“Playing fast and loose”: Vilsack urges realism from GOP as farm bill negotiations hit stalemate (2024)

Mexican laborers cut broccoli stalks for Smith Farms' crew A as the harvest season gets underway at a Smith Farm's field near Fort Fairfield in central Aroostook County. Smith Farm's employ over 150 migrant workers to help in their harvest of both broccoli and potatos.(John Ewing/Portland Press Herald via Getty Images)

");}

In February, during a tense House hearing over funding for the upcoming Farm Bill — one in which Agriculture Committee chair Glenn Thompson classified the current administration as being one that “demonizes farmers” if they do not “subscribe to a far-left climate agenda” — USDA Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack already seemed a little weary when he issued the seemingly simple directive: “The bottom line is, we need to get it done.”

Vilsack’s charge to lawmakers came nearly five months after the 2018 Farm Bill had already expired in September, and as tensions between House Republicans and Democrats over budget priorities had really started to simmer; the Republicans want to allocate more funding to large-scale corporate farms, while Democrats want to prioritize federal nutrition assistance programs and conservation efforts.

However, as evidenced by the fact that the package still isn’t funded, it’s a legislative challenge that’s more easily given than accomplished.

Now, Vilsack has a different message for Republican lawmakers: Be realistic.

“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,” Vilsack said in an interview on the radio program AgriTalk on Thursday.

The Farm Bill, which is typically renewed every five years, governs a wide range of agricultural and food programs. It supports farmers by offering crop insurance to mitigate financial risks from natural disasters or market dips, as well as commodity programs that stabilize prices for staple crops, like corn, soybeans and wheat. It also funds the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC).

In speaking at a House Agriculture Committee meeting in late May, Rep. Tracey Mann, a Republican from Kansas, summarized the enormity of the legislation: “A lot of people forget why we need a five-year farm bill, why it’s so necessary to balance fiscal responsibility reform with anticipatory policy and why the legislation we pass today ought to reflect the needs of agriculture producers and consumers. It’s because farm bills are felt in every corner of America, in every field and pasture, in every grocery story and agribusiness. The legislation we pass today will have ripple effects for years to come.”

According to Vilsack, the Republican proposals require a significant amount of additional funding “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.”

He continued: “The reality is they just don't have [the funding]. First of all, they're taking resources from nutrition assistance which is a red line for Democrats.” Secondly, Vilsack said, Republicans are “essentially playing fast and loose” with the future agriculture secretary’s ability to use the Commodity Credit Corporation, a government agency that supports farmers through loans, subsidies and buying surplus crops to stabilize market prices.

Vilsack’s appearance on AgriTalk largely centered around whether the disputes between the two parties could be resolved in such a way that would lead to actually passing the Farm Bill before the one-year extension of the 2018 law runs up. However, lawmakers on both sides have already indicated they would rather issue another temporary extension of the current law — pushing a vote for a longer-term measure until after the November election — than rush (or compromise, depending on how one interprets their statements) on the $1.5 billion package.

In speaking with the Washington Post, Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said, “I’m not going to support a bad bill.”

The committee’s top Republican, Sen. John Boozman of Arkansas, agreed: “If we don’t make meaningful improvements, if we don’t put more ‘farm’ in the farm bill, we’re better off not having a new farm bill.”

However, Vilsack maintained in speaking with AgriTalk that legislators (and specifically Republican legislators) need to come to the table prepared to make progress.“People have to lower the expectations,” Vilsack said. “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.”