Dems, anti-hunger groups slam GOP farm bill; others mixed

Reacting to the release of the GOP Senate farm bill by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman, R-Ark., on Tuesday, Democrats and anti-hunger groups criticized it while farm groups praised some parts of it and asked for more.

The Senate Agriculture Committee Democrats said they “have been clear that a farm bill must meet the needs of both farmers and families across America. This bill does not address the devastating cuts to SNAP or the shift to state taxpayers passed into law as part of H.R. 1. We appreciate that bipartisan provisions have been included in the discussion draft and stand ready to work with Republicans to negotiate a bipartisan farm bill that both meets the moment and can be successful on the Senate floor.”

Rep. Angie Craig, D-Minn., ranking member on the House Agriculture Committee, was more critical than the Senate Democrats.

“Unsurprisingly, the Senate Republicans’ farm bill falls far short of meeting the needs of family farmers and working people,” Craig said in a news release. “Trump’s inflationary tariffs, trade wars and war with Iran have made life more expensive for all Americans and making a profit nearly impossible for our farmers. Instead of working with Senate Democrats on a bipartisan deal to fix these problems and restore food assistance by addressing the $187 billion in SNAP cuts and the unfunded mandate to the states from H.R. 1, Sen. Boozman chose the partisan status quo. Farmers and working people need real solutions that will open markets, bring down costs and make everyday life less expensive. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to negotiate a truly bipartisan farm bill that serves the needs of farmers and families and stands a chance of becoming law.”

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson, R-Pa., said, “I applaud Chairman Boozman and his team for their continued efforts to support producers and rural America through a full, five-year farm bill. I am encouraged to see the Senate build on the bipartisan momentum we began in the House of Representatives with the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026.

“It has never been more apparent that our country needs modern farm policy that finishes the work we started last summer with the Working Families Tax Cuts Act. I look forward to working with Chairman Boozman and getting a farm bill to President Trump’s desk soon.”

Food Research & Action Center President Crystal FitzSimons said Boozman’s discussion draft “ignores the needs of tens of millions of people, including families with children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans, who are finding it increasingly difficult to put food on the table. FRAC is deeply concerned that the draft does not mitigate any of the unprecedented $187 billion cut to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program enacted under the budget reconciliation law, H.R. 1. The draft specifically fails to address the harmful cost shifts to states, which Senate Agriculture Committee Democrats stated was essential to begin negotiations on a bipartisan farm bill.”

FRAC said 4.7 million people have lost access to SNAP since H.R. 1 went into effect, the highest figure cited so far.

MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger President and CEO Abby Leibman said, “Chairman Boozman had the opportunity to stand up as a bipartisan champion for millions by listening to his colleagues and constituents and using his legislative vehicle to save SNAP from its uncertain fate. Instead, he cowered to the status quo that is responsible for millions of people losing SNAP benefits.”

Ty Jones Cox, vice president for food assistance at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said the discussion draft “ignores the rapidly worsening hunger crisis in the wake of the 2025 Republican reconciliation law (H.R. 1). Even more people will lose the vital food assistance they need to afford groceries unless Congress immediately delays H.R. 1’s unprecedented shift of significant new SNAP costs to states. Policymakers failing to act in the face of this emergency is unconscionable. This proposal — or any legislation with farm relief that ignores the urgent need to mitigate this harm — should be rejected.”

Center for Science in the Public Interest Vice President of Programs Anupama Joshi said, “The proposed bill does not provide a path forward for families struggling with the high cost of food or support investments in building a strong food system. It is a disappointment, and demonstrative of policymakers choosing politics over people.”

CSPI also said, “The proposed bill also falls short on a number of other fronts. It does not restore funding cuts from last March for programs investing in local farmers and leveraging the purchasing power of food banks and schools. These cuts weaken the regional food system and limit healthy food access for children and families. The proposed bill fails to expand the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP). Further, the bill enshrines the compromised 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans in statute and corrupts the process to update them in the future.

“We urge members of the Senate Agriculture Committee to vote no on this bill that does nothing to restore and protect SNAP, expand access to nutritious foods, support regional food systems, or advance evidence-based approaches to nutrition policy.”

Share Our Strength Senior Vice President George Keleman said, “While we’re disappointed that this initial farm bill does not include a delay of the SNAP administrative and benefit cost-shift, we call on the committee to engage in a bipartisan process to pass legislation that protects and strengthens our nation’s most effective anti-hunger program after more than 4 million people have lost access to SNAP. It is critical that all states have access to a delay, not just the states with the highest error rates.”

FOR FARMERS

American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall urged passage of the bill. “The benefits include improved access to credit, expanded investments in specialty crops, increased transparency in fertilizer markets, and enhanced research and conservation programs,” Duvall said. But he added, “We look forward to working with the chairman and members of Congress to address three top priorities not included in this farm bill draft, which are needed to help farmers through the current multiyear downturn in the farm economy. They include providing economic aid to help farmers struggling with historic inflation, protecting interstate commerce from a patchwork of state laws, and approving the sale of E15 blended fuel year-round, which would be a win-win for farmers and consumers.”

National Farmers Union President Rob Larew said, “While the bill includes meaningful improvements, it needs to go further to meet the scale of the crisis facing family farmers and ranchers across this country.

“We urge the committee to go further on priorities that matter to farmers and consumers: mandatory country-of-origin labeling for meat and poultry, year-round nationwide E15, local food procurement funding, and stronger Packers and Stockyards Act enforcement.”

The Crop Insurance and Reinsurance Bureau said it “applauds the committee’s willingness to address regulatory challenges and implement key policy changes to improve the farmer’s crop insurance experience while strengthening the public-private partnership that makes crop insurance the most efficient and effective delivery of assistance to farmers.”

The American Meat Producers Association, Humane World Action Fund, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and Farm Action all praised the bill for not including the Save Our Bacon provision that would negate the impact of California Prop 12 which requires that pork sold in the state come from animals raised under certain conditions. That provision was included in the House version of the bill.

But the National Pork Producers Council called on the committee to include “a solution for California’s Proposition 12 and the impossible patchwork of state laws it promotes.”

Farm Action President Angela Huffman also said the bill fails to provide adequate support for specialty crop farmers and “erodes” funding for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program.

“And while the Senate bill does not include the broad pesticide manufacturer liability shield that was stripped from the House bill, it still contains harmful pesticide provisions that would weaken protections for farmers, rural communities, and the public,” Huffman said. “Without the structural reforms needed to restore competition, rebuild local and regional food systems, and strengthen farmers’ position in the marketplace, Congress will continue treating the symptoms instead of the cause. If lawmakers fail to address those underlying problems, farmers will be back in Washington asking for another bailout.”

The American Sugar Alliance, which represents beet and cane producers, said the bill “recognizes the essential role of U.S. sugar policy and drives progress for strengthened crop insurance tools for farmers.”

International Dairy Foods Association President and CEO Michael Dykes said the bill’s “dairy nutrition incentives broaden existing SNAP incentives beyond non-fat (skim) and low-fat (1%) milk to include whole and reduced-fat (2%) milk, as well as certain cheeses, limited-sugar yogurt and cultured dairy foods, helping stretch SNAP dollars for participating families. The bill also permanently authorizes Mandatory Cost Surveys and the Dairy Forward Pricing Program and provides much-needed certainty for dairy farmers and the broader agricultural sector through a five-year farm bill.” Dykes said IDFA “encourages lawmakers to build on this progress” but did not list any specific additional programs.

The National Milk Producers Federation list many provisions it likes in the bill but added, “Dairy farmers look forward to working with senators to get this legislation passed and into conference with the already passed House bill, where lawmakers can craft the best legislation possible.”

Consortium for Common Food Names Executive Director Jaime Castaneda said the bill “includes a bipartisan provision to counter the European Union’s abuse of geographical indications to restrict generic names globally.”

Corn Refiners Association President and CEO John Bode applauded Boozman for “advancing bipartisan policies that support innovation in biomanufacturing, strengthen demand for American agricultural feedstocks, and help ensure farmers can benefit from emerging domestic and global market opportunities.”

Plant Based Products Council Executive Director James Glueck praised Boozman “for recognizing the importance of America’s agricultural bioeconomy: Strengthening USDA’s BioPreferred Program, improving existing loan programs, and other provisions will help expand markets for American-grown feedstocks, support rural manufacturing jobs, and bring more U.S.-made biobased products to consumers and federal purchasers.”

American Soybean Association President Scott Metzger also praised the bill for advancing biostimulants as well as its conservation, fertilizer research, rural broadband and international food aid provisions.

The Specialty Crop Farm Bill Alliance, the International Fresh Produce Association and the National Potato Council all praised the special crop production and research provisions in the bill.

Kari Hamerschlag, deputy director of food and agriculture at Friends of the Earth, said the group was “encouraged” that the bill did not include either “Save Our Bacon Act” or a pesticide industry liability shield, but said it should also protect SNAP and put more money into organic and regenerative agriculture, conservation and local and regional food systems.

Rebecca Bartels, executive director of Invest in Our Land, said, “We are concerned that the Senate’s draft again redirects funding for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program to pay for other priorities – cutting the program by nearly $2 billion below the levels Congress set just last year. EQIP and other conservation programs provide practical, real-world benefits to producers’ resiliency and ability to innovate, which is why they are some of the most oversubscribed tools USDA operates. We applaud the positive updates to the Conservation Reserve Program; however, we cannot simply shift funding around and expect to meet the needs of our producers.”

The National Association of Wheat Growers and the National Corn Growers Association both said they are reviewing the proposal.

The National Grain and Feed Association praised the bill for reauthorizing the U.S. Grain Standards Act, maintaining the current Conservation Reserve Program acreage cap, continuing support for export market development programs such as the Market Access Program and Foreign Market Development Program and including “key elements of IFEED, a bipartisan approach to modernize and streamline the regulatory pathway for non-nutritive animal food ingredients that provide important public and animal health benefits, such as reducing human foodborne illness risks and improving animal production.”