House Ag Committee passes farm bill 

The House Agriculture Committee early today passed what’s known as the farm bill 2.0, or the “skinny” farm bill. 

The vote was 34 to 17, with seven Democrats joining all Republicans in voting for the bill. 

The Democrats voting yes were:

• Rep. Jim Costa of California
• Sharice Davids of Kansas
• Don Davis of North Carolina
• Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico
• Adam Gray of California
• Kristen McDonald Rivet of Michigan
• Josh Riley of New York 

In closing remarks, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson, R-Pa., said, “Over the last two days, we’ve heard a lot of good discussion on farm bill programs. I want to thank all members for engaging with the 12 titles of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, both during this markup and over the course of this Congress. And for those of you on committee last Congress, thank you for staying the course and for your input and contributions to this farm bill reauthorization.”

“Also, thank you to majority and minority committee staff and House legislative counsel for all their hard work and support in crafting this bill. And we thank the Congressional Budget Office for their work. Between policy research, drafting, technical assistance, and the countless turns with the Congressional Budget Office, our staff has proved themselves to be invaluable advocates and resources for sound agricultural policy. I appreciate the entire teams on both sides of the aisle for the work they’ve done to organize and carry out the committee’s business.

“I hope everyone in this room has a sense of urgency about what we are doing here today. Our farmers, ranchers, and rural communities need a new farm bill, and they don’t need it next year, or next Congress. They need it now.

“In my opening remarks yesterday, I encouraged everyone on this committee to not let perfect be the enemy of good. In fact, I think I heard that sentiment repeated by a few of my colleagues, on both sides of the aisle. I hope everyone here today felt they had the opportunity to deliberate ideas, offer amendments, and engage with the will of the committee. It was a slog, but ultimately that is how legislating is supposed to work.

“It is not meant to be a rubber stamp of the chairman’s mark, crafted in secret, but rather a process by which the chairman generates a starting point, and then every member of the committee has an opportunity to refine and improve the underlying bill.

“That is what has happened here today, and I am proud of all of you who participated. Please believe me when I say that I want to continue working in good faith with each of you on the important policy within our committee’s jurisdiction.

“With that commitment in mind, I ask you to think about the constituents you represent, and the good this bill will do for them. If you care about the future of the farmers and ranchers who feed, fuel, and clothe our country, I hope you can support this bill. If you care about the 60 million Americans living in rural areas, I hope you can support this bill.

“And above all, if you believe food security is national security, I encourage you to support this bill. We know that a full, five-year farm bill moves the needle for our entire nation, not just farm country. Before us, we have a real opportunity to move American agriculture forward.

“I am proud of this bill, and I am proud of the work we’ve done to further improve it in the last 24 hours. And this is just the first step in the process. There is more work to be done, more refinements that can be made, and if we report this bill out with a robust bipartisan vote, we will have a path to the floor where more improvements can be made.

“However, if we let partisanship get in the way, if we let perfect be the enemy of the good, and allow the momentum to stall, then our farmers and rural communities will be left waiting for another year for a long overdue farm bill. That would be a disservice to our hard working stakeholders.

“Thank you all again for your dedication during this markup. I encourage everyone to vote yes on the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026,” Thompson said.

Rep. Angie Craig, D-Minn., the ranking member, said, “I came into this Congress with the sincere hope that we could get a five-year, 12-title farm bill across the finish line — with the farm and hunger coalition that has so successfully worked together so many times before.”

“As we walked through each of these titles over the course of the last two days, it’s clear what a shell of a farm bill this bill truly is. The farm programs funded in the so-called Big Beautiful Bill would have been supported by the minority in this bill. 

“Republicans picked the winners for new investment in the Big Ugly Bill and decimated Title 4 outside of regular order. Now, they are refusing to invest new money in many farm programs that have stagnated after nearly a decade of inflation. This bill delivers what no one is asking for: the status quo.

“Folks, it is not status quo in farm country. A global trade war has left devastating impacts to our nation’s farmers. And the farm assistance offered by this administration is a fraction of the need. We offered help to farmers and families during this mark up today. But apparently, we can only spend money when it cuts taxes for the wealthy in this country — like my colleagues voted for in reconciliation last year. 

“I do not know any farmer in Minnesota who is asking for the status quo.

“Have we made some bipartisan improvements to the bill during the amendment process, sure. But despite that, this remains a lackluster, disappointing farm bill that does not meet the moment. This bill does not lower input costs or stabilize our export markets. It does not help make food more affordable while prices surge under Trump’s backward economic policies. And it is going to have challenges getting broad bipartisan support on the floor,” Craig said.

In roll call votes, the committee voted down a series of measures introduced by Democrats and passed a series of measures introduced by Republicans. 

In significant developments during the markup:

• The committee voted to name the scholarship program at the 1890s land grant colleges after Rep. David Scott, D-Ga. 
• The committee engaged in lengthy discussions about whether USDA programs can be used to aid the placement of solar panels on prime farmland. 
• There was discussion on whether the committee should take a stand on congressional action on the sale of E15 gasoline nationwide and year round, even though it is outside the committee’s jurisdiction.
• Rep. Jim Costa, D-Calif., introduced an amendment to reverse a provision that would reverse California’s Proposition 12, but he withdrew it, vowing to fight another day. 
• Craig introduced a measure written by Rep. Jim Baird, R-Ind., that would slow down the implementation of a hemp law restricting intoxicating products, but withdrew it.