Rep. Dusty Johnson looks ahead to more Farm Bill work

Yahoo

05-02-2025

Feb. 4—MITCHELL — Rep. Dusty Johnson and other members of Congress worked hard to get a new Farm Bill done before the start of 2025.
But it didn't happen. As lawmakers scrambled for compromises to come up with a spending deal and avoid a government shutdown, for the second straight year, a one-year extension to the 2018 Farm Bill was agreed upon. That ensured programs like crop insurance, conservation programs and SNAP benefits would continue as they are intended to.
Johnson said he was disappointed in the delay, but was optimistic a solution would be found later this year.
"We don't have a farm bill yet. It's not complete," Johnson told the Mitchell Republic in a recent interview. "We did get a disaster package out that allows people who have been suffering from some pretty difficult situations to get some assistance. But we still do need to get a Farm Bill done this year, and I think we will."
Johnson said it was disappointing that Congress was unable to get an updated Farm Bill done. An extension of the previous Farm Bill keeps critical programs running, but every extension without a fully-updated bill means operating under policy that is more and more outdated every year.
Johnson cited leadership in the Senate as one sticking point in the process. That leadership has now undergone change with the ascent of John Boozman, a Republican from Arkansas, to the position of chair on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Commission. He replaces former chair Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat from Michigan.
He felt the change would be beneficial to the process of moving the Farm Bill forward, as cooperation between the two houses of Congress is crucial to progress.
"We absolutely need to have the Senate pick up the pace, and I think they will. There's a new chairman, and he seems far more driven to get this done than what we saw from his predecessor, who retired," Johnson said.
The failure to get a bill passed stems partly from a stalemate between Democrats and Republicans over how to pay for it and whether to place limits on nutrition and climate programs, among other nuances.
A bill this important is going to come with some compromises on both sides, and delaying it only hurts the American farmer and the economies that revolve around it and the farm.
"This is something that's only going to get done with both parties working together and both the House and Senate working together. Does it get a little frustrating? It does get frustrating, in part because I don't really understand the value of the delay," Johnson said. "Normally, in D.C., I understand why somebody is slow-walking something. They have something to gain by the delay. For the life of me, I just don't understand who in the world benefits from having a Farm Bill languish as it has been."
The 2018 Farm Bill extension runs through Sept. 30, 2025. That means the clock is again ticking, putting pressure on lawmakers to put differences aside and come up with a solution that they can agree on enough to make it law for the next five years.
From here, the national lawmaking apparatus will have to adjust to the new Trump administration, which will likely have some input into the Farm Bill. But Johnson said the bulk of the work will have to be done in the House and Senate and across party lines if is to be successful.
"We're just waiting on the Senate now to get rolling again with the administrative transition. The administration will be a little bit involved in the Farm Bill, but really this is something that the House and Senate have to do their work," Johnson said. "In the House, we've got a really good Farm Bill. We'll dust it off for this year, we'll clean it up a little bit, and I imagine we will be able to vote it out of committee again on a strongly bipartisan basis. If the Senate can do the same, then I think we'll be in a good position to succeed."
Key points expected in the 2025 Farm Bill include increased funding for climate-smart conservation practices, potential adjustments to SNAP benefits, enhanced support for specialty crops, improved crop insurance programs, focus on rural development initiatives and likely provisions for expanding access to healthy food in underserved communities.
Not all legislation and policy that affects the agriculture industry is included in the Farm Bill.
Johnson said there are areas of policy to consider that could positively impact the American farmer. Reducing input costs can help create a beneficial balance that could help offset some weaker commodity prices.
"We're in a pretty lousy price environment for commodities. Cattle are good, but corn and beans are really soft. With input costs as high as they are, that really squeezes our producers. I do think when we get federal government spending under control that it's going to trickle throughout the supply chain to help hold the line on some of these input costs," Johnson said. "As we get more American energy to the market, that's going to reduce energy costs for producers. If we can help on the input side, that's going to make it a little bit easier for producers to get a margin."
Johnson also feels the Trump administration's approach to Waters of the United States rules, which defines waters that are subject to federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act, is superior to that of his predecessor. Subjects covered under the rules include navigable waters, impoundments, tributaries, wetlands, intrastate lakes and ponds and streams.
The rules can impact farmers by determining which bodies of water on their land fall under federal regulation, potentially affecting their ability to perform basic farming activities like drainage or land modification without needing permits. That can lead to increased costs, delays and uncertainty regarding land management practices on their property.
The Trump administration should be more friendly to farmers when it comes to control over their fields, Johnson said.
"With the previous administration on Waters of the United States, you had them, in essence, asserting jurisdiction over a wet spot in somebody's field. The Donald Trump approach to waters of the United States is, listen, it's got to be a large navigable body before that's the federal government's business," Johnson said. "That's not to say that there aren't important state and local regulations that can have an impact, but if something's going to be the business of the United States government, it should have a national impact."