With a farm bill fight brewing over President Biden’s climate agenda, House Republican leaders named Pennsylvania Rep. Glenn Thompson chair of the House Agriculture Committee on Thursday. Thompson, who wants to expand farm supports, has accused the administration of acting as “a lone wolf” in setting up its $3.5 billion proposal to develop climate-smart commodities.
Climate mitigation is expected to be a leading issue when Congress updates farm policy in the new year. It is the only area assured of additional funding in the farm bill due in 2023. The climate, health, and tax law enacted in August appropriated $20 billion for USDA conservation programs with a priority on climate action.
“The political landscape in Washington may be fractured, but as chairman, I will prioritize the needs of our producers and rural communities — the backbone of this country,” said Thompson after the Republican Steering Committee voted to elevate him to Agriculture Committee chair. “We will keep our foot on the gas to deliver principled solutions, robust oversight, and a farm bill that is responsive to the needs of our farmers, ranchers, and foresters.”
As a group, GOP lawmakers have been cool to President Biden’s goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 and achieving net zero emissions by 2050. Thompson, an “amiable centrist,” according to a political reference book, has been a vocal and regular critic of the climate agenda at the USDA.
“The need for a reliable safety net is paramount,” said Thompson early this week at a Farm Foundation forum, adding that “we need to enhance the farm safety net provisions in the farm bill to provide more long-term certainty and to reduce the need for ad hoc assistance.” The government has spent tens of billions of dollars in stopgap trade war and pandemic relief payments to farmers since 2018. Farm groups say the new farm bill should include higher reference prices, a factor in calculating the size of subsidy payments, and provide more protection through the taxpayer-subsidized crop insurance program.
In late September, Thompson said climate mitigation did not deserve priority over other soil and water conservation goals, despite the $20 billion earmarked for it. “I don’t feel bound by the amount of funding or the specific program allocation passed in the partisan [climate] bill.” Some House Republicans, irked by the amount being spent on climate-smart projects, have suggested putting limits on the USDA’s ability to spend money without a congressional go-ahead.
The outgoing Agriculture chair, Rep. David Scott of Georgia, hailed Thompson’s “collegial” attitude and said he hoped for strong bipartisan support for the new farm bill. “I am encouraged by the bipartisan work we have accomplished together, particularly around our shared interest in broadband and access to USDA programs for our new and small producers,” said Scott, who is expected to be the senior Democrat on the committee in the two-year congressional session opening in January.
Passage of the 2014 and 2018 farm bills was derailed by attempts by conservative Republicans to tighten eligibility requirements and slash spending on SNAP. Thompson had a hand in the unsuccessful SNAP provisions in the 2018 farm bill.
SNAP could cost $1.1 trillion over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Thompson said in June that it was time to rein in a program that was expanded greatly as part of pandemic relief. “We do not need to spend for the sake of spending,” he said. “Sometimes our best intentions cause irreparable hardship for families that we aim to help.”