As of July 2024, three proposals have been released on the 2024 Farm Bill – one in the House of Representatives and two in the Senate. This article is the fifth in a series outlining the themes in these three proposals. This article will cover the Commodities title, Forestry title, and Horticulture, Marketing, and Regulatory Reform (“Horticulture”) title.

Background

The Farm Bill is a multi-year comprehensive law, containing twelve separate Titles, that governs most aspects of food and agriculture in the United States. The Farm Bill was originally enacted in 1933 as part of the New Deal and is typically reauthorized every five years. The 2018 Farm Bill was set to expire in 2023. However, Congress passed a one-year extension. If Congress does not pass a new Farm Bill or another extension this year, some programs will expire at the end of the federal government’s fiscal year, which is September 30, 2024, and other programs will expire at the end of the 2024 crop year, which is December 31, 2024.

In 2018, the total baseline budget over ten years in the Farm Bill was approximately $867 billion. Of this, the Commodities title accounted for approximately seven percent of the budget, and the Forestry and Horticulture titles each accounted for less than one percent of the budget. The total projected baseline budget for the 2024 Farm Bill is $1.4 trillion, and of this, the Commodities title would account for four percent and the Forestry and Horticulture titles would each account for less than one percent of the budget.

Three proposals for the 2024 Farm Bill have been released, one in the House of Representatives and two in the Senate. On May 17, 2025, House Agriculture Committee Chairman G.T. Thompson released the text of the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2024 (“House proposal”) and a title-by-title summary. On May 23, 2024, the House Agriculture Committee held a markup meeting, where members offered, debated, and voted on amendments to the bill. The bill was voted out of committee and will now be considered by the entire House of Representatives. On May 1, 2024, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow released a section-by-section summary of the Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act (“Senate Majority proposal”). Senator Stabenow has not released the full text of the bill or scheduled a markup hearing. On June 11, 2024, Senate Agriculture Committee Ranking Member John Boozman released title-by-title summaries of the Senate Minority (“Senate Minority proposal”). Senator Boozman has not released the full text of the bill and a markup meeting has not been scheduled.

Title 1: Commodities

The programs in the Commodities title provide farmers with price and income support for major commodities such as corn, soybeans, and wheat. This title also provides disaster assistance to farmers and covers the sugar and dairy programs. The House proposal and Senate Minority proposal would both increase the statutory reference prices for all commodities covered by the Commodities Title. Additionally, the House proposal and Senate Minority proposal would increase the loan rates for all covered commodities. Lastly, the Senate Minority proposal would “reign in discretionary use of the Commodity Credit Corporation (“CCC”) and increase transparency of CCC use.” The Senate Majority proposal would only increase statutory reference prices for seed cotton, rice, and peanuts. Additionally, the Senate Majority proposal would reduce the adjusted gross income limitation for row crop producers from $900,000 to $700,000. However, the adjusted gross income limitation for specialty and high-value crop producers would be increased from $900,000 to $1,500,000. Lastly, all three proposals would make changes to the sugar and dairy programs. For more a more detailed overview of the Commodities title proposals, click here for an article by the Texas A&M University Agricultural & Food Policy Center.

Title 8: Forestry

The provisions in the Forestry title provide support for the USDA Forest Service forestry management programs. The Forestry provisions in the three Farm Bill proposals fit into four categories – programs related to forest & wood products, wildfire management, and watershed management, and the Forest Service’s administrative procedures.

Forest and Wood Products

All three proposals would amend provisions related to forest and wood products. The three proposals would revise the Good Neighbor Authority Program, which “allows the Forest Service to enter into agreements with state forestry agencies to do the critical management work to keep [the] forests healthy and productive.” The proposals would allow Counties and Tribes to use the money received from timber sales on federal forest land to complete projects on nonfederal land covered by a Good Neighbor Authority agreement. Additionally, the House proposal and Senate Majority proposal would both establish a platform to track forest and wood products. The Senate Majority proposal would specifically track carbon data on these products. The Senate Majority proposal would also “authorize the Secretary [of Agriculture] to allow electrical utilities with special use permits or easements on National Forest System land to cut and remove trees or other vegetation from within 150 feet of distribution lines or transmission lines without requiring a separate timber sale if the activities are consistent with applicable land management plans and conform with environmental laws.” Lastly, the Senate Minority proposal would establish a new program to help private forestland owners access new and evolving markets.

Wildlife Management

Additionally, the three proposals would address programs related to wildfire management.  However, the three proposals approach wildfire management slightly differently. Under the House proposal, tribes would be given the authority to conduct prescribed burn demonstration projects on federal lands. The House proposal would also “direct the Secretary [of Agriculture] to develop a strategy…to utilize livestock grazing as a wildfire risk reduction strategy on federal land.” The Senate Majority proposal would increase training on wildfire mitigation risks by requiring the Secretary of Agriculture to establish one or more training centers. Lastly, the Senate Minority proposal would improve mapping capabilities and data collection to help predict wildfire risks.

Watershed Management

The Senate Majority and Minority proposals would address programs related to watershed management. The Senate Majority proposal would expand the Water Source Protection Program, which “[carries] out watershed protection and restoration projects on National Forest System land,” to include watersheds adjacent to National Forest System land. Additionally, the Senate Majority proposal would require the Secretary of Agriculture to consider the long-term effects on watershed health when conducting forest management activities under the Watershed Condition Framework. Lastly, the Senate Minority proposal would “bolster the Water Source Protection Program and Watershed Condition Framework,” but does not give details on how it would achieve this.

Administrative Procedures

The three proposals also more broadly amend the procedures of the Forest Service. Under the House proposal and Senate Majority proposal, the Forest Service would be allowed to lease administrative sites for rural housing for lease terms up to one-hundred years, with an option for renewals. The House proposal highlights that this provision is to “alleviate rural housing challenges.” Under current Forest Service regulations, there are several categorical exclusions, which are used to specify Forest Service activities that do not have to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act. Under the House proposal and Senate Minority proposal, some existing categorical exclusions would be expanded, and new categorical exclusions would be authorized. Additionally, the House proposal and Senate Minority proposal would increase the duration of Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management stewardship contracts from up to ten years, to up to twenty years. According to the Forest Service, it enters into stewardship contracts to “achieve land management goals for the National Forests or public lands that meet local and rural community needs.” The Senate Majority proposal would require the Secretary of Agriculture when developing land use plans to “consult with Tribes and affected Alaska Native Corporations.” Lastly, the Senate Majority proposal would expand specified existing National Forests, such as the George Washington National Forest and Jefferson National Forest in Virginia and the Ouachita National Forest in Arkansas.

Title 10: Horticulture, Marketing, and Regulatory Reform

The programs in the Horticulture title primarily support farmers who produce specialty crops or are involved in the production of USDA-certified organic products. This title also covers industrial hemp. The Horticulture provisions in the three Farm Bill proposals fit into four categories – programs related to specialty crops and local food production, organic food production, and hemp, and environmental regulations of agriculture.

Specialty Crops and Local Food Production

All three proposals address programs related to specialty crop and local food production. The three proposals would increase funding for the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program, which “[enhances] the competitiveness of specialty crops,” including fruits, vegetables, tree nuts, horticulture, and nursery crops. The House proposal and Senate Majority proposal would amend the eligible entities under the Farmers’ Market and Local Food Promotion Programs to include food hubs, which USDA defines as “a business or organization that actively manages the aggregation, distribution, and marketing of source-identified food products primarily from local and regional producers to strengthen their ability to satisfy wholesale, retail, and institutional demand.” The Senate Majority proposal would also add food hubs as eligible entities under the Regional Food Systems Partnership Program. The House proposal would “[e]xpand the responsibilities of the [Office of Urban Agriculture and Innovative Production] to include providing guidance and promoting conservation techniques for activities related to urban, indoor, and other emerging agricultural practices.” Lastly, the Senate Majority proposal would codify and provide mandatory funding for the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, which provides funding for “state, tribal, and territorial governments to purchase foods produced within the state or within 400 miles of the delivery destination to help support local, regional, and underserved producers.”

Organic Food Production

Additionally, the three proposals address programs related to organic food production by increasing funding for various organic food programs. Specifically, the House proposal and Senate Majority proposal increases funding for the National Organic Program, Organic Production and Market Data Initiative, and National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. The Senate Minority proposal does not address which programs the proposal would increase funding for.

Hemp

The House proposal and Senate Majority proposal also would amend provisions related to hemp. Both proposals would establish a definition of industrial hemp. The House proposal would define industrial hemp as:

• “Grown for the use of the stalk of the plant, fiber produced from such a stalk, or any other non-cannabinoid derivative, mixture, preparation, or manufacture of such a stalk;
• Grown for the use of the whole grain, oil, cake, nut, hull, or any other non-cannabinoid compound, derivative, mixture, preparation, or manufacture of the seeds of such plant;
• That is an immature hemp plant intended for human consumption;
• That is a plant that does not enter the stream of commerce and is intended to support hemp research at an institution of higher education…or an independent research institute; or
• Grown for the use of a viable seed of the plant produced solely for the production or manufacture of any material described in [(a) – (d)].”

To go along with this new definition, the House proposal would “allow for USDA, States, and Tribes to reduce or eliminate testing requirements and background checks for producers of industrial hemp.” The Senate Majority proposal would also define industrial hemp, but the proposal did not provide the definition. Under current law, people who were previously convicted of a controlled substance related felony were banned from producing hemp. The Senate Majority proposal would lift this ban.

Environmental Regulation of Agriculture

Lastly, the three proposals address the environmental regulation of agriculture. The House proposal affirms that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) is the sole determiner of safety findings related to pesticides. However, under the House Proposal states would still be able to regulate the use of pesticides. The Senate Minority proposal would also “restate and reaffirm the EPA’s obligation with respect to the federal and state regulatory process,” but the full text of this reaffirmation has not been released. Both the House proposal and Senate Majority proposal address the regulation of plant biostimulants, which USDA defines as “a substance or microorganism that, when applied to seeds, plants, or the rhizosphere, stimulates natural processes to enhance or benefit nutrient uptake, nutrient efficiency, tolerance to abiotic stress, or crop quality and yield.” Under the House proposal, plant biostimulants would be excluded from regulation under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. The Senate Majority proposal would require the EPA to clarify how plant biostimulants are regulated under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. Lastly, the House proposal would “add a requirement for EPA to consult with the [interagency working group] before implementing any policy, strategy, workplan, or pilot program regarding the application of the Endangered Species Act to the pesticide registration and review process.” This interagency working group was created under the 2018 Farm Bill and is comprised of representatives from five federal agencies – the White House Council on Environmental Quality, EPA, USDA, Department of Commerce, and Department of the Interior.

Conclusion

The House proposal passed out of the Agriculture Committee and will now move to the House floor for consideration. The Senate Majority and Minority proposals are simply frameworks and neither group has released full bill text. The Farm Bill process will unfold over the next several months and as we get closer to the expiration of the extension of the 2018 Farm Bill, Congress has three options. The first option is to pass a new Farm Bill. The second option is to let the 2018 Farm Bill expire. The third option is to pass another extension of the 2018 Farm Bill, which some members of Congress have publicly discussed in the past few weeks.

To read the articles in the 2024 Farm Bill series, click here.

For more NALC resources on the Farm Bill, click here.