House Ag Chair Says Farm Families ‘Among the Biggest Winners’ in GOP Budget Bill

House Republicans passed their reconciliation bill by a one vote margin on May 22. The bill boosts farm programs and extends key tax breaks but cuts SNAP program spending.

On this episode of Agri-Pulse Newsmakers, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson joined the show to talk about why the bill is so important for agriculture. He also discussed the impact of federal downsizing at USDA and whether farmers should be worried about the president’s trade policy.

Then, Jim Richards with Cornerstone Government Affairs and Anne Simmons with The Peterson Group, Inc. discussed the specifics of reconciliation and whether comprehensive farm bills are a thing of the past.

Watch the Episode

Want to receive Newsmakers in your inbox every week? Sign up!

Read the Transcript

Please note: This transcript has not been edited.

Andrew Huneke: Welcome to “Agri Pulse Newsmakers”, where we aim to take you to the heart of ag policy. I’m your host, Andrew Huneke. This week’s guest is House Ag Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson, who joins us to talk about the reconciliation bill’s impact on agriculture, the farm bill, trade, and USDA downsizing.

But first, here’s this week’s headlines.

The House of Representatives approved the reconciliation bill that includes funding for key parts of the farm bill, expands key tax benefits widely used by farmers and small businesses, and boosts spending for commodity programs and crop insurance. The bill passed by a one-vote margin, 215 to 214, and now heads to the Senate where changes could be made. In the Senate, the reconciliation process allows the bill to pass with a simple majority, avoiding a Democratic filibuster. However, any changes to the bill made in the Senate would force the modified version to be sent back to the House. The bill includes big wins for farmers, including the tax benefits and the more than $56 billion increase for farm bill programs, like higher reference prices in the Price Loss Coverage program. It would also bring IRA conservation funding into the farm bill baseline and remove restrictions that limit the dollars to climate-smart practices. However, the bill still has historic cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, projected at $295 billion.

Ag Secretary Brooke Rollins says the department does not plan on offering another round of buyouts, but the department still plans to release a reorganization plan that has been delayed by litigation. The plan would require moving some USDA employees out of the National Capital Region. The department has lost 15,000 employees through two rounds of buyouts.

And, finally, House Ag Chair Glenn “GT” Thompson says he’s ready to start working on a standalone farm bill now that the House is done with the budget reconciliation process. Thompson says some of the provisions included in the bill would address hemp production, protect pesticide manufacturers from lawsuits if products meet federal labeling requirements, and prevent states from setting animal production standards that other states must follow, like California’s Prop 12.

Congressman GT Thompson is the chairman of the House Ag Committee. We asked him why the reconciliation bill is so important for agriculture.

GT Thompson: Our farm families probably are among the biggest winners within that bill. First of all, it prevents the largest tax increase in history, and that’s significant. It includes a permanent fix for the death tax, raises the level at which assets would be taxed. I think that’s good for the large majority of our farms and farmers as they try to pass ’em on to the next generation. 199A, which is an important provision in agriculture. And then just the individual taxes that benefit every American, certainly farm families. And then you dig a little deeper within the bill and you’ll find provisions like what we did in education and workforce. Our farm kids have been discriminated against when it came to being eligible for educational loans, because the Biden administration changed the criterion from revenue to assets, and everybody knows that farmers are asset rich and cash poor. And so what part of a farm do you liquidate in order to be able to pay for your child’s education? And so we fixed that, we did a $60 billion investment for our farmers and for rural America. The safety net, the commodity title, the increase of 10 to 20% for each of the commodities, we were able to put in there adding new basis for farmers who have never had it, whether new, young and beginning, or someone who has farmed their whole lives. The improvements to the Dairy Margin Coverage. When you look at crop insurance, which is probably the most popular farm bill program that we have, we actually make the premiums more affordable and we make the products more versatile so that they may help with disaster-type relief and, at the same time, we extend it to the specialty crops.

Andrew Huneke: There are many pieces of the committee’s farm bill last year that are left out of this reconciliation legislation, including provisions dealing with Prop 12, California’s restrictions on how livestock are raised. What is your plan for enacting those farm bill provisions that are being left behind?

GT Thompson: Well, we know what they are. As you mentioned, we had the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024, so we’ll have the Farm, Food, and National Security Act 2025. The reason things were left out of reconciliation, because they had to meet certain criterion according to the Senate rules. And so it had to change in finances, either cost savings or increased investments. So you’ve mentioned Prop 12, that’s a very important piece of legislation that will be a part of the bill that we put together, as it was last time, and that was a bill passed with bipartisan votes in the last Congress. Just the Senate had done nothing, and that’s why it didn’t go any further than our committee. We’re gonna deal with the hemp issue, we don’t have sugar wars in this farm bill but we do have hemp wars. A pesticide labeling, that was a part of the previous farm bill and we’re gonna deal with it this time. I just can’t imagine the cost of farming if you’re dealing with a company that has to jump through hoops in 50 different states when it comes to labeling, and so we trust the EPA, we trust the EPA scientists, and so we’ll deal with that labeling issue as part of it. And then there’s a lot of other things in there that just weren’t appropriate for reconciliation. Obviously, rural economic development, what we do with broadband, and making sure that we have connectivity all across the country, back the longest farm lane and deep in the forest. And there’s quite a bit yet that needs to be done. All very, very important, and looking forward to doing that.

Andrew Huneke: The US and China have lowered tariffs on each other, and President Trump announced what he called a historic trade deal with the United Kingdom. However, the threat of trade wars still has farmers worried. We asked House Ag Committee Chairman GT Thompson if they should be worried and what he’s hearing from producers in his state.

GT Thompson: Well, I think we should always be cautious. I’m hearing the same thing from my farmers as I’m hearing farmers and ranchers all across the country. You know, trade does create some anxiety for us because we rely on trade when it comes to American agriculture. It helps to offset any problems that we’re having domestically, and having robust foreign markets is incredibly important. But I wanna remind people that President Trump’s only been in office a little over 100 days, and he’s got China at the table now. He has, you know, probably over 100 countries who are knocking on the White House door wanting to do a deal. I got a call about a month ago from the US Trade Representative, Jamieson Greer. He called me on a Sunday morning before I was going to church and said, “Chairman, we’re, you know… We’re putting a framework together with India.” And I’m thinking, “That’s incredible,” ’cause India has more stomachs to fill than any other nation in the world. And the call was to let me know that, but also, they asked me: What did I see the implications for American agriculture? And all of that is just in a little over 100 days. And so I understand the anxiety and how important trade is to the American farmer. I just ask that you give President Trump and his team a little grace ’cause he is making great progress.

Andrew Huneke: Turning to USDA now and the federal downsizing that’s happening there. About 15,000 employees have taken buyouts, including large numbers of scientists. Does the department have the staff left that it needs to have to protect American agriculture or to do critical research?

GT Thompson: Well, in the performance of our oversight of USDA and really working shoulder to shoulder with Secretary Rollins, that is my expectation. You know, size really doesn’t matter when it comes to the size of USDA. Literally, it’s huge. And if there’s downsizing, I understand that, you know, more efficient government is preferred, but it has to be just as effective or more effective, and so I trust Secretary Rollins. I’ve also been encouraging the different trade associations, different groups that, you know, take the opportunity here. We got, you know, incredibly experienced people that are choosing, electing to take a voluntary buyout. I’m not crazy about that program. I don’t like losing people that are highly effective, highly efficient, but at the same time, if they’re going to do that, they’re available. So I encourage the commercial side and the trade groups, you know, “Let’s try to scoop these people up. They tend to be the best and the brightest in their respective fields. Let’s keep them working on behalf of the American farmer and just we’ll be on the other side of the coin, not the government’s side.”

Andrew Huneke: House Agriculture Committee Chairman, GT Thompson, thank you so much for joining us, sir.

GT Thompson: My pleasure, thank you so much.

Andrew Huneke: We’ll be right back with our panel discussion. But first, Lydia Johnson looks at farm bankruptcies across the country in this week’s “Map It Out.”

Lydia Johnson: After a four-year downward trend, US farm bankruptcies are on the rise. 216 US farms filed for Chapter 12 bankruptcy in 2024, which marks a 55% increase from the previous year. As you can see on this chart, California led the nation with 17 filings, up by six from the previous year. Arkansas was second with 16 filings, an increase of nine from the year prior. Nebraska was third with 15 filings, showing an increase of eight filings over the previous year. In 2024, 14 states and territories had zero filings. Seven states went from having no filings in 2023 to at least one in 2024. Net farm income in 2024 reached a four-year low, decreasing about 24% in just two years. As producers work through planting season, many are making decisions about how to finance their operations for the upcoming year. They’re expecting to receive emergency commodity assistance program payments this summer to provide some economic relief despite continued challenging conditions. For Agri-Pulse, I’m Lydia Johnson.

Andrew Huneke: Welcome back to Agri Pulse Newsmakers, where this week’s panel is going to focus on everything that happened with the reconciliation bill, what could happen with the Farm Bill, and a little bit on USDA downsizing. Joined this week by Jim Richards with Cornerstone Government Affairs and Anne Simmons with the Peterson Group. Thank you very much. Thank you both very much for joining me this morning. And Jim, I wanna start with you first, sir. You know that big beautiful budget bill that Republicans put together in the House, it provides new funding for farm bill programs with savings from nutrition assistance. Who’s going to benefit the most from this in agriculture?

Jim Richards: Bottom line answer on that is the I title one commodity coverage producers that are gonna, if this thing gets enacted, which I think it will probably by middle of July when they’re all said and done, but it’s gonna be those pro producers that have their updated reference prices and new reference prices to use the marketing tools that are gonna be major beneficiaries. There are other components within the other titles of this reconciliation package from the Natural Resources Committee, from the Energy and Commerce Committee that also are gonna benefit rural America and agriculture producers on the energy front, on permitting front, on fire control front, etcetera. But primarily it’s gonna be those producers that are impacted by reference prices and what it’ll do for those orphan programs that have been stranded for far too long.

Andrew Huneke: We know that Bill now moves on to the Senate. How do you think the Bill will end up being changed in the Senate?

Jim Richards: I think it’s safe to say that Senator Boozman, there’s not a big gap on where GT through that Herculean effort that he and the committee made are on the SNAP front. But there is some rumbling on the reference price fronts and what’s going on there that I think could be potentially problematic that you see a little bit of a change. And if there is some substantive change, particularly on the Title I front, then, you know, it becomes difficult to understand whether or not that’s something that the House would be willing to accept, because you’ve got procedural issues here. Primarily because we don’t really do conferences anymore like we used to in the old days, one. And two, the clock is ticking, particularly with the debt ceiling. And so that’s why I’ve been in the middle of July kind of timeframe for this reconciliation package to be done for months. And the more change you make, the more the opportunity or the greater the chance that the House is not gonna able to pass or accept what comes back from the Senate. I think there’s gonna be some changes at the end of the day, but I don’t think that you can get too far off of what the House produces which will be to create something that’ll be acceptable to the House and the Senate.

Andrew Huneke: And Anne, I’d like to bring you into the discussion now, ma’am. You know, democrats in the House and the Senate have stressed that cutting nutrition assistance to fund farm programs is going to make it harder to pass a farm Bill later. Like what are your thoughts on that?

Anne Simmons: I’m gonna repeat a familiar adage when it comes to that question, which is, farm bills have traditionally needed Democrats and Republicans to pass. I know, going back to the 2008 bill Tom Peterson, you know, that’s the last farm bill we managed to get the 2014 and the 2018 bill done, but I would remind folks that both during 2014 process and the 2018 process, the first bills that went to the house floor failed. They went down because they were partisan and they had no democratic votes and they weren’t able to get enough Republican support for either of those versions. So in the long run, like I said, I think Democrats will come back. There is a lot of heartburn, a lot of mistrust now because of what was done to SNAP, in the one big beautiful bill package. But I think there is always a chance for folks to work together. I think the sentiment that our democratic members had in last Congress still prevails, which is most of them, they all wanna work together to try and get a bipartisan farm built done.

Andrew Huneke: We asked Jim Richards and Anne Simmons if farmers should be worried that we may not see comprehensive farm bills after the partisanship we’ve seen on this reconciliation legislation.

Jim Richards: It’s gonna be very difficult, which is one of the reasons that I think GT in particular has pushed the hardest and Senator Boozman understands very well that you gotta take care of some of the core components in this reconciliation process that they can, because those vote margins don’t get any easier for the next 20 months. And the outcomes and the budgetary stresses that exist across the government, much less within the foreign sector, don’t diminish, if anything, they become more extreme. So it’s tough. We all want it to happen and we wanna be wrong that the ’18 was the last great farm bill, but time will tell. But I’m a pragmatic optimist in that until it’s not done, then there’s a chance to get it done. And hopefully for the sake of the folks that Anne and I know so well and our families across the country, that this is important too, that we’ll get there. But it’s gonna be tough to be brutally honest.

Andrew Huneke: And Anne, your thoughts as well on that?

Anne Simmons: I would agree with what Jim said and I would just add, and this isn’t a partisan comment, it’s as an observer of what happened, you know, GT, Chairman Thompson got a bill out of a bipartisan vote coming out of committee last year and still couldn’t move a bill. So I’m not gonna indicate whether I think things are better or worse this time around for moving a bill, but I think folk need to be concerned about house Republican leadership and putting their focus there about what are they gonna be doing to help GT and Senator Chairman Boozman get a bill done.

Andrew Huneke: And I’d like to wrap with the issue of federal downsizing, particularly with what’s going on at USDA and we know Ag Secretary Brooke Rollins is expected to release the department’s downsizing plan soon, which she says will focus on protecting services to farmers and making the department more efficient. Do you think farmers or consumers will notice the impact of the department’s downsizing positively or negatively?

Anne Simmons: To me, there’s two places that this is going to impact. If they move headquarters folks out to the countryside, I think the concern there is the potential brain drain and losing a lot of folks with a lot of knowledge and experience. Yes, you can build that back, but that takes time. And the impact of losing those folks is you’re not able to implement a farm bill as quickly. You’re not able to implement and get out into the field other programs or initiatives that the secretary and the president might have. The other obviously impact is gonna be on field services and local offices, county offices, what that means. And I know she said she’s not gonna close any more offices. I assume they’re still gonna look at their optimally staffed office initiative that the Trump administration was working on, Secretary Perdue had in the first term to look at, you know, what’s the best location for these, how many staff do we need per office to get that best service. I would also add NRCS obviously is another concern for folks because it was Chief Lohr, NRCS Chief Lohr during the first Trump administration that wanted to get to 12,000 FTE and there’s more conservation money out there, not less. So I think that’s gonna be another big impact in addition to FSA loan officers as well.

Andrew Huneke: Well, certainly a lot to be paying attention to here as we move forward on both the reconciliation front and the federal downsizing front. Jim, Anne, thank you so much for joining us this morning. We’ll be back with more “Agri-Pulse Newsmakers,” but first, Lydia Johnson looks at the country’s top agricultural imports by commodity in this week’s Ag by the Numbers.

Lydia Johnson: Nearly $149 billion worth of consumer-oriented agricultural goods were imported in 2024. If tariffs escalate, consumers could begin to feel the effect in the grocery aisle. Produce, bakery products, and alcohol Could be the first to see a jump in price. As you can see on this chart, fresh fruits and fruit products were the top imported commodity in 2024, accounting for $29 billion. Vegetables were second at $22 billion. Bakery products and pasta trailed at $14 billion, followed by distilled spirits and beef and veal at $11 billion. Nearly 80% of the US’ ag imports are supplied from just 10 countries, including many targeted by President Trump’s tariffs. Mexico and Canada were the top suppliers, followed by the European Union, Brazil, and China respectively. For Agri-Pulse, I’m Lydia Johnson.

Andrew Huneke: Thanks for joining us for another episode of “Agri-Pulse Newsmakers.” Here’s what’s on the horizon for next week. Both the House and Senate will not be in session. USDA’s Economic Research Service will release its quarterly Ag Trade Forecast on Thursday. And lastly, signup is open for the Agri-Pulse Food and Ag Issues Summit in Sacramento, California on June 10th. You can gain insights on water issues, the ag economy, and perspectives from the California capital from industry leaders and lawmakers. To sign up, visit the Events tab on our website, www.agri-pulse.com. For Agri-Pulse, I’m Andrew Huneke. Thanks for watching.

Narrator: “Newsmakers” is a production of Agri-Pulse Communications. You can also find our new content on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts. And don’t forget to follow Agri-Pulse and our correspondents on social media to get breaking news and more. For agriculture, trade, food environment, and regulatory news, your source is agri-pulse.com.