Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chair, today we are considering a farm bill that fails to meet the needs of families and farmers across the country.

We heard several times in the opening reference that this farm bill meets the needs of rural America, but a farm bill should meet the needs of all Americans. I only wish that we were debating this at an hour where the American public could pay attention and listen.

Last year, the House of Representatives considered H.R. 1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, by $187 billion to give tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans in our country.

Republicans have gutted the most effective anti-hunger program in the United States, which will have unforeseen consequences for generations. We are already seeing the impact.

Since H.R. 1 was enacted, more than 3 million Americans have been kicked off SNAP, with losses reported in every single State. In Connecticut, over 33,000 people have already lost their benefits, and we expect that number to rise.

Families are having to choose between keeping a roof over their heads and paying for healthcare as food becomes yet another impossible trade- off. It is not because their needs have changed, but because this Congress has changed the rules.

This farm bill is unacceptable in its current form and does not meet the moment. It does not repair the damage. It does not restore the benefits, and it does not respond to the warnings from States and counties that the Federal Government is shifting massive administrative costs onto, forcing local governments to consider raising taxes, tightening eligibility, or scaling back services just to keep these programs afloat.

This farm bill includes a blanket liability shield for large pesticide corporations. It rolls back critical environmental conservation programs. It offers no plans to address the tariffs and trade instability that are already squeezing producers around the country.

Once again, this farm bill does nothing to address the $187 billion in SNAP cuts already enacted. In fact, it cements those cuts. At a time when grocery prices are rising and tariffs are increasing costs for families and farmers, we should be restoring SNAP and expanding access; not cutting it.

This is not a farm bill that strengthens rural America and feeds the millions of food-insecure Americans already at risk. We need a farm bill that supports farmers and families, rural and urban communities.

I urge a ``no'' vote on this version of the bill so that we can get back to the negotiating table and produce something that is beneficial for our entire country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chair, as the designee for Mr. Cleaver, I have an amendment at the desk.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of this amendment, which is based on the bipartisan TREES Act.

The Forest Service has long supported urban and community forestry, especially since a single tree can reduce energy costs of homes by 8 to 12 percent.

That is why Democrats provided $1.5 billion for the Urban and Community Forestry Program at the Forest Service in the Inflation Reduction Act.

Of course, Republicans were not satisfied to just let that program continue, so they rescinded the remaining money in H.R. 1, along with the $187 billion in SNAP funding.

The existing Urban and Community Forestry Program requires a 50- percent cost share, however, while the program established by Representative Cleaver's amendment would provide up to 90 percent.

Mr. Chairman, I support this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I urge all Members to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, even though I am not opposed to the amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of this amendment. USDA technical assistance for rural water systems is key to maintaining their safety and effectiveness.

This is a commonsense approach to governance that would ensure that the Circuit Rider program would be available to rural communities that rely on it during government shutdowns.

These professionals help small communities with management, regulatory compliance, water quality, and infrastructure maintenance to ensure sustainable service.

Mr. Chair, I support this amendment, and I urge all of my colleagues to support it, as well.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chair, I urge all Members to support Mr. Crawford's amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to this amendment, and I yield myself such time as I may consume.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. HAYES. Mr. Chair, while I agree with the premise of this amendment, I am not interested in picking winners and losers. The Hot Foods Act addresses this issue the right way by ensuring that all foods that are hot at the point of sale can be purchased with SNAP benefits, including not just precooked rotisserie chicken, but hot sandwiches, soups, and much more.

This amendment lacks the proper guardrails to avoid unintentionally opening up SNAP to restaurants. This fix should be allowed to all hot foods. I will be opposing this amendment, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' as well.

Mr. Chair,

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

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

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source