Will Nutrition Reforms Once Again Divide the Farm Bill Coalition?

The Republican speaker of the Firm is committed to reforming welfare programs – including nutrient assistance – to fulfill a entrada promise and reduce the federal deficit. But farm-country lawmakers are worried about belongings together a fragile urban-rural coalition that has long been critical to passing a new farm bill.

Sound familiar? That was the example in 1995. The Business firm speaker was Newt Gingrich, and he was committed to carrying out the GOP'due south 1994 campaign calendar, the "Contract with America." One of the Republicans' promises was to turn the food stamp program over to the states by converting it into block grants.

Gingrich immediately ran into opposition within his ain party – lawmakers from farm districts – including members of the House Agriculture Committee, who were intent on maintaining the longstanding political ties betwixt subcontract and nutrition programs and their supporters.

A similar scenario played out in 2013, when GOP House leaders couldn't muster enough votes from their own members to pass a farm bill but also lost Autonomous votes because of proposed cuts in SNAP programs. The farm bill failed to pass on the Firm flooring.

Later, the farm and nutrient portions of the bill were passed separately – only to be rejoined in the Senate and ultimately approved as a comprehensive farm bill in 2014.

Now, history appears to be repeating itself in one case once again in 2018 – just every bit debate over a new farm pecker begins in the U.Southward. Business firm of Representatives.

Rep. Collin Peterson, the House Agriculture Committee's ranking minority member who hails from Minnesota, said the proposed neb "hit an impasse" at last week's briefing for commission Democrats when they learned nearly the details of the bill's nutrition title.

Peterson "has seen the nutrition title and tin can't back up it," said Liz Friedlander, a spokeswoman for committee Democrats. She said, however, that there were ongoing discussions with the Republican side.

"My side is in revolt," said Peterson during an interview with Mike Adams of American Ag Network. "There will not be i unmarried vote in commission for this nib if what they accept currently in the beak is in there."

Peterson said Republicans "want to have 8 1000000 people off the rolls," about 20 per centum of SNAP participation, and requite the savings "to united states to create a chore training bureaucracy."

Under electric current police, able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) ages xviii to 49 generally must work at least xx hours a week to receive SNAP benefits. They can be out of work no more than than iii months out of every three years unless their state or area has a waiver for USDA considering of high unemployment or job scarcity.

A source knowledgeable about the committee's draft bill said the legislation would tighten the waiver rules and increase the number of athletic adults subject to the work requirement to include adults with children above the age of 12. Peterson said the age limit would be raised to 65, under the draft bill. The source said that was nevertheless subject to negotiation. The savings from tightening the work requirements would be used to expand state employment and grooming programs.

For his part, Commission Chairman Mike Conaway, R-Texas, insisted that "not 1 person would be forced off SNAP due to the work or grooming requirements we have been discussing. Not ane. Our approach is not even remotely like the arroyo taken in 2013 that acquired the farm bill to fail.

"I understand that this is an even numbered year and that some in the Democratic leadership may not want to permit Congress to become its work done in social club to score points in the fall and they will look for any excuse. That's certainly their prerogative. But anyone who cares nearly the farmer and the rancher and the state of the agriculture economy does not have that kind of luxury."

Peterson compared the linguistic communication in the bill to an subpoena adopted on the House floor in June 2013 that caused Democrats to defection against the farm bill and causing it to neglect. That amendment besides would have tightened piece of work requirements and allowed states to keep some of the savings. Democrats said that gave states an incentive to kick people off the SNAP.

Peterson said he didn't know how Conaway could go alee with having the commission fence the bill March 20, if he wants Democratic support.

However, Conaway said he planned to release the draft bill side by side week in order to have the committee markup the week after next, setting upwards Business firm floor activeness the week subsequently the Easter recess. He insists that he still wanted the bill to have bipartisan back up.

"I have always intended and continue to hope that this farm bill will be a bipartisan pecker. There is no reason that it should not be and every reason it should. Our farmers and ranchers are hurting."

He is probable to need some Autonomous support on the Business firm floor to overcome losses from GOP conservatives who also object to the spending on farm programs or believe that the changes to SNAP don't go far plenty.

Meanwhile, some farm organizations are reminding their members nigh what Sen. Robert Dole once best-selling nigh the wisdom of keeping farm and food programs together.

"Information technology'due south worked," former Sen. Robert Dole, R-Kan., says of the farm-nutrition coalition that he helped forge for the first time in the 1973 farm bill. "People have benefited from the nutrient plan, people who needed it … and farmers, and non all farmers are rich, have benefited from the farm programs."

For more than on the "lessons learned" during previous farm bills, go to the costless Agri-Pulse eBook: "The Seven Things You lot Should Know Before Yous Write the Side by side Farm Neb."

Editor'due south Note: Agri-Pulse Senior Editor Philip Brasher contributed to this column.

hoffmantace1994.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.farmforum.net/story/news/columnists/2018/03/13/will-nutrition-reforms-once-again-divide-the-farm-bill-coalition/49245595/

Share this post