Thompson Eyes Farm Bill Effort in Fall to Address SNAP, Avoid ‘Poverty Cliff’

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson wants to move legislation this fall to address farm and nutrition programs left out of the budget reconciliation bill.

Thompson, R-Pa., told reporters Tuesday the bill would need about $8 billion in additional funding over 10 years, far less than the $66 billion spending increase included in the reconciliation bill dubbed the One Big Beautiful Act and paid for out of cuts to funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

Asked about his timetable for committee action, he said, “September … Let’s get this, get this out of the way so it can start to work for the American farmer.”

Issues that would be addressed in what Thompson calls “farm bill 2.0” include controversial provisions to address concerns around industrial hemp, lawsuits against pesticide manufacturers, and California’s Proposition 12 regulations on sow housing.

Other issues that need to be addressed include reauthorization of the Conservation Reserve Program; limits for USDA direct and guaranteed loans; rural broadband assistance; and a provision to trigger permanent price-support laws if existing commodity programs are allowed to lapse after 2031.

Thompson also said he wants to address several nutrition assistance issues, including expanding SNAP eligibility for ex-convicts, as well as families of young adults who are still in school and whose income counts toward their family eligibility.

Thompson said he also wants to modify SNAP eligibility requirements to eliminate a “poverty cliff.” “Instead of pulling the rug out from underneath these folks as they start to do better, let’s keep supporting them until they’re financially independent of the government,” he said.

Thompson dismissed concerns that Democrats wouldn’t support a new bill because Republicans took money from SNAP to increase spending on farm programs in the reconciliation measure. Farm bills have long passed Congress with support from an urban-rural coalition.

“In terms of blowing up the bipartisan farm bill coalition, that blew up a long time ago, before I got to Congress,” Thompson said.

He went on, “If it really was a bipartisan coalition, we would have been at 50-50, not 80-20, or 81-19,” a reference to the ratio of nutrition to farm program spending under the 2018 farm bill.

This article was originally published by Agri-Pulse. Agri-Pulse is a trusted source in Washington, D.C., with the largest editorial team focused on food and farm policy coverage.