On Monday, the House Agriculture Committee (Committee) advanced its portion of the reconciliation package by a vote of 27-24. While the Committee was able to pass $66.4 billion in funding directed toward climate programs and forest restoration, the bill was missing $28 billion for farmer and rancher conservation provisions. These provisions were not included in the Committee’s bill because the language had yet to be given a score by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), which provides cost estimates for legislation. The Committee was given a cap of $89.1 billion to spend on its portion of the reconciliation package. With only $23 billion remaining after the passage of the $66.4 billion version, it remains to be seen what will be cut from the $28 billion farmer conservation provision.
House Agriculture Chair David Scott (D-Georgia) has promised to include the provision in the final package before the full House votes; however, the late addition has caused some anger amongst Republicans from both chambers. Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee Ranking Member John Boozman (R-Arkansas) criticized the late addition of the conservation provisions because House members would not be given an opportunity to debate or propose potential amendments to the provisions. On Wednesday, Ranking Member Boozman stated that “It’s a terrible precedent…we’re going to have a situation where future farm bills, future agriculture decisions, are going to be written by administrations.”