Washington, Lincoln, and the 2023 Farm Bill

In the United States, the idea that government has a role to play in support of production agriculture dates to the Nation’s infancy.  In his 1796 Annual message to Congress, President George Washington stated, “It will not be doubted that with reference either to individual or national welfare agriculture is of primary importance…Institutions for promoting it grow up, supported by the public purse; and to what object can it be dedicated with greater propriety?”

Daniel Webster, best known as a Senator from Massachusetts from 1827–1841 and 1845–1850, argued “Let us never forget that the cultivation of the earth is the most important labor of man.  When tillage begins, other arts follow.  The farmers, therefore, are the founders of civilization.”

On May 15, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed legislation to create the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Over the next two months – amid the Civil War – he signed additional legislation that expanded and transformed American farming, including the Homestead Act, and the establishment of the Land Grant agricultural university system.  In 1889, the USDA was elevated to cabinet status.

Since the early days of the American Colonies and the founding of the Republic, agriculture policy initiatives and farm bills have been a staple of domestic and foreign policy.  Agree, or disagree, these bedrock principles which have tended to reflect the fundamental goals of farm policy; providing a safe and abundant food supply, retention of a competitive marketplace, and achieving both objectives at reasonable prices.

Between 1936 and 1947 there were no fewer than ten pieces of major farm legislation or Executive Orders dealing with agriculture.  In addition, at least 100 pieces of legislation between 1948 and 2015 were signed into law. 

Although each of these pieces of legislation may have been targeted to a specific policy initiative, what each has demonstrated is a commitment by the federal government and American taxpayer to ensure a safe and reliable food supply for the American consumer and the world at large.

Which brings us to the 2023 Farm Bill and what the next farm bill might look like.  Coalitions are being formed, policies are being floated and strategic planning by stakeholders of all stripes is well underway.

There will again be a broad range of issues under consideration, including (but not limited to); commodity support programs, payment limits, biotechnology, conservation compliance, utilization of risk-management tools, federal dairy policy, agro-terrorism, food safety, and nutrition programs.

In addition, policymakers will debate issues regarding business development and retention, transportation infrastructure, technology (including telecommunications), availability of credit, education, housing, and health care as they develop agriculture policy and craft the farm bill. 

The debate surrounding the last few Federal farm bills has made it clear that pressures for additional support for traditional programs contained within the agriculture budget be counterbalanced by efforts to curb spending in the face of ongoing budget deficits.  The inevitable competition between spending priorities will play out against the backdrop of the national debt, unfunded liabilities in excess of $200 trillion and a growing debate regarding decoupling of the commodity and nutrition titles.

The agriculture policy playing field is extremely complex and none of the above will be considered in a vacuum.  There have been varied and conflicting ideals throughout the Nation’s history which have always surfaced during agriculture and farm bill debates.  Often these issues end up being played out in the political arena in equal (or greater) proportions to the activity which surrounds the substantive discourse.

Members of Congress, the Administration, and stakeholders will again engage in a delicate balancing act as they explore policies that will not only allow American agriculture to remain competitive, but also those which will garner enough votes to ensure passage of the next comprehensive farm bill before the current one expires.

Dave Ladd, President of RDL & Associates, is a frequent guest commentator regarding public policy and the political environment.  His company, RDL & Associates, assists clients in achieving their legislative and policy objectives via strategic communications, message development and interaction with elected officials.

The Fundamental Role of Urban and Rural Coalitions in Agriculture Policy

The role played by modern agriculture in the economy, the shifting demographics of rural America, the decline in rural population, and the advancing age of producers have made the formation of coalitions increasingly critical for agriculture and related stakeholders.  These shifts have changed the way coalitions are developed and maintained, bringing about partnerships that are urban and rural, as well as regionally by commodity.

Understanding farm bills requires highly specialized knowledge about issues ranging from crop insurance and conservation to nutrition and forestry.  Since 1973, one of the key reasons farm bills have passed Congress is due to the broad support created by urban and rural coalitions.  Farm state members of Congress have leveraged votes on issues such as minimum wage or consumer protection – viewed to be critical to urban constituencies – in return for support of agriculture legislation.  To make farm bills more palatable to a broader constituency, domestic food programs such as food stamps and food aid have become an integral part of the agriculture budget. 

However, the strength of this coalition may be threatened by the desire to reduce federal outlays.  Will members of Congress and stakeholders who advocate for domestic food programs be willing to accept reductions to these outlays that are in proportion to those under consideration for program commodities?

Coalitions are also regional and oriented toward specific commodities.  Southern members of Congress who represent cotton, rice, peanuts, and tobacco will often leverage votes for their commodities of interest with Midwestern and Northern members who represent corn, wheat, and soybeans.  Since dairy and sugar come from a broader base (e.g. sugar beets in Minnesota/North Dakota and sugarcane in Louisiana), the regional coalitions that are formed regarding these commodities are wider due to regional diversification.  However, regional, and commodity-based coalitions will also see stress during consideration of the 2012 farm bill. 

Although the makeup of Congress is increasingly urban in nature, agriculture continues to have several options politically.  Because members in the House of Representatives must seek re-election every two years, those who represent rural districts cannot afford to stray too far from their constituency.  In the United States Senate (a chamber that functions by unanimous consent), every senator represents agriculture and rural interests, regardless of the size of the state or the types of commodities produced. 

In addition, the rules and precedents of the United States Senate afford the minority the right to protect and advance commodity provisions and funding for agriculture programs that otherwise might not achieve broad majority support.  Finally, the Electoral College strengthens the hand of agriculture and rural communities.  Federal farm bills are large, complex, and expensive and every title within the farm bill speaks to a wide-range of interest groups with diverse agendas.

The Plains states, where farm incomes and land values are most affected by program commodity payment mechanisms, will remain at the core of electoral politics for members of Congress – as well as the candidates for President in 2024.

Copyright © 2023 RDL & Associates, LLC.  All rights reserved.