House Republicans are rejecting the traditional farm bill model and bringing new legislation to the floor that includes updated farm subsidies but excludes the expensive food stamp program.
After the bill — which cut food stamps by 3 percent — failed to pass the House last month, House GOP leaders decided to drop the $80 billion annual food stamp program from the legislation completely. The House is expected to vote on the new bill as early as Thursday afternoon.
Republicans released the new bill Wednesday night and worked to line up the 218 votes necessary for its passage. Some representatives feel that splitting the bill is the only way to get it to pass the House.
In a conference call with a number of farm groups, Speaker Boehner’s Chief-of-Staff Mike Sommers explained the split.
“We made the assessment that taking it to the Left wouldn’t work. … So instead, we are splitting the bill. We will act on passage of the farm portions first and then attempt to pass the [food stamp] portions,” Sommers said. “I know this isn’t ideal, but it is the only way I believe we get a farm bill. So the options to me are clear: Pass the farm-only package or no farm bill.”
But even if the bill does pass in the House, Republicans will have a tough time getting it through the Senate and signed by President Obama.
The White House released a statement Wednesday evening saying the president would veto the legislation if it is sent to him. The administration said the food stamp program “is a cornerstone of our nation’s food assistance safety net, and should not be left behind as the rest of the Farm Bill advances.”
And the Democrat-led Senate will most likely resist a split bill or further cuts to the food stamp program.
Farm groups have voiced their opposition as well. In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) last week, more than 500 groups urged GOP leaders not to propose the separated legislation.
Regardless, House Republicans are pushing forward with the vote. House Agriculture Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) offered his tentative support.
“Maybe the old dynamic of how we have done things since 1965 isn’t valid anymore,” Lucas said. “Maybe it is time to try something different.”
