BILL KNIGHT
In a moment of optimism for bipartisan collaboration, in July I wrote about the possibility of Members of Congress reaching across the aisle for a new Farm Bill.
Obviously, I was less a hopeful-helpful Mr. Rogers than a Mr. Magoo, unable to see what was in front of us all.
In September, the Farm Bill expired, just when Congress narrowly averted a government shutdown (until Nov. 17, when the temporary compromise Continuing Resolution expires, too).
The Farm Bill stakes are high for Illinois and the nation: tens of billions of dollars in key funds, from conservation programs to rural internet access, from farm programs to clean-energy development — and there’s little sense that a resolution will be quick or easy, unlike most of the last 90 years.
First passed in 1933 as part of the New Deal, the last Farm Bill was wide-ranging, with 12 parts, or “Titles,” such as environmental conservation (Title II), Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP — formerly “food stamps” — Title IV) and rural development (Title VI).
A Farm Bill has been approved 18 times since, about every five years. The last one, the “Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018,” cost about $430 billion, and logic dictates what’s needed won’t cost less.
If Congress doesn’t pass a Farm Bill by Dec. 31, things would get much worse.
“Farm Bill[s] suspend long-abandoned permanent laws for certain farm commodity programs from the 1940s that used supply controls and price regimes that would be costly if restored,” reported the Congressional Research Service.
Failing to act means reviving 1938 and 1949 laws, outdated policies of supply management and higher crop and dairy subsidies. Alone, the latter could disrupt the dairy industry and cause the price of milk to spike.
Meanwhile, between July 1 and Oct. 1, the U.S. House was in session for fewer than 30 days And that included hearings on book bans, calling Attorney General to testify on his “weaponizing” the Justice Department to, well, enforce laws, and an inquiry on impeaching President Biden despite several Republicans saying there was no proof of “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
Such antics, plus shutdown brinkmanship and the Crisis Caucus’ chaos about the Speaker of the House all derailed meaningful work. Americans seem tired of gridlock and incompetence, but there’s no clear path, no compromise or even compromiser.
Concerning spending — whether the Farm Bill or Ukraine aid — it’s down to Republican vs. Republican debating drastic cuts or even deeper cuts to the budget (especially to and for the needy) — all while ignoring the bipartisan complicity in the national debt. The annual federal budget had surpluses from 1998 to 2001. It’s grown since, with most Democrats and Republicans signing off on deficit spending after the 9-11 terror attacks, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Great Recession, 2017’s huge tax cuts mostly benefiting the rich, and the COVID pandemic.
As I wrote this summer, U.S. Rep. Glenn Thompson (R- Pa.), chair of the House Ag Committee, promised progress and seemingly supported SNAP, but he hasn’t delivered even a proposal.
Democrats aren’t much better. U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), chair of that Ag Committee, I said a few months ago, pledged to be bipartisan in drafting something palatable to most folks. Alas, her approach seems to lean toward just keeping things about the same (maybe because she’s reportedly not running again: less muss, less fuss on the way out the door). But the same-ol’/same ol’ is inadequate for rural infrastructure: fire departments and ambulances, the vital rural electric co-op system and small-town water and sewage facilities, plus SNAP’s safety net for urban and rural residents alike. True, some extremists have put SNAP in their bull’s eye, but nutrition for regular people could still link farm country and metro areas.
Both parties must advocate for small farmers as well as subsidized giants, the climate as well as the market, and crops that feed people and not just livestock and fuel tanks. Republicans and Democrats need to stress not just their campaign donors and re-elections, but what will serve most people, from the 46 million Americans in rural America to the rest in cities who benefit from the outdoors and the commodities grown there.
Too many everyday Americans may think, “It’s just politics. It’ll all work out.”
Really? Ask Kevin McCarthy about that.
But I hope so.
Oops. Did I just bump into something again?