House Democrats have made it clear they will oppose the 2018 Farm Bill because of the proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly referred to as food stamps. However, many conservatives in the chamber are lukewarm toward the bill as well because they feel SNAP reforms don’t go far enough.

Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, signaled some modifications would be necessary to get conservatives’ support. “I don’t know that there’s an overwhelming issue, I think it’s just modifying the existing farm bill to make sure it reflects conservative principles,” said Meadows. “With some modifications I’ll be a yes,” he added.

Meadows was not specific on exactly what modifications conservatives are looking for.

The biggest change in SNAP comes in the form of work requirements. Able-bodied adults with no dependents between the ages of 18 and 59 would be subject to a weekly 20-hour work or work training requirement. Democrats on the agriculture committee say the work and work training requirements are not feasible and would unfairly remove people in need from the SNAP rolls.

The 2018 Farm Bill is expected to cost $860 billion over 10 years, with about 70 percent of that funding going toward SNAP. However, some conservative and libertarian groups such as Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Partners oppose the bill for issues beyond SNAP. The groups are supportive of any SNAP reform but take issue with other parts of the bill, such as crop insurance and conservation programs. The groups claim the bill is “rife with corporate welfare” and includes provisions that benefit owners of large agricultural businesses over the average taxpayer.

NAAA, along with other ag industry partners, recently sent a letter to House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway (R-TX), as well as Senate Chairman Pat Roberts (R-KS), expressing support for the bill due to the enormous amount of regulatory relief it would provide—specifically, Title IX of the Farm Bill which relates to the registration and use of pesticides. Title IX contains:

• A fix for the duplicative National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit by eliminating its requirements for pesticides registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
•  Much needed improvements to endangered species consultation and the pesticide registration process under the FIFRA.
• Language on cooperative federalism advancing states as coregulators of pesticides, but prohibiting local or county governments from advancing pesticide rules, such as Lincoln County, Oregon’s efforts last year banning aerial application of herbicides to forestry.

The House bill also contains funding for rural broadband programs. NAAA made sure the farm bill’s committee report contained the following language to ensure the proper marking of towers under 200 feet in rural areas:

“As the USDA develops financing, policy and other aspects related to rural broadband development, the Committee requests USDA take into account Sec. 2110 of the FAA Extension, Safety, and Security Act of 2016. This will ensure communication towers providing broadband services in rural areas that meet the specifications described in Section 2110 are properly marked and entered into a FAA database to protect the safety of aerial applicators, aerial firefighters, public health applicators, medevac units, law enforcement and other low-flying aircraft.”