HELENA — For the last two years, Congress has debated a new “Farm Bill”: a major piece of legislation setting agriculture policy and spending for years to come. But in both cases, lawmakers were only able to agree to extend the current farm bill – one year at a time.
(Watch the video for more on how the uncertainty on the farm bill affects Montana.)
It’s generally expected a federal farm bill will last five years. The one now in place dates back to 2018, and was originally set to expire in 2023.
Scott Kulbeck, executive vice president of the Montana Farm Bureau Federation, says not having a full new farm bill puts farmers and ranchers in an unclear position.
“Without it, there's a lot of uncertainty,” he said.
Kulbeck says MFBF is talking with Montana’s congressional delegation about the importance of getting something passed before the new expiration date, Sept. 30. After that, programs will begin to lapse.
“If those in the Senate are optimistic, then I just have to be,” said Kulbeck. “It's been a long process, but I feel like we're heading in the right direction.”
Kulbeck says, for several years, farmers and ranchers in Montana have been dealing with challenges like inflation and poor sale prices for many commodities.
“Rural Montana and rural America are facing the worst economic downturn that that they have since the 1980s farm crisis, and the farm bill provides some stability,” he said.
He hopes to see Congress take actions like increasing reference prices – a minimum price for products like wheat, barley and pulse crops, that means farmers can get additional support payments if they have to sell for less.
“No one buys insurance for the good times,” Kulbeck said. “Similarly, the Farm Bill program provides critical tools to help farmers and ranchers manage risk for the bad times.”
Walter Schweitzer, president of the Montana Farmers Union, is more pessimistic about what the federal government is doing – and what it’s going to mean for Montana agriculture. He expressed concerns about proposed federal budget cuts at the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
“Probably what we can hope for more than anything is that they just extend the existing farm bill another year or two, in light of what's going on right now in Congress,” he said.
Schweitzer says he wants the farm bill to include more provisions boosting small producers and pushing back on consolidation in the agriculture industry.
“It's gotten so concentrated that they have the ability to price gouge producers and consumers and do it all the time,” he said. “We could have a competition title in our farm bill and authorize the funding so that the Department of Justice could enforce these antitrust laws, to hold these bad actors accountable.”
Some of the key farm bill provisions, including reference price increases, have now become part of a different bill altogether: They’ve been added to congressional Republicans’ “One Big Bill.”
Kulbeck said the Farm Bureau would be happy to see these farm bill sections pass as part of that bill.
“What we're doing right now is urging the Senate to get the bill to the finish line,” he said.
But Schweitzer said he’s worried that what’s in the “Big Bill” is going to undermine the coalition that’s kept farm bills alive in the past – particularly proposed reductions in federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
“We need the votes from those urban states to be able to pass a farm bill, and if we don't fund the nutrition program, we're not going to get their votes,” he said. “So I'm hopeful that the Senate is going to fix the House version.”
The Senate is still working on its version of the “Big Bill,” including the agriculture provisions. According to an article in Politico, there could still be significant changes to that language before the bill moves forward. That means there’s a long way to go before a resolution on what will happen with the farm bill and its components.
