With House farm bill passage, what’s the outlook in the Senate?

After a frenzied day with leadership signaling debate would start on a new farm bill, stopping and then starting again, the U.S. House of Representatives managed to move it past the finish line April 30. The bill would update key agriculture programs and nullify animal-welfare state laws like California’s Prop. 12.

In a major win for the Make America Healthy Again movement, lawmakers approved an amendment to strip from the bill a provision to establish federal supremacy of pesticide-labeling laws over state rules.

House Agriculture Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson called the move a risk to farmers and the broader food system. Crop science company Bayer also decried removal of the language that it says was meant to avoid “a patchwork of regulations creating ambiguity.”

The vote on final farm bill passage was 224 to 200. Fourteen Democrats and one Independent voted for the bill and three Republicans voted against it. Six members did not vote—one Democrat and five Republicans.

Ultimately, there were more than 350 farm bill amendments filed with 57 considered by House members. Of those, 24 amendments were adopted, as well as an en bloc amendment.

E15 delayed again

A measure aimed at expanding U.S. ethanol sales had been set for stand-alone consideration alongside the farm bill, though that vote now appears scheduled for mid-May.

Lawmakers including Rep. Zach Nunn, R-IA, and Rep. Adrian Smith, R-NE, are pushing for an E15 vote as soon as possible. Rep. Austin Scott, R-GA, said while he’s backing the bill, it’s unclear if it will have enough support to pass amid a slew of issues, including objections to provisions in the bill that would impact small oil refiners and an estimate from the Congressional Budget Office that the measure would add billions of dollars to the federal deficit over the next decade—an estimate strongly refuted by the ethanol industry.

Up next in the Senate

Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman, R-AR, is targeting the end of May or early June for a bill markup as Democrats prepare for fights on pesticides and federal food assistance.

Unlike in the House, where the bill could pass with a simple majority, the Senate version will require 60 votes to clear the filibuster, which means securing at least seven Democrats.

The top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, said she wants to revisit the design of a policy to shift a substantial portion of the costs of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program onto states, as required by last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The House Agriculture Committee’s ranking member, Rep. Angie Craig, D-Minn., is also urging Senate Democrats to press the issue.

In a statement after the House vote, Senate Ag Committee Democrats said, “We have been clear that the farm bill must address the needs of American farmers and families. With a five-year high in small-farm bankruptcies, the farm bill must address rising input costs, provide new opportunities for domestic markets and fight for a trade agenda that works for everyone. Senate Democrats are committed to ensuring all states are treated equally by delaying the new SNAP cost shifts and addressing the needs of farm country.”

Boozman, however, insisted reopening debate on the SNAP cost-share is a nonstarter.

“We’re not going to revisit that,” he said.

One issue that is on the table, Boozman said, is whether to include language on pesticide labeling that was featured in the base text of the House bill but was eventually stripped after a successful amendment vote led by Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-FL.

Headwinds ahead

The provision, which would essentially make the Environmental Protection Agency pesticide label the law of the land, faced pushback from Democrats and Republicans aligned with the Make America Healthy Again movement, who argued it offered a legal “shield” for large chemical manufacturers.

The House’s stripping of the controversial provision was the “result of a movement of people that are trying to get pesticides off of our foods and chemicals out of our foods,” Ag Committee Democratic Sen. Cory Booker, D-NJ, said.

“And so now in the Senate, we’re going to have a similar fight, and I’m going to be one of those people that continues to push to clean our food system and rid it of these toxic chemicals that are linked to so many cancers and other diseases,” Booker said.

Booker introduced a bill with fellow Democrat Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico to ensure glyphosate manufacturers can be held liable under federal and state law if the chemical is proven to cause cancer.

Booker said discussions on the Senate farm bill are “just starting to happen,” but he’s hoping Boozman will work with him and his team on the pesticide issue.

Boozman acknowledged the pesticide-labeling provision in the House bill had been a “controversial” issue. He said conversations are underway to determine whether a similar provision would be included in Senate farm bill text.

“We’re talking with our Democratic colleagues, and if no Democrat is going to vote for it, it makes it more difficult [to include],” Boozman said.

Senators could also face squabbles over a measure that repeals animal-welfare state laws, including California’s Proposition 12. The provision came under intense debate in the House Rules Committee, but the panel ultimately blocked an amendment that sought to undo the measure.

Boozman told members of the National Association of Farm Broadcasting he remains “very much in support” of a fix to Prop. 12, but acknowledged it remains a divisive issue in the upper chamber.

“I don’t think there’s a single Democrat that would vote for it,” Boozman said. “In fact, I’ve asked for one to be identified that we could work with and so far nobody’s [been] provided.”

The Supreme Court upheld California’s Proposition 12 in 2023. The law prohibits sales in the state of eggs or pork derived from animals that were not raised in line with California’s animal-housing standards. The National Pork Producers Council and other farm groups have advocated for the House farm bill provision, arguing many small producers cannot afford to make the necessary operational changes to preserve access to the California market.

If the Senate passes its own farm bill, Thompson and other House lawmakers will have another opportunity to weigh in when the two bills go to a conference committee. Thompson stressed to reporters he plans to defend the House bill’s Prop. 12 language at that venue, if necessary.

“I’m going to fight for that provision,” Thompson told reporters.

California is “imposing its will on the rights of every other state. And that’s just wrong,” Thompson said.

Editor’s note: Sara Wyant is publisher of Agri-Pulse Communications Inc., www.Agri-Pulse.com.