South Dakota farmers and ranchers want the 2023 Farm Bill to include adjustments to crop insurance and restrictions on conservation mandates.
This week, Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-South Dakota, headed a roundtable in Bridgewater to discuss the bill, which is renewed on a five-year cycle. The omnibus legislation includes most federal agriculture spending, as well as funding for food stamps. The 2018 package cost $867 billion.
Johnson was joined by Rep. G.T. Thompson, R-Pennsylvania, the highest-ranking Republican on the House Ag Committee. The representatives heard from groups representing the corn, soybean, livestock and dairy industries. Johnson said he wanted feedback on changes to insurance subsidy programs that protect producers from market volatility and severe weather. Those provisions were emphasized under the 2014 Farm Bill, when direct payments to farmers were phased out.
“The era of just getting a check because you’re in production agriculture is long past. What the government does now is make available risk mitigation strategy, things like insurance,” Johnson said. “We don’t need a revolutionary Farm Bill. I think we’ve got a few tweaks that we can tackle.”
Producers asked the representatives to revise reference prices for their products. If market conditions force a farmer to sell a product for less than the reference price, they’re compensated through a program funded by the Farm Bill. But inflation and high commodity costs have made it difficult for some farmers to benefit from the program.
Producers are largely satisfied with the insurance provisions.
“The biggest thing for crop insurance in general is do-no-harm,” said Caitlyn Davis, an agent at Breske Crop Insurance.
Groups represented at the roundtable were concerned about the Farm Bill's conservation title. That section funds programs like the Conservation Reserve Program, which compensates farmers for setting aside vulnerable land. While there was support for those programs, the groups were worried about the possibility of conservation mandates.
“Any conservation practices or credits need to be voluntary or incentive-based,” said Austin Havlik, a representative for the South Dakota Cattlemen’s Association.
Rep. Johnson echoed that viewpoint, describing producers as “environmental heroes.”
“We just can’t use crop insurance eligibility as a backdoor to mandate how we think people should maintain their property,” he said. “We want policies that are nuanced, we want policies that respect the knowledge of the producer, and give them the opportunity to make the right decision for their operation.”
Democrats have supported an incentive-based model, but disagree with Republicans over how much money should go toward climate and conservation programs.
The nutrition title is also likely to create controversy. Nutrition benefits made up a majority of the money spent under the 2019 bill, which saw partisan disagreement over the expansion of work requirements for the SNAP program. Thompson chaired the Nutrition sub-committee during negotiations for the 2018 bill. He said the 2023 package should focus on getting SNAP recipients off the program.
“That will be an important part of the discussion,” he said. “If you and your family are in challenging financial situations, you need to have nutrition support, we want to provide it. But what you need more than that is a family-sustaining job, and we want to provide pathways for that.”
If Republicans win majority control of the House this November, Thompson will likely chair the Agriculture Committee.
Johnson said he’ll prioritize small changes, including new insurance models for cattle ranchers, improved disaster relief and adjustments to reference prices.
“They don’t want a revolutionary Farm Bill, they want something that’s evolutionary,” Johnson said.
Drafting of the new bill is expected to begin in early 2023.