The “big, beautiful” reconciliation bill would overwhelmingly benefit large farms at the expense of small ones, some farm program critics told reporters on Wednesday, as reported by Agri Pulse. “This legislation that the ag committees have produced is clear "fiscal malpractice” said Josh Sewell of Taxpayers for Common Sense. Sewell was joined on the call by consultant Ferd Hoefner, formerly of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, and the Environmental Working Group’s Scott Faber.


View More

House Republicans moved closer to completing action this week on a reconciliation plan to implement President Trump’s “one, big, beautiful” agenda bill. The final three committees completed action on their portion of the package to renew the 2017 tax cut legislation with some additional tax cuts and to cut roughly $1.5 trillion in spending over the next decade to pay for the tax provisions and reduce overall federal spending. Congress has few legislative days scheduled until the Memorial Day recess, which is Speaker Mike Johnson’s deadline to push the reconciliation package through the House to get the package on Trump’s desk by July 4. The House Budget Committee consolidate the work of the various committees into one package and bring it up for a vote next week. As of right now, Speaker Johnson does not have the votes to pass this big chunk of Trump domestic agenda. It is anticipated changes to this legislation will have to be made in the Rules Committee or on the floor to ensure its passage.


View More

The Agriculture Department would get $560 million more for rural broadband expansion, plus increases for research, food aid and combating animal and plant diseases, under a House spending bill for fiscal 2023.

The Food and Drug Administration, which also would be funded through the bill, would get $3.6 billion, an increase of $341 million over FY22, including $77 million more for food safety.


View More
While there is a reported agreement by a bipartisan group of senators to the framework of increased spending on core infrastructure programs, the political jockeying continues. Republicans question how the increased spending will be paid for – definitively not with any kind of gas tax increase – in addition to what commitments are being made to then consider a massive government funded bill that would not require bipartisan support. Progressive Democrats have concerns also about how the bill would be paid for – definitely not by increasing the corporate tax rate -- and argue that it doesn’t do enough for climate change and other social issues they want addressed.

View More