What They Are Are Saying: Groups Oppose Partisan Farm Bill

National, state, and local leaders and groups oppose the House Republicans’ partisan farm bill. The bill would institute the largest cut to SNAP, America’s most effective anti-poverty program, in nearly 30 years. Additionally, it rescinds critical funds for climate-smart agricultural practices secured by House Democrats in the Inflation Reduction Act and limits the ability of the USDA to support farmers during natural disasters and other emergencies.

Bill O’Keefe, Executive Vice President for Mission, Mobilization and Advocacy, Catholic Relief Services: “CRS is concerned about Chairperson Thompson’s Farm Bill proposal in the House. It risks undermining the program quality and reach of the Food for Peace Title II (FFP) program. We strongly oppose including parts of the American Farmers Feed the World Act (H.R. 4293) in the package, as it jeopardizes Resilience Food Security Activities.”

Evangelical Environmental Network: “Through the Inflation Reduction Act, a promise was made to our farmers: to support them in implementing climate-smart agriculture practices. In addition to being climate-smart, these practices are also water-smart, soil- smart, and smart for our farmers’ bottom line.”

Reverand Susan Hendershot, President, Interfaith Power and Light: “We do not support a partisan Farm Bill proposal that pits funding for nutrition assistance, including SNAP benefits, and conservation funding against each other. Instead, we call for a Farm Bill that protects these programs, along with protecting the $20 billion allocated for climate-smart agriculture in the Inflation Reduction Act and firmly integrating it into the core of the Farm Bill with climate guardrails.”

Daren Caughron, Sustainable Energy and Environment Legislative Manager, Friends Committee on National Legislation: “The framework released by the House Committee on Agriculture [republicans] fails to meet the standards for a bipartisan Farm Bill that works towards ending hunger and supporting farmer’s resilience to extreme weather. Proposals to remove “guardrails” protecting conservation investments and cuts to nutrition funding will pit critical nutrition and conservation programs against one another, rather than underscoring the deep importance of both components.”

Linda Lipsen, CEO, American Association for Justice: “In the face of hundreds of thousands of claims that ordinary Americans have brought against the manufacturers of Roundup and other pesticides, it’s appalling that Congress would choose to protect the profit margins of corporate giants over the lives of farmers, maintenance workers, and others who come into contact with these potentially deadly chemicals.”

AFL-CIO: “The AFL-CIO strongly opposes the [republican] Farm Bill. Families rely on Food for Peace – and also SNAP, SNAP’s Thrifty Food Plan, and other federal nutrition and food security programs. We cannot support making harmful policy changes or funding cuts to any of them.”

Nancy Perry, Senior VP of Government Relations, ASPCA: “The draft Farm Bill attacks state protections for farm animals, puts dogs in puppy mills at even greater risk, and fails to address the horse slaughter crisis. It is far too harmful to support, and we urge Congress to ensure that the final Farm Bill upholds state farm animal protection laws.”

Cristel Zoebisch, Director of Policy, Carbon180: “We urge lawmakers to focus on a bipartisan final Farm Bill that maintains the integrity of climate safeguards included in the Inflation Reduction Act and supports a broad set of innovative approaches to building strong agriculture and forestry systems.”

CARE Chefs’ Table: “As professional chefs and advocates fighting to end global hunger, we work daily to support local food systems, build reliable supply chains, and help our communities have safe, nourished lives. We urge you to ensure communities around the world have the same opportunities through this year’s Farm Bill reauthorization. To do so, we must protect and strengthen Food for Peace Title II and McGovern-Dole Food for Education, two of the United States’ most critical international food assistance programs. Alarmingly, proposals like the American Farmers Feed the World Act (H.R.4293 and S.2862) threaten to cripple Food for Peace.”

Emily Gee, Vice President for Inclusive Growth, Center for American Progress: “This partisan farm bill contains unacceptable cuts to vital nutrition programs and guts critical investments in climate-smart agriculture. It would also prevent any adjustment to food benefits, which would result in more people going hungry.”

Margie Alt, Director, Climate Action Campaign: “Depriving the nation’s farmers of critical dollars and tools that they need to slash climate pollution and guard against the worst impacts of the climate crisis is short-sighted and counterproductive. It puts our food systems and numerous family farms at risk.”

Ty Jones Cox, Vice President for Food Assistance, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: “Every SNAP participant would receive less to buy groceries in future years than they would under current law, putting a healthy diet out of reach for millions of people. This would be the largest cut to SNAP since 1996 if enacted & these cuts would grow even deeper over time.”

Dr. Peter G. Lurie, President, Center for Science in the Public Interest: “The bill attacks Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, cuts key climate-focused programs, and includes measures to weaken the nutritional content of school meals. In general, the framework undercuts programs vital to protecting our nation’s food and nutrition security.”

Andrew Lentz, Director of Federal Affairs for Agriculture Policy, Environmental Defense Fund: “The removal of climate-focused funding in these programs is a step backward at a time when we need to be moving forward with greater urgency. Stripping these resources away will undermine farmers’ and ranchers’ ability to adapt and thrive in the face of increasingly challenging growing conditions.”

Environmental Working Group: “Environmental Working Group (EWG) strongly opposes the farm bill proposed last week and instead urges you to develop a farm bill that reduces hunger, supports all farmers, preserves the rights of state and local governments, and helps farmers who seek USDA assistance to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prepare their farms for extreme weather.”

Mattea Mrkusic, Senior Energy Transition Policy Lead, Evergreen Action: “The GOP’s draft farm bill removes vital climate ‘guardrails’ to conservation programs that are already improving water and soil quality, boosting rural economies, and fighting climate change across the country. It’s bad policy, and even worse politics. Democrats have made it clear for months that they won’t support any bill that eliminates the climate guardrails. This bill doesn’t stand a chance in the Senate. It’s time for House Republicans to get real and work with Democrats to draft a farm bill that maintains this popular and necessary funding.”

Feeding America: “The significance of the farm bill in combating food insecurity in the United States cannot be overstated. We’ve heard from our neighbors facing hunger that food insecurity should be treated as an urgent crisis and, unfortunately, the bill text the House Agriculture Committee released today is cause for concern.”

Mitch Jones, Managing Director of Policy Litigation, Food & Water Watch: ““The Farm Bill is a seminal opportunity to reform our food and agriculture sector away from factory farms and corporate greed. Instead, House Republicans want to double down. Some of leadership’s more dangerous proposals would take us backwards on animal welfare, and climate-smart agriculture — both The EATS Act and support for factory farm biogas must be dead on arrival. It’s time Congress put the culture wars aside and got back to work on a Farm Bill that puts consumers, farmers, and the environment above politicking and Big Ag handouts.” 

Kelly Horton, Interim President, Food Research & Action Center: “The House Farm Bill text released today by House Agriculture Committee Chair G.T. Thompson poses a serious threat to the health and wellbeing of the more than 41.4 million people who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to put food on the table.”

HEAL Food Alliance: “Today, 44.2 million people, including over 13 million children, live in food insecure households, yet this bill will slash the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by $27 billion. Although the bill improves SNAP eligibility for certain demographics such as college students, it will restrict the USDA’s ability to set SNAP benefits, eroding nutrition programs’ long-term ability to provide access to vulnerable families and communities across the country.”

James Beard Foundation: “We are concerned about the House of Representatives version of the farm bill, particularly the provisions regarding conservation funding for climate-smart agriculture and proposals to weaken and cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).”

Madeleine Foote, Healthy Communities Program Director, League of Conservation Voters: “House Agriculture Committee Chair GT Thompson caved to the demands of extreme MAGA Republicans who are not serious about working in a bipartisan way to protect our farmers, communities, and environment. The proposal from the Republican-led House would strip money from climate-smart agricultural practices and conservation programs that are already oversubscribed, even after the increased investments from Inflation Reduction Act, taking money out of the hands of farmers who want to leave a better environment and a more sustainable food system to feed our families for generations to come.”

113 Massachusetts organizations: “Congressman Thompson’s proposal would prevent future science and evidence based adjustments to SNAP benefit amounts. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates this would cut $30 billion from SNAP over 10 years. This would mean a $750 million cut to SNAP for Massachusetts families between FY2027 and FY2033.”

Abby J. Leibman, President & CEO, MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger: “With over 44 million Americans facing hunger, Chairman Thompson would rather double down on harmful and irresponsible policies to cut nutrition assistance for those in need. I find it ridiculous that once again, conservatives are looking to ‘refocus’ the purpose of SNAP — this time to ‘promote a healthy lifestyle.’ Let’s be clear: SNAP is an anti-hunger program, plain and simple.”

Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner, Executive Director and CEO, MomsRising: “At this time when skyrocketing food prices have increased hunger and food insecurity, forcing tens of millions of U.S. families to make impossible choices between food and other essentials, it would be mean-spirited and shameful for Congress to cut the SNAP benefits moms and families rely on; and it also would be damaging to our economy. Yet this is exactly what the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024, introduced by U.S. House Republican leadership today, would do. Its impact would be devastating.”

Christina Stucker-Gassi, Policy Lead, Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides: “NCAP strongly opposes the current farm bill draft and advocates for a bill that reduces hunger, supports all farmers, preserves local rights, and helps farmers reduce greenhouse gas emissions while adapting alternatives to changing pest and disease regimes.”

Mike Lavender, Policy Director, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition: “A bill that closely mirrors the latest House summary is not a bill that should become law.”

Oregon Food Bank: “The House Farm Bill proposal, put forth by House Agriculture Chair Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson, cuts SNAP benefits for all participants by freezing the USDA’s ability to update the Thrifty Food Plan to accurately reflect the cost of a healthy, realistic diet accurately.”

Gina Cummings, Vice President for Advocacy, Alliances, and Policy, Oxfam: “The House must reject must reject the provisions of the American Farmers Feed the World Act included in the House Farm Bill draft as the bill goes for markup. The inclusion of such provisions is a threat to global food security and a shift towards a less-efficient model of international aid by the United States.” 

UnidosUS: “House Agriculture Committee Chairman G.T. Thompson’s proposed cuts to SNAP benefits threaten to undermine this vital support system and deepen the hunger crisis in Latino communities.”Melissa Kaplan, Senior Manager of Government Affairs, Union of Concerned Scientists: “The bill is out of line with what the public wants and our food system needs. People across the country strongly support programs that help farmers protect their farms from extreme weather, like those funded by the Inflation Reduction Act. They also support protecting the workers who keep our country fed and want to ensure that small- scale, diverse and young farmers have equitable access to land, credit, and other vital resources. The [republican] House bill fails in these respects.”

Verified by MonsterInsights