Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, the farm bill is one of the most important pieces of legislation that Congress works on. It touches every corner of this country every day.

Let me be direct about what this bill does and does not do. It does not address the crisis actually happening in farm country right now.

Farm bankruptcies are up 50 percent nationally and nearly 75 percent in the Midwest. Input costs keep rising, driven by reckless tariffs and the reckless war in Iran.

Farmers are being squeezed from every direction, and this bill offers them next to nothing: no farm aid; no solution to rein in fertilizer or diesel prices; no protections against USDA reorganizations or funding freezes; no attempt to end the tariffs destroying export markets or restore the trade relationships farmers depend on; and false promises again and again on year-round E15.

Where is the relief?

Where is the urgency?

There is a five-alarm fire in farm country, and Republicans are pulling out a garden hose.

Working families aren't doing any better. Gas, goods, and grocery costs are rising, and this bill does nothing to bring them down. Instead, this farm bill ratifies the largest cuts to food assistance in American history.

Republicans used the big, ugly law to slash $187 billion from SNAP and handed that money straight to the wealthiest Americans. In doing so, they torched the bipartisan coalition that has kept the farm bill together for generations, and now they want Democrats to come in and lock in those very same cuts with a bipartisan farm bill, while they continue to threaten the SNAP program with more partisan cuts. Give me a break.

Mr. Chair, let me tell you what those SNAP cuts look like on the ground. In my district, 11,000 people have lost food assistance, and that is before the next round of cuts kick in. Nationally, 4 million Americans have already been kicked off SNAP entirely, 4 million people gone, and this farm bill will cement those cuts and that cruelty into law.

Republican and Democratic Governors alike are warning they cannot pick up the new cost share coming down the pike. That means more cuts, more hunger, and more harm.

We need a real farm bill, one negotiated in good faith, one that can actually pass the Senate, and one that confronts the real factors driving the crisis in farm country and the affordability crisis at the kitchen table.

Mr. Chair, this partisan bill is not it, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, the Columbia Basin Project is a federally authorized project managed by the Bureau of Reclamation, part of the Department of the Interior.

At its heart, is the Grand Coulee Dam, which has the primary purpose of supplying water for irrigation and producing power. There are secondary benefits, such as aiding flood control and providing recreation opportunities.

The Western Waters Regional Conservation Area, by contrast, is designated by the Department of Agriculture as a critical conservation area whose primary purpose is to address insufficient water and habitat.

I am concerned, therefore, that this amendment may divert funds meant for drought relief toward areas that have a dam supplying them water.

If the gentleman sincerely believes that there are farmers in need of USDA assistance, then I would be happy to work with him when NRCS completes its review of CCAs every 5 years.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, as I expressed in my earlier remarks, I continue to oppose this amendment, and I urge all Members to oppose this amendment.

Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, wildfires are a significant threat to rural communities, and I support efforts to bring down the cost of forest treatments that would help protect these communities.

This amendment, though, just uses those rural communities as a prop in order to disguise the fact that it would expand the renewable food standards definition to every single tree across our public lands. It is not limited to the wildland-urban interface where thinning would have the most impact. There are no limits on this, not for protected wilderness, beloved recreation areas, or old growth. It does not matter if the tree is cut down as part of a responsible forest restoration project or a clear-cut.

This proposal is reckless and would endanger our public lands.

Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to oppose, and I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to oppose this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, I rise as the designee of Ms. Brownley, and I have an amendment at the desk.

The NRCS currently includes composting facilities as a conservation practice standard, but assistance under this standard is limited to the construction of a structure to facilitate composting.

This amendment proposes specifically to designate composting as a practice standard that is not tied to a structure but simply on activities to produce composts from organic waste.

The amendment also requires review of a current composting facility practice standard and has provisions to address greenhouse gas emissions.

This proposal would allow farms that use composts to more fully participate in and benefit from conservation programs, regardless of whether they build a structure. This could also reduce food waste, and I support the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. BROWN. Mr. Chair, I am prepared to close.

I urge all Members to support, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source