WASHINGTON — House leaders, stung by the surprise defeat of the farm bill last month, worked late Wednesday night to line up Republican votes for a bill that would split food stamps and farm programs into separate bills, paving the way for a vote that could come Thursday on legislation containing only farm programs. It would be the first time since the early 1970s that farm programs and food stamps would not be included in the same bill.
The 608-page bill filed by House leaders would keep changes that were made last month and would not allow amendments. The new proposal would also repeal a provision in the current farm bill, passed in 2008, called “permanent law” that causes farm programs to revert to 1949 price levels if a new farm bill is not passed.
Lawmakers said they would vote on a food stamp bill at a later date.
The Obama administration immediately criticized the proposal saying the president would veto the bill if it made it to his desk. The administration said it had not had time to fully review the bill, but it did not include changes suggested by the president.
“The bill does not contain sufficient commodity and crop insurance reforms and does not invest in renewable energy, an important source of jobs and economic growth in rural communities across the country,” the administration said. “Legislation as important as a Farm Bill should be constructed in a comprehensive approach that helps strengthen all aspects of the nation. This bill also fails to reauthorize nutrition programs, which benefit millions of Americans — in rural, suburban and urban areas alike.”
House leaders hope that splitting the bill would make it easier to get approval for a new five-year farm bill — the bill offered last month was derailed because conservatives wanted much deeper cuts in the food stamps program than the proposed $20 billion. Sixty-two Republicans joined with Democrats to vote against the measure, a stinging defeat for Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, who had endorsed bill.
One Republican who voted against bill last month said he welcomed the split.
“It’s good government and transparency to have the bill split into farm programs and nutrition,” said Marlin Stutzman, Republican of Indiana, who has advocated for the separation.
But Democrats called the proposal an act of desperation.
“This is really bad policy that ignores years of urban and rural cooperation,” said Peter Welch, Democrat of Vermont. “And it completely ignores the bipartisan efforts of the House Agriculture Committee.”
Environmental and conservative groups also criticized the move.
“It is unconscionable that House leaders have put forward a farm bill that provides unlimited subsidies to the largest and most successful farm businesses, and guts programs to help the environment,” said Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs of the Environmental Working Group, a Washington research organization. “If passed, this bill would be the costliest farm bill in history. It should be rejected.”
Heritage Action for America, the advocacy arm of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative organization, called the move by the House a stunt to go to conference with the Senate, which passed a farm bill that included the food stamps program.
“The end result of such a conference would be a perpetuation of subsidies and government intervention that will continue to harm consumers and taxpayers alike,” said Michael A. Needham, chief executive of the group.
Last week, farm groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, sent letters to members of Congress saying farm and food stamps should not be separated.
It is unclear whether the Senate would be willing to conference with House leaders on a farm bill that does not include nutrition programs. On Tuesday Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan and chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, issued a statement critical of the House efforts.
“This is a major mistake opposed by over 500 farm and conservation groups,” Ms. Stabenow said. “For two years in a row, the Senate has passed a bipartisan Farm Bill that reforms programs, cuts spending, and creates jobs in American agriculture. “If the House is serious about supporting rural America, they need to pass a comprehensive farm bill like the Senate bill that passed with broad bipartisan support."
The 608-page bill filed by House leaders would keep changes that were made last month and would not allow amendments. The new proposal would also repeal a provision in the current farm bill, passed in 2008, called “permanent law” that causes farm programs to revert to 1949 price levels if a new farm bill is not passed.
Lawmakers said they would vote on a food stamp bill at a later date.
The Obama administration immediately criticized the proposal saying the president would veto the bill if it made it to his desk. The administration said it had not had time to fully review the bill, but it did not include changes suggested by the president.
“The bill does not contain sufficient commodity and crop insurance reforms and does not invest in renewable energy, an important source of jobs and economic growth in rural communities across the country,” the administration said. “Legislation as important as a Farm Bill should be constructed in a comprehensive approach that helps strengthen all aspects of the nation. This bill also fails to reauthorize nutrition programs, which benefit millions of Americans — in rural, suburban and urban areas alike.”
House leaders hope that splitting the bill would make it easier to get approval for a new five-year farm bill — the bill offered last month was derailed because conservatives wanted much deeper cuts in the food stamps program than the proposed $20 billion. Sixty-two Republicans joined with Democrats to vote against the measure, a stinging defeat for Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, who had endorsed bill.
One Republican who voted against bill last month said he welcomed the split.
“It’s good government and transparency to have the bill split into farm programs and nutrition,” said Marlin Stutzman, Republican of Indiana, who has advocated for the separation.
But Democrats called the proposal an act of desperation.
“This is really bad policy that ignores years of urban and rural cooperation,” said Peter Welch, Democrat of Vermont. “And it completely ignores the bipartisan efforts of the House Agriculture Committee.”
Environmental and conservative groups also criticized the move.
“It is unconscionable that House leaders have put forward a farm bill that provides unlimited subsidies to the largest and most successful farm businesses, and guts programs to help the environment,” said Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs of the Environmental Working Group, a Washington research organization. “If passed, this bill would be the costliest farm bill in history. It should be rejected.”
Heritage Action for America, the advocacy arm of the Heritage Foundation, a conservative organization, called the move by the House a stunt to go to conference with the Senate, which passed a farm bill that included the food stamps program.
“The end result of such a conference would be a perpetuation of subsidies and government intervention that will continue to harm consumers and taxpayers alike,” said Michael A. Needham, chief executive of the group.
Last week, farm groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, sent letters to members of Congress saying farm and food stamps should not be separated.
It is unclear whether the Senate would be willing to conference with House leaders on a farm bill that does not include nutrition programs. On Tuesday Senator Debbie Stabenow, Democrat of Michigan and chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, issued a statement critical of the House efforts.
“This is a major mistake opposed by over 500 farm and conservation groups,” Ms. Stabenow said. “For two years in a row, the Senate has passed a bipartisan Farm Bill that reforms programs, cuts spending, and creates jobs in American agriculture. “If the House is serious about supporting rural America, they need to pass a comprehensive farm bill like the Senate bill that passed with broad bipartisan support."