A long-awaited federal Farm Bill has passed the House, leaving some farm advocacy groups to rejoice, while others are expressing concerns. Some of the key debates include pesticide use, regulating out-of-state imports and reductions in conservation program funding.

“Many New York Farm Bureau priorities are included in the bill, such as improved dairy risk management tools, greater access to crop insurance for specialty crop producers, increased support for new, young, beginning and veteran farmers transition to farming, strengthened rural broadband provisions and reauthorization of forestry programs that support wood products,” said New York Farm Bureau president David Fisher in a statement.  

The Farm Bill is federal legislation that is passed every five years. The current one was enacted in 2018 but expired in 2023. Lawmakers have repeatedly extended it to keep key programs in place. President Donald Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill also funded certain programs that were part of the Farm Bill. 

The Farm, Food and National Security Act passed the House with a final vote of 224-200 on April 30. Fourteen Democrats voted yes to the bill, including New York’s Josh Riley. This is the highest number of votes from a minority party on a House farm bill since 2008, according to a press release from House Committee on Agriculture Chairman Glen Thompson of Pennsylvania.  

“It’s not perfect, and there’s more work ahead, but this is a major step forward for upstate New York and rural American,” Riley said in a press release. 

Some of the programs Riley highlighted which are included in the bill are strengthened oversight on foreign purchases of U.S. farmland, a reauthorized USDA rebate program for tractor rollover protection systems, expanded dairy nutrition programs, and expanded crop insurance and disaster relieve for specialty and organic producers.  

Pesticide use 

The bill also included language about how pesticides are labeled. It removed a clause that shielded the producers of pesticides from lawsuits and allows states to require labels that warn users about potential negative effects. The previous version stated that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was the authority for pesticide labeling. This aligns with ideology from Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who opposes the use of pesticides on food crops.  

The Modern Ag Alliance is a coalition of agricultural organizations that is founded by Bayer, which produces pesticides. Executive Director Elizabeth Burns-Thompson said in a statement that this threatens tools that farmers rely on to produce food. 

“The House turned its back on the farmers who feed, fuel and clothe this country. By gutting common-sense crop provisions from the Farm Bill, lawmakers caved to anti-science [Make America Healthy Again] activists instead of standing with those who grow our food. The result is a patchwork of state rules that will raise costs, cut yields and increase grocery prices,” Burns-Thompson said.  

U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, a Republican from Florida, sponsored the amendment. In a press release, she said it enforces clear warning labels that ensure families know the risks of pesticides and prevents federal overreach by allowing states and individuals to hold manufacturers accountable. 

“I do not support giving blanket immunity to corporations at the expense of American families,” Luna said in a press release.  

Animal welfare 

In 2018, California passed a law that prohibits the sale of pork, veal and eggs that are produced outside of the state’s animal confinement restrictions. The American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Pork Producers County challenged it in the U.S. Supreme Court, but they upheld the law stating that Congress can legislate how states regulate interstate sales.  

The law primarily impacts pork producers because California accounts for 15% of the national pork market. Farmers who would be able to sell to California must implement and comply with their restrictions regarding the enclosures that the sows are raised in. The Farm Bill included a fix for this by including an amendment that doesn’t allow states to regulate livestock in other states. 

The National Pork Producers Council released a statement expressing their gratitude for the changes and hopes for the Senate to pass the same bill.  

“Thompson and congressional supporters on both sides of the aisle heard our plea to help America’s pork producers,” said President Rob Brenneman in a statement.

Becca Joblonski, a professor of applied economics and management at Cornell University, said that Prop 12 leads to a bigger question of whether states should be allowed to set these regulations. 

“I think that if you limit the ability of states to do this, it’s gonna have these very broad effects and I would say that disproportionally those impacts will be felt to small and mid-scale farms and food businesses,” Jablonski said. “Whether or not Prop 12 is good or bad is beside the point because sometimes what happens is that well intentioned advocates and policymakers set policies that don’t achieve the intended outcomes.”

Uncertainty for farmers 

Farmers are currently experiencing record high input costs, and low commodity prices, leading to challenging times for the industry. The war in Iran has caused diesel and fertilizer prices to skyrocket, and tariffs have exacerbated other expenses. Democratic Rep. John Mannion (NY-22), said this is why he did not vote in favor of the bill. 

“In Central New York and the Mohawk Valley, dairy, specialty crops, and family farms define our landscape and our economy. Across NY-22, farmers have made it clear that rising input costs, inflation and tariffs are squeezing their margins. Unfortunately, the House-passed Farm Bill missed the mark and failed to address these root causes,” Mannion said in a statement to Spectrum News 1.  

A frequently used program called the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQUIP) had a cut of $1 billion. Jablonski said this could be particularly concerning for New York farmers. 

“EQUIP is a highly sought after program that many of our New York state farmers take advantage of for things like high tunnels. In a growing region like this, you need some of those things,” she said.  

Additionally, there was a cut to funding soil health programs, which Jablonski said are already overprescribed. It also includes modifications to how data from the dairy industry could be collected, which could inform how federal programs work in the future. 

“If you could get better dairy data, there’s a number of things you could do with that, and you could think about what the implications are for some additional federal programs,” Jablonski said.