GOP cuts in federal food aid scramble passage of long-delayed farm bill
Posted March 13, 2026

KansasReflector.com
The U.S. House Agriculture Committee advanced a sweeping farm bill early this month, attempting to revive Congress’ stalled effort to rewrite the nation’s agriculture law the same way it’s been done for decades.
But the vote also exposed the fragile coalition that will determine whether the legislation can ever move forward.
Those who watch the process closely told States Newsroom they are not sure a new farm bill will be enacted, given the rupture in the traditional alliance that has in the past successfully brought together agriculture interests and anti-hunger advocates to support farm bills across party lines.
Historically, farm bills have brought together a diverse coalition of advocates and lawmakers across party lines. The arrangement dates back to the 1973 farm bill, when Congress first combined nutrition programs with farm subsidies to build a coalition strong enough to pass the legislation. The sweeping legislation now includes food and nutrition programs, energy, conservation, and rural development, as well as farm support and crop insurance.
Now, cuts and changes in the nation’s biggest nutrition program, which could impose major new financial burdens on states, have been made by Republicans completely outside the usual farm bill process. This added to changes Democrats made in 2022, when they skipped the farm bill and used budget reconciliation to increase funding for climate-friendly farm conservation programs — though it is the food aid cuts that have most roiled the current debate.
These recent shifts could fundamentally change how the farm bill moves through Congress, said Christopher Neubert, deputy director of the Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems at Arizona State University. He is also a former Democratic staffer on both the Senate Agriculture and Budget committees.
“It’s a careful balance …. but the farm bill was one thing that felt kind of certain,” Neubert said in an interview. “Now we’re entering a new period that I think does make a lot of people uneasy.”
“Unless there’s a real push to take a look at some of the serious challenges that exist and meaningfully address them, it might be very difficult to get a five-year farm bill across the finish line,” Neubert said.
Policy and funding together
The Agriculture Committee approved its version of the farm bill in a 34–17 vote March 5, following a markup that stretched more than 20 hours and featured sharp partisan disputes, particularly over the previous cuts to nutrition programs.
The legislation would set policy and funding levels for major food, agriculture and conservation programs for the next five years. The text and a title-by-title summary of the 802-page bill can be found here.
The farm bill’s five-year timeline in the past gave some certainty and planning ability to farmers and ranchers, while bringing lawmakers and stakeholders back to the table periodically to reexamine the programs.
Congress last passed a farm bill in 2018, which expired in 2023. Since then, lawmakers have kept many programs running through temporary extensions, as negotiations over new versions fell through.
In the meantime, Congress made some of the largest changes to farm bill programs outside the normal reauthorization process – a major shift that has disrupted the usual process.
Last year’s GOP spending and tax cuts package, known as the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” reshaped nutrition funding, cutting the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.
SNAP, administered by states, is the nation’s largest anti-hunger program. It provides monthly, income-based benefits to help low-income individuals and families purchase groceries. Democrats have widely criticized the changes to the program.
Some Democrats do sign on
Even so, the House Agriculture Committee vote showed some bipartisan support.
Seven Democrats joined Republicans in backing the legislation: Reps. Jim Costa of California, Sharice Davids of Kansas, Don Davis of North Carolina, Gabe Vasquez of New Mexico, Adam Gray of California, Kristen McDonald Rivet of Michigan and Josh Riley of New York.
That was slightly more bipartisan than when the committee advanced a farm bill two years ago. Only four Democrats supported a measure that included some SNAP cuts within the farm bill.
Among those crossing party lines this year was Rivet, a freshman lawmaker and member of the moderate New Democrat Coalition.
Rivet hosted a press event on March 10 at a Saginaw County farm to promote the bill, highlighting the balancing act some moderate Democrats may face if the legislation reaches the House floor in an election year.
“Farmers need solutions and certainty,” Rivet said, noting that she backed the bill because of provisions related to disaster relief, crop insurance and specialty crop support.
Still, she acknowledged the legislation will need changes as it moves forward.
“I was excited to be able to vote ‘yes’ on this farm bill,” Rivet said. “But I need to say that the bill is not perfect. We do need to reverse the devastating cuts to SNAP for hungry kids and families.”
Restoration of SNAP funding resisted
The debate over SNAP and other nutrition programs loomed over much of the committee’s work and will continue to be a major factor as the legislation moves forward.
“The historic cuts to SNAP jeopardize the path forward for this bill and future farm bills,” Davids said during the committee debate.
Democrats offered multiple amendments to restore SNAP funding, but Republicans did not support any.
Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs at the liberal-leaning Environmental Working Group and a longtime farm policy advocate, said the longstanding alliance between those who back SNAP and farm supporters helped Congress pass farm bills for decades even as fewer Americans lived in rural communities.
But he argues that the recent policy decisions have effectively dismantled that agreement. The cuts to nutrition programs in last year’s budget reconciliation bill helped offset new investment in farm subsidies, which Faber and other advocates contend go disproportionately to large farmers and do little to support smaller farms.
“Republicans chose to blow up the farm bill coalition in the one big, beautiful bill …so if Congress fails to pass another farm bill ever again, it will be Republicans who rightfully will bear the blame,” Faber said in an interview.
Faber called the political shift around the farm bill “a historic once-in-a-generation miscalculation by the farm lobby that will, in the long run, undermine public support for the farm safety net.”