians can’t let that happen.
As you can see, it’s a big old salad. And I’ve only scratched the surface.
Although mention of the Farm Bill can cause drowsiness and glazed eyes, it’s a pretty big deal, and not just for farmers. At the very least, we’re paying for the bill.
So dig in. Although watching the salad, or the sausage, made in Congress may not leave you with much of an appetite.
(319) 398-8262; todd.dorman@thegazette.com
Opinion content represents the viewpoint of the author or The Gazette editorial board. You can join the conversation by submitting a letter to the editor or guest column or by suggesting a topic for an editorial to editorial@thegazette.com
