Congressional leaders are taking a direct hand in the final farm bill fight—the Trump administration’s demands for a freer hand in fire prevention in national forests—with a decision possible as early as today that would allow a lame-duck vote on the $87 billion-a-year legislation. Negotiators have resolved the headline issue, a proposal by House Republicans for stricter SNAP work requirements, but are keeping it under wraps until the compromise bill is complete.
“We’re making good progress on the farm bill,” said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer on Tuesday. “The only things left are some forestry” provisions.
A farm bill without new and stronger work requirements for food stamp recipients “should be considered a non-starter,” warned the conservative group Heritage Action, pointing to published reports that SNAP rules probably would stay the same.
House Speaker Paul Ryan and President Trump have called for stricter SNAP work requirements. But the Senate, in a bipartisan 2-to-1 vote rejected them. The House GOP would require an estimated 7 million “work capable” adults ages 18-59 to work at least 20 hours a week or spend similar time in job training or workfare to qualify for food stamps.
“I don’t think we’re going to be told until the last minute,” said Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, when asked how SNAP was resolved. Grassley said the “four corners,” the four lead negotiators, have not told him if his farm-subsidy reform will be in the final version of the farm bill. Democratic Sen. Debbie Stabenow, and one of the lead negotiators, told the Hagstrom Report that the “four corners” were in agreement on SNAP. Farm subsidy limits and a handful of other issues remained, she said on Monday.
“We’re working as quickly as possible and are very close on a deal,” said a spokeswoman for Senate Agriculture chairman Pat Roberts, who is in charge of farm bill negotiations.
In a last-minute entry to the farm bill debate, the White House has cited catastrophic wildfires in California as proof that forestry rules must be changed. President Trump promised $500 million for risk mitigation while touring fire-damaged areas on November 18 but two of his cabinet secretaries said the actual goal was farm bill language to waive environmental restrictions on practices such as removing dead or insect-infested trees, thinning tree stands or conducting controlled burns. “We’re not talking about clear-cutting,” but larger treatment areas for fire prevention and fire recovery, said Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue last week.
The administration also wants to expand to local governments a “good neighbor” program that allows states to manage forests on Forest Service land.
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke joined Perdue in calling for more leeway to prevent fires. The administration proposals align with the GOP-written House farm bill, which would reduce the need for environmental review of forest-thinning projects.
The Senate wrote its own forestry title and opposes many of the House proposals. The House bill would allow the Forest Service “to bypass current requirements for environmental analysis and public participation for forest thinning projects up to 6,000 acres,” or 9.4 square miles, said McClatchy.
“The Trump administration’s attempt to use the bill to push harmful forestry policy is misleading and shameful,” tweeted Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the assistant Democratic leader. Also on social media, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, Maryland Democrat, said House Republicans “are trying to politicize this tragedy to get a sweetheart deal for big timber lobbyists.”
In March, Congress passed a budget bill that allows expedited forest management and fuels reduction work. The budget bill also approved a “fire fix” that would end the practice of paying for fire fighting by raiding Forest Service funds earmarked for forest management and fire prevention.
The National Wildlife Federation said the administration is not looking at the underlying problems of under-investment in forest restoration, climate change and the growing number of Americans living on the edge of wildlands. “The fact is that Congress has starved the Forest Service — which is still spending 60 percent of its budget on fire suppression — and the Fire Fix negotiated in March does not take effect until FY20,” said Collin O’Mara, the group’s chief executive. “Congress should pass the Senate’s bipartisan forestry title and start the Fire Fix immediately.”