On June 22, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved the fiscal year (FY) 2024 Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill in what has become a rare occurrence – unanimous, bipartisan approval. The Senate’s approval of the Agriculture bill stood in stark contrast to what transpired in the House Appropriations Committee just a week earlier – an eight plus hour partisan slog that resulted in approval of the House’s FY2024 Agriculture spending bill along party lines.
The contrast between the two markups on opposite sides of the US Capitol stems entirely from the content of the two bills. NSAC wrote in May about the House’s deep and unnecessary cuts which go well beyond the agreed upon discretionary spending cap established in the debt-limit deal. Meanwhile, the Senate’s FY2024 Agriculture bill simultaneously adheres to the agreed upon cap while increasing FY2024 spending above FY2023 enacted levels. In this post, we’ll dig into the details of the Senate’s bill and see what might be in store for the months ahead as the two chambers look to reconcile the bills and keep the government funded after September 30.
At a high level, the Senate bill sets FY2024 Agriculture spending at nearly $26 billion, more than $500 million above the FY2023 enacted level of $25.5 billion. This increase is primarily directed toward the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, which means that most programs throughout the bill receive level funding, at best.
Conservation
The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Conservation Operations account – which funds NRCS staffing and technical assistance that supports the adoption of on-farm conservation practices – comes in at $922.15 million. This is a nearly $20 million cut from the FY2023 enacted level, but a $10.7 million increase above the House’s proposal. Within the Conservation Operations account there is $800.89 million for Conservation Technical Assistance (CTA). Within that, there is $10 million for the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI). GLCI – which promotes high quality livestock grazing techniques – was funded at $14 million in FY2022 and FY2023 but was zeroed out in the House’s proposal. The Senate’s number of $10 million, while lower than previous years, is nonetheless an important counter to the House’s proposal. The Senate bill also includes report language on GLCI which directs $8 million to states for competitive grants to diverse partnerships, including socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers and their organizations.
The Senate Appropriations Agriculture Subcommittee – which drafts Agriculture spending bills – also included report language elevating the importance of soil health and conservation planning for small acreage operations:
Soil Health – The Committee recognizes that improving soil health on agricultural lands is key to achieving both meaningful conservation and economic benefits for producers. … The Committee encourages the Secretary to dedicate more technical assistance funds to establish standard protocols for measuring and testing carbon levels to evaluate gains in soil health that will help producers to create positive economic, environmental, and social outcomes through ecosystem service markets. The Committee believes the Secretary should provide additional technical assistance related to healthy soil planning, soil carbon sequestration, and conservation activity planning. NRCS is urged to support the expansion of existing State soil health programs and to assist interested States in establishing new State soil health programs.
Streamlined Conservation Planning – The Committee direct NRCS to develop a streamlined conservation planning and application process for small acreage operations to reduce the time and effort required by both the applicant and local NRCS staff to process conservation program applications.
As with much of the Senate bill, context is important to understand the conservation funding included in the bill. While NSAC has strongly advocated for increased FY2024 funding for CTA and GLCI, among others, the confines of the debt-limit deal make increases across the bill challenging. Given this context, level funding for CTA and a slight reduction for GLCI represent important counters to the House bill.
Research
The Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education Program (SARE) receives $50 million in funding in the Senate’s proposal, $5 million above the House’s proposal and identical to FY2023’s enacted level. Given the fiscal constraints under which the FY2024 bill was drafted, NSAC is relieved to see level funding for SARE. The Committee also included report language on SARE emphasizing that the Committee is “strongly supportive of the SARE program and directs USDA to ensure that research, education, and extension activities carried out within SARE remain intact.” The Committee also included additional report language regarding SARE’s important work on soil health and climate resilience:
The Committee recognizes SARE’s accomplishments to improve soil health through cutting-edge research, education, and extension on cover crops, diversified rotations, and managed grazing. SARE is encouraged to focus on increasing agricultural resilience in the context of a changing climate and the related economic, social, and environmental challenges, including through interdisciplinary systems research and education, farmer and rancher research and demonstration grants, and graduate student research grants.
Elsewhere within the purview of USDA’s Research, Education, and Economics Mission Area, a number of priorities important to NSAC members received level funding. The Organic Transition Research Program (ORG) received level funding of $7.5 million, and the Senate bill included ORG report language to encourage a continued focus “on research topics related to the role of organic agriculture with regard to climate change.” The Senate bill also funds the Food Safety Outreach Program at a level $10 million, the Farm and Ranch Stress Assistance Network at a slightly increased $12 million, and the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative at a level $455 million.
Despite this positive news, the Senate bill falls short of providing an appropriation for the Farming Opportunities Training and Outreach Grant Program (FOTO), which includes both the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program and Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers (Section 2501). While FOTO receives $25 million in mandatory funding that is unaffected by annual appropriations, the program has also received additional discretionary appropriations in recent years.
Local & Regional Food Systems
The Local Agriculture Market Program (LAMP), created in the 2018 Farm Bill, combined two previously existing programs – the Value-Added Producer Grant Program (VAPG) and the Farmers Market & Local Food Promotion Program (FMLFPP) – under a single umbrella. Although now both housed within LAMP, these two programs are funded separately. The Senate bill would provide $7.4 million for FMLFPP. Meanwhile, VAPG comes in at level funding compared to FY2023 with an appropriation of $13 million for VAPG grants and $3 million for the Agriculture Innovation Center Program. NSAC is pleased to see these full funding levels preserved, particularly given the context.
Unfortunately, however, both the House and Senate bills fail to provide appropriations for the Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production (OUAIP). The 2018 Farm Bill established the small but impactful OUAIP, and in the years since it has become a fully staffed office. Interest in and support for the grants and cooperative agreements offered through OUAIP are at an all-time high. With both Senate and House bills zeroing out funding for the Office, there is a risk that there will not be any funding in FY2024 to support the critical, growing, and in-demand work being done through this office. NSAC will be working closely with Congressional Appropriators throughout the remainder of the process to address this issue.
Importantly, the Senate bill avoids including any harmful policy riders. The House bill contained policy riders ranging from an anti-farmer Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA) rider that would limit the rulemaking authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to promote fair competition in livestock and poultry markets, provisions to block USDA from pursuing equity-focused initiatives, and rescissions of critical climate-focused COVID-era funding. Thankfully, the Senate bill rejects all of these provisions.
What’s Next?
As the calendar turns to July, both the Senate and House Appropriations Committees have already passed their respective FY2024 Agriculture bills, meaning that the next step would be “floor action” for both bills, or consideration and vote by all members in each respective chamber. Taking into account the upcoming Congressional schedule, Congress is only in session for 32 days between now and the end of the government fiscal year, September 30, 2023. This is an incredibly tight window for floor action, particularly given that the Agriculture spending bill is one of 12 total appropriations bills that Congress must pass by September 30 to keep the government funded.
A provision in the debt-limit deal passed earlier this year outlined that if Congress is unable to pass all 12 appropriations bills by the end of calendar year 2023, then an across-the-board 1 percent cut to discretionary spending will go into effect. This provision may provide some incentive for Congress to pass an FY2024 spending omnibus (or combined) spending bill, yet the distance between the House and Senate proposals remains vast. It is significant that the Senate passed its bills with unanimous, bipartisan support, and it remains a key question of whether the House FY2024 spending package could garner 218 votes on the House floor.
A continuing resolution – which would continue government funding at FY2023 levels – seems most likely, though not certain, for the September 30 deadline. It remains to be seen whether Congress will be able to strike an agreement beyond that.
For detailed information about appropriations, visit NSAC’s Agriculture Appropriations Chart.
The post A Deep Dive on the Senate’s FY2024 Appropriations Bill appeared first on National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.