Inside D.C.

The “uncharted territory” of House Farm Bill politics

One great truism about agriculture in Washington, DC, is it’s a nonpartisan issue; disputes are generally regional or commodity versus commodity.  That’s why, as one ag reporter warned this week, “we’re moving into uncharted territory” with what appears to be the purely political loggerheads at which House Agriculture Committee Democrats and Republicans find themselves over federal food stamp eligibility.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) — the government euphemism for food stamps — is the most philosophically divisive and political chunk of any Farm Bill.  It is part of the omnibus farm program legislation for one reason, namely to get enough votes to pass the darn thing.  By including federal nutrition programs in a “Farm” Bill, leaders seek to draw urban votes from House members who otherwise would have no stake in ensuring farmers have what’s now known as “an income safety net.”  SNAP champions then see their program protected by getting rural lawmakers to hold their noses and vote for a generally urban program.

House Agriculture Committee Chair Mike Conaway (R, TX) finds himself with all committee Democrats unwilling to even negotiate options to the GOP’s plan to require food stamp recipients to participate in job training.  There exist already SNAP eligibility rules mandating any able-bodied recipient between 18 and 45 years old, without dependents, must work at least 20 hours a week.

Democrats contend their refusal to negotiate is predicated on Conaway not sharing the actual draft bill language or Congressional Budget Office (CBO) cost estimates.  Requests for language were ignored, they say.  “This is ridiculous.  This isn’t a top-secret, classified document. We shouldn’t have to call (special prosecutor) Robert Mueller to subpoena the damn farm bill,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D, MA), ranking member of the committee’s nutrition subcommittee, and SNAP’s most valiant protector.

Conaway says panel ranking member Rep. Collin Peterson (D, MN) had the language and the CBO “scores” in late February; Peterson says he didn’t share because Conaway asked him not to, presumably because Conaway didn’t want his draft bill leaked the media and debated in the press before his committee had a chance to debate it internally.

It’s argued both Conaway and Peterson stumbled – Conaway by being too secretive; Peterson by simply not asking Conaway for leave to give his side the bill language to study.  In any event, events and egos have led to a fractured committee, one broken along party lines.  Suffice it to say, if the Democrats want to delay the new Farm Bill, they’ve chosen the correct strategy.

Conaway wanted his Farm Bill to be publicly digested, marked up and on the House floor by the end of this month.  That won’t happen.  Now, he’s hoping to get his bill out and marked up by the end of April, but that’s only if the Democrats come back to the table to at least talk about the specifics of the GOP draft.  Peterson said this week the Farm Bill effort is “on life support,” and the shrinking legislative schedule running up to the midterm elections means an extension of current law may be needed. That exact scenario is how the 2012 Farm Bill morphed into the 2014 Farm Bill.

Conaway declared this week if the Democrat members won’t talk, he’ll move a GOP-only Farm Bill.  Sen. Charles Grassley (R, IA) told reporters a GOP-only Farm Bill is a no-go in the Senate.  “I don’t think it has any chance of getting through the Senate if it isn’t bipartisan.  Consequently, we’ll write our own farm bill and it will be a bipartisan bill,” the long-time Senate ag committee member said.

Ag committee Chair Pat Roberts (R, KS) – supported by panel ranking member Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D, MI) with whom he met this week to talk Farm Bill logistics, says his committee will approve and the full Senate will support – he and Stabenow are targeting 70 votes – a Farm Bill that’s the product of “a broad bipartisan coalition to support a comprehensive bill.  That’s how we got it done before.”