There’s no surprise here: Republicans don’t want to govern or they can’t govern. Take your pick.
This week’s example: The Farm Bill — now on life support for five months since the Bill expired.
Journalist Jerry Hagstrom is at the Annual Crop Insurance conference. He reports for The Hagstrom Report:
Scottsdale, AZ: Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., told the nation’s crop insurers today that she proposed giving farmers a choice between highly subsidized crop insurance and signing up for the traditional commodity subsidy programs in order to spur debate.
“Folks don’t want to even start unless I pick something that will lose every Democratic vote,” Stabenow told the National Crop Insurance Industry Convention in a speech she delivered online from the Detroit.
Stabenow was referring to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the conservation money in the Inflation Reduction Act. Republicans have proposed putting restrictions on the Agriculture Department’s ability to rewrite the Thrifty Food Plan that determines benefit levels for SNAP, which used to be known as food stamps. Republicans have noted that previous updates of the Thrifty Food Plan had been budget-neutral, but the Biden administration rewrite increased benefit levels.
Republicans have also proposed taking some of the almost $20 billion in budget authority for climate-related conservation programs to use for other purposes, particularly raising the reference prices that trigger farm subsidies under Title I of the farm bill.
In a letter to her committee colleagues, Stabenow noted that cotton farmers have a choice “of the traditional base acre programs and a highly-subsidized and streamlined area-based crop insurance policy.”
“The next farm bill should give a similar option to all commodities,” she wrote.
Stabenow said she has some key principles for the next farm bill, which include targeting benefits to active farmers, providing choice and flexibility and assistance as soon as possible, and reaching more farmers and addressing emerging risks.
“This is the art of the possible,” Stabenow said, adding that there has to be bipartisan support.
The bill needs to “respect” points at which Republican and Democratic votes would be lost. Negotiators need to “find a spot in the middle,” she said, adding that the committee has not traditionally taken money from one title to fund another. She said she is opposed to both cuts to the nutrition title and cuts to crop insurance.
The job of House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson, R-Pa., is even harder than hers, she said.
“The only way we get a farm bill is to get a strong bipartisan bill in the Senate first,” Stabenow concluded.
However, it appears the Risk Management Agency is learning that its new “micro” (little paperwork and less data) products are in trouble, partly due to a lack of buyers and, for some, because the risk is not accurately measured. Stabenaugh did not dwell on these issues.
As the Bill continues to be delayed, House Chairman G.T. Thompson is caught between (1) Committee Members who want to work on the Bill and (2) the hard-right Members who have little interest in legislating, i.e., a rock (#2) and a hard place (#1).