Senate Farm Bill Gains Broad Farm Industry and Policy Support
Farm organizations across the country responded quickly after the Senate passed its version of the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” a wide-reaching legislative package addressing agriculture, tax, healthcare, and nutrition. The bill now heads to the House for a vote.
Major farm groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), praised the Senate for including improvements to the farm safety net and key tax provisions.
Zippy Duvall, AFBF President, highlighted the importance of these provisions, stating, “Prices being paid to farmers continue to fall, while expenses remain stubbornly high… Farmers will stand a better chance of enduring tough times so they can plant for another season.”
The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) noted several benefits in the Senate bill, such as protecting family ranchers from tax hikes, increasing exemptions for estate and gift taxes, and preserving property rights by removing land sale and eminent domain provisions. The NCBA also welcomed continued funding for animal disease prevention.
Other organizations, such as the American Soybean Association (ASA) and National Corn Growers Association (NCGA), expressed support for the revised 45Z Clean Fuel Production Credit and expanded USDA trade programs like MAP and FMD. However, NCGA voiced concern over reductions in the value and timeline of the credit.
John Newton, formerly with the Senate Agriculture Committee, said the bill reduces farmers’ reliance on unpredictable ad hoc disaster aid. Instead, he emphasized the bill’s ability to offer long-term certainty for planning and investment.
The Association of Equipment Manufacturers (AEM) also praised the bill’s tax reforms, claiming it will boost U.S. manufacturing by improving investment incentives and creating jobs.
However, food and nutrition advocates raised alarms over projected $185 billion cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and related programs.
The Food Research & Action Center warned these cuts would force states to absorb more costs and reduce nutrition benefits.
Rural health advocates welcomed a $50 billion fund for rural hospitals but warned that overall Medicaid cuts would still limit care and threaten hospital stability.