▶ 0:00:00These issues affect every community in every congressional district in this nation. And so the member day hearing serves as an opportunity for our colleagues to present testimony to the agriculture committee on the issues that are most important to their constituents. I thank our colleagues for taking the time to share their priorities as they relate to this committee's jurisdiction.
▶ 0:00:22My hope is that my Republican colleagues on this committee who have a responsibility to act as a check on the executive branch and to serve the people who elected them to office will listen and take their priorities to heart. It has become crystal clear that the White House is not listening to farmers or families right now and that many of our Republican colleagues sadly are not speaking up.
▶ 0:00:50an idiotic trade war, band-aid relief programs that pick winners and losers in the a economy, non-stop lies and misinformation about SNAP, pretending that there is no affordability crisis, rural hospitals closing, health care costs everywhere going up. That's this administration and today's Republican party.
▶ 0:01:14Instead of admitting that tariffs are increasing costs for all Americans, shutting farmers out of markets that took years and billions of dollars to develop, and making food more expensive for American families, the administration has rushing a $40 billion bailout to Argentina. instead of ending the trade war that has contributed to increasing farm bankruptcies this year compared to recent years and cost farmers nearly $30 billion in losses.
▶ 0:01:44The Trump administration announces a farm aid package for row crops that fails to meet the moment of helping American farmers after a challenging crop year, particularly leaving specialty crop growers, sugar producers, and foresters out in the cold.
▶ 0:02:02Day after day, week after week, at press conferences, during TV interviews, as in and in cabinet meetings, President Trump and his administration make clear that they are not hearing the American people who are telling us, "Help us. Life is getting too expensive. Health care costs are going up in America's heartland. Rural hospitals and clinics are closing because of the big ugly bills, $1 trillion dollars in Medicaid cuts.
▶ 0:02:29Insurance premiums are skyrocketing due to the ACA tax credits expiring, which nearly 30% of farmers and ranchers themselves rely on for health care. Farmers are drowning in debt as input costs remain high and trade wars cost them their biggest customers. Hungry seniors and children are getting less to eat because of non-stop attacks on food assistance. Our committee can do something about that.
▶ 0:02:57We can bring sanity back to our trade policy. We can make sure that basic needs programs, whether in rural health or food affordability, are there for hardworking Americans when we need them instead of helping the president cut the heart out of these programs. We can show the American people, the people who sent us to Washington, that we hear them and we are doing something about the current affordability crisis.
▶ 0:03:26if my colleagues in the majority could find the courage. I look forward to hearing from our colleagues about their priorities today. And thank you.
▶ 0:03:38The chair would request other members submit their opening statements for the record so our colleagues may begin their testimony. I'd like to welcome our colleagues who have joined us today to provide testimony on issues important to their congressional districts. We have a bipartisan list of members testifying today and each member will be recognized for five minutes. And I'm pleased now to recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Gonzalez, uh, for five minutes.
▶ 0:04:02Thank you, uh, Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Craig for holding uh, this morning's hearing and giving us an opportunity to advocate for our district. I represent the 34th district of Texas in South Texas and uh, I want to talk about some of the impacts on our region. Earlier this year, Republicans enacted a bill that cut nearly $200 billion from SNAP. The largest cut of SNAP in American history.
▶ 0:04:28As Americans are struggling with inflated grocery costs and skyrocketing health care prices, taking food assistance away is really cruel. I represent a district that uh over a quarter of households uh are recipients of SNAP, the highest of all districts in the state of Texas. And this isn't um specific to this is really a bipartisan issue.
▶ 0:04:5175 of the poorest districts in America are represented by Republicans who also benefit greatly from this program. What this cut will do is force families and children and senior citizens and veterans to go hungry. I urge this committee to work in a bipartisan manner to correct this wrong imposed by the Republican big bad bill. I would be happy to work with any of you on this issue.
▶ 0:05:19Another issue I want to talk about that's specific to the co the the Gulf Coast entire Gulf Coast in my district is uh I'd like to take a moment to talk about the shrimping industry. um in that order. First, our domestic shrimpers uh have really been hurt and experienced economic hardships uh by increased foreign shrimp imports, fuel price uh increases, labor shortages, and immigration regulations.
▶ 0:05:46As a result, South te the South Texas shrimping industry and the shrimping industry across the Gulf Coast is in peril. uh we're losing the American fishing industry uh to the disadvantage that they have competing with with foreign and farm-raised seafood. We should work hard. Uh when we talk about America first, let's also talk about American uh fishing industry which is really um shuttering. We've lost about half of it in the last I think decade.
▶ 0:06:14Um hundreds of boats are sitting on the docks. Many of them are being sold to uh other countries because they cannot compete in today's uh markets. The federal government must do more to protect the shrimping industry and the fishing industry.
▶ 0:06:29I urge the committee to allow commercial shrimpers to access agric agriculture safety net programs to uh incre and increase FDA inspections and provide resources to allow the USDA to purchase domestic seafood and distribute them to our schools and local food Um the next issue I want to touch on is uh the new world screworm.
▶ 0:06:54Um, second as the known as a new world screworm as it inches closer to this the border of Texas. We're really concerned this could be devastating uh for the ranching economy not only in Texas but across the country. Uh I know for a fact uh I've been monitoring this since it the issue was on the border of Mexico and We met with the USDA uh Dr. Kim Loier in in central Texas.
▶ 0:07:22I think she's probably, you know, the global expert on this issue. She told us at the time we needed to be producing 700 million uh sterile flies weekly. At the time we were producing about 200. A few months from there we it moved from the border to u to Veraracruz and now it's one state away from the state of Texas and we just celebrated the construction of a facility which will take years. We don't have time to construct a facility.
▶ 0:07:51We're at I think we're working with Panama and Mexico and some other places. We're we're producing about 300 million u sties weekly. We need to more than double that, almost triple that just to hold it back. And I I'd urge the committee to speak with her and speak with experts on this because it's be it's become a very political issue, but we're not we don't have our facts straight. And I think we need to talk to the scientists and and get up to par on what we really need. U my office is at your disposal to work on this issue. Um, there's facilities in northern Mexico.
▶ 0:08:20There's facilities in South Texas. U there's places where we were housing migrants that are available. You know, you need about 200,000 square foot uh to to uh to produce these sterile flies and you need a lot of water. There are places that we can we can begin immediately. We don't have to wait uh years because that's what it'll be years. And I can assure you right now um that this this problem is about 150 miles away from our southern border. in six months. Uh we'll probably have it in Texas and it'll continue grow to grow through the country.
▶ 0:08:50We need to address this. Um so with that, I yield back. Well, Mr. Gonzalez, thank you for your testimony on behalf of your constituents. Much much appreciated. Now working down through my list and now recognize the gentle lady from Michigan, Representative Tib for five minutes.
▶ 0:09:07Thank you so much, Chairman uh Thompson and Ranking Member Craig for hosting this uh hearing. I'm here because I know that children can't learn if they're hungry. I'm also here because I represent the 12th Congressional District in Michigan, which houses one of the most beautiful blackest city in the country. I'm also here as the co-founder of the Congressional Mama's Caucus. And for me, I still remember years ago having a mother in my office uh in tears.
▶ 0:09:36Uh and I don't know if you've ever heard the cry of a desperate mother, but I have. and she was crying because the Head Start program that her children were in was closing. And I told her, I'll find you a different place. I'll figure out the transportation. Please, you know, stop crying. I was trying to console her. And she said to me, but you don't understand. That's the only place my children can eat twice a day.
▶ 0:09:59So, I think after, you know, watching what happened with the SNAP benefit, which is a lifeline for food for our families, was treated as a political pawn, it was devastating. You know, it was incredibly heartbreaking to get the calls and the emails and even the messages through social media and they're so scared it's going to happen again, chairman.
▶ 0:10:21And so I know that they're not alone that it's 42 million Americans across the country, but understand in the budget betrayal bill, it's a 15% cut to $6 a day $6. We're going to cut 15% across the board. And it's going to be something that literally will take food off of the tables of our families.
▶ 0:10:44And when children can't learn when they're hungry, when they can't thrive because they're hungry, um it's going to hurt our whole country. Um and so for me, it's not just the children. Of course, we know it's 40% of SNAP benefits and recipients are older um adults or 40% of SNAP benefit beneficiaries are children. that we know that also we have a number of people that are senior citizens that are also bene also benefit from it.
▶ 0:11:11I know right now studies show that an estimate of a dollar chairman a dollar investment in children returns $62 in value over the lifetime. Investments like SNAP and childhood develop for childhood development allows kids to learn without thinking about where their next meal comes from. And here is not just children. It's 36% in Michigan alone that are senior citizens that benefit from SNAP benefits. And so, Mr.
▶ 0:11:38Chair, a 70-year-old woman asked me to share her story, and I think it's important because she doesn't even get the $6. She gets actually lower than that. She says, "I'm 74 year old, a single female senior citizen with Social Security as my only income. I get $24 uh in SNAP benefits. This helps me purchase fresh fruits and vegetables." She says she only buys a half gallon of milk. margarine and a loaf of bread.
▶ 0:12:02And I don't know what to say to her when I say, are we really allowing, you know, are we saying to her that we don't have the money to make our seniors, you know, help them afford milk and bread? And so, it is important to understand that the impact is real and it's not just Republicans and Democrats, it's the American people. And we have a crisis around access to food. We know this. Um, and the cost is going up. But even in Michigan, it's my a community.
▶ 0:12:29The agricultural sector in Michigan is incredibly important. And they say now the Michigan Farmers Market Association said 15 they rely 15% um and benefits from SNAP uh investment from this body. And so it's incredibly important to understand that connection. You know, I have to say this because it's heartbreaking to see us fighting for a Pentagon budget. what it was $890 billion for Pentagon budget that can't even pass an audit.
▶ 0:12:57Yet where we cut is in SNAP benefits, not where they're wasting all this money. And with my residents, I'm telling them we always have money for war, but we don't have money for food for them. Um, and so somehow again, it is it is lacking the priority and understanding why it's important to make sure that we invest in SNAP benefits. Um, stories like this I'm hearing from residents are not isolated. We're all hearing them and so I'm asking all of you to please do your best in investing into SNAP benefits.
▶ 0:13:27Do more than what we're already doing and it is a win-win. It's not just the farmers, it's our whole country as a community as together that we understand the investment is important for our children. Lastly, I also have urban farmers chairman and don't forget the urban farmers. I say this because some of my families, the only place they can get food is a gas station. And now we have urban farmers creating these farmers market where people can get fresh food. Um they can get access to um food that again they they don't have access to at a gas station.
▶ 0:13:57And so I'm asking all of you as you prioritize and when you talk about farmers, talk about all the farmers. Don't forget urban farmers. With that, I yield.
▶ 0:14:06Thank the gentle lady. If if members do have questions, I apologize. I I missed that when Mr. Gonzalez was here. So, uh, just, uh, indicate, let me know. And Mr. Scott has indicated.
▶ 0:14:17Thank you.
▶ 0:14:17Recognized. M.
▶ 0:14:18Mr. Lee, you said the lady was 74 years
▶ 0:14:21Yeah, she was 74.
▶ 0:14:22Well, she's exempt from any of the changes that we made.
▶ 0:14:25Well, she's saying that when the um during the shutdown, sir, you know, when the shutdown, she says, "Are we really political pawns with the snap cuts, the benefits?" So, for her, yeah, she always got it on. So, every state invests.
▶ 0:14:37Let me let me let me finish. It's my time. You had your time. So, so first of all, like 99% of the Republicans voted to keep the government open. Uh, I know there were some Democrats that voted to keep the government open, but the fact is if she's a senior, seniors and children were exempt from the changes.
▶ 0:14:54Oh, I'm talking about during the shutdown, sir.
▶ 0:14:56So, she gets it on on the 30th and she didn't get that's why I think I think
▶ 0:15:03and sir, she doesn't understand what's happening here. She just knows that her card doesn't didn't get reloaded. So, so just so you know.
▶ 0:15:10All right. So, let me let me say this. Uh, I had a lady at Walmart that I know, her husband's disabled. She works full-time. She asked me if her benefits were going to be cut, and the answer was no. Her benefits were not going to be cut. Um, I mean, so so again, um, I I just the way you said it, you were indicating that they were going to be cut because she was 74. The way I understood it, you were talking about story because I told her we had $5 billion, as you know, in um money that we could have used.
▶ 0:15:40It's emergency response money that we could have used to make sure she didn't go hungry for those few days.
▶ 0:15:46Seniors and children were exempt from the changes that
▶ 0:15:50I'm talking about the shutdown and the political the the back.
▶ 0:15:53I voted to keep the government and you voted to shut it down. So, let's I I'll yield the R.
▶ 0:15:57I understand. and and chairman through you just please know even that little bit of few days if we didn't we should have used the $5 billion that we all appropriated and agreed to and she wouldn't have I mean again the anxiety and fear that we just inflict on our families. They don't know what's happening here. They just know their card wasn't reloaded.
▶ 0:16:18Yeah. The shutdown was absolutely uh unforgivable. Mr. McGovern.
▶ 0:16:22Yeah. Let let me let me just say for the record, my friends voted for nearly a $200 billion cut to SNAP in the big ugly bill, right? So when they talk about not uh not cutting benefits, they are. And number two, uh this is the first administration in history that actually withheld uh food assistance from people even during a shutdown. This was a conscious decision. Federal courts were telling them that they had to administer it and they kept on appealing it. That's where they're coming from.
▶ 0:16:50And I would just say the cuts to to SNAP that this Congress has enacted represent a moral failing um in this Congress. Uh the idea that making sure that no one in this country goes hungry uh is that somehow it's a radical idea is unconscionable. And by the way, the SNAP benefit uh is inadequate. It's on average of about $2 uh per person per meal. I mean try living on that.
▶ 0:17:18And that is why so many people on SNAP are looking for additional help from food banks and food pantries mid midmon because it it doesn't doesn't go far enough. And the other thing I want to put to rest too is I keep on hearing people say uh people on SNAP ought to work. Well, the majority of people who are able-bodied who are on SNAP do work. Some of them are working not just one job but two jobs just to try to make ends meet.
▶ 0:17:42Uh and the idea that somehow we are nickel and dimming this program that we are taking benefits away from people at the same time we're giving tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires and big corporations I think is pathetic. And so I thank you all for being here and raising the issue of SNAP.
▶ 0:18:01Thank you. Uh Miss Representative Talib, I just have a question. The woman who shared this story with you, what is her political affiliation?
▶ 0:18:11I don't know. No, I don't ask
▶ 0:18:12pretty much. And I think that's the point I'm trying to make. It doesn't
▶ 0:18:16And I just want to make sure that we level set this member day hearing because it's not about what you did or you did. It is bringing forth the priorities and the concerns from constituents because at the end of the day that 74 year old woman who gets $24 a month doesn't really care the letter behind the names of the people sitting on this dis.
▶ 0:18:41what she cares about is her fear and frustration with how am I going to continue to buy that loaf of bread, that margarine, that gallon of milk.
▶ 0:18:51So, right. So, I I just think that that's the important part of the testimony that you just gave. Um because I think what we experienced during the shutdown and what everyone saw is something that I've been well aware of is that every part of the country every the fragility of our food security systems and and then the second part of what you said about many people in the places where you represent having to literally
▶ 0:19:22only get uh groceries from a gas station or and I think that's very important because a lot of times on committee, we're talking about what people can purchase. There really isn't a lot of availability in a lot of these communities. So, can you talk just a little bit about what you see in that respect for what is available to people in in these communities that you represent?
▶ 0:19:43You should see it if you go into a gas station and I know some of you have seen these massive kind of new gas stations or the these are not these are the old at gas stations. If you remember going in there to get, you know, I used to go in there to get my niilators and and
▶ 0:19:57and but it's just I because I I actually go and look
▶ 0:20:01next to where the auto related supplies is like bread, cookies, chips. It's it's not uh you know healthy foods, but when you don't have access, that's what happens. That's why it was so important that all of you worked really hard to make sure that EBT cards and food assistant could be used at far some of the farmers market.
▶ 0:20:20And I'll tell you, it is transformative the way on Saturdays and sometimes during the week they have these uh popup farmers market for our families and they are taking fresh tomatoes, um you know, zucchini, you name it. I mean, it's it's it's amazing to see. But you should, if you ever get a chance, just go into some of the gas stations. I'm talking about the old school gas. I'm not talking about the really fancy ones that come up now. Um the the ones in my community are the ones with literally Congresswoman Hayes. It's like
▶ 0:20:49Oh, I know. Oh, I used to
▶ 0:20:50two lows and it's just that's it and then everything else is just you know really thank you. I think that's very important. I used to do an assignment with my students uh on urban revitalization and one of the tasks was how long it would take to for you to find a fresh tomato in your community. I would give the students a radius. You couldn't have any transportation. How long would it take for you? not tomato paste, not canned tomatoes, not tomato sauce, but a fresh tomato.
▶ 0:21:21And the discussions that came out of that when my students realized how difficult it was to access fresh fruits and vegetables in their surrounding communities and how that looked very different in some other communities. Thank you so much for your testimony. I yel back.
▶ 0:21:39Okay, with that, uh, represent Lee, thank you so much for your testimony. Um, we have two members of the committee that are testifying. I'm going to uh go to them next so that they can then take their place on the DAS in case they have questions of of other witnesses. So, first recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Costa.
▶ 0:22:01Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Craig for the opportunity to speak at members day this morning. Uh I speak on behalf of uh California uh the constituents I represent in the 21st district and the great beautiful Sam King Valley that is one of the most productive agricultural regions in the entire country therefore the world. I speak as a third generation farmer.
▶ 0:22:24California's 70,251 farms and ranches are remarkably productive given the average size. 70% of these farms is less than 100 acres. 89% or less than 500 acres. And yet I represent as a third generation farmer uh those uh individuals, those families that really put food on America's dinner table every night. And food is a national security issue. We don't treat it that way.
▶ 0:22:53I don't believe often enough, but it is. Food on America's dinner table is a national security issue. And in California, the number one agricultural state, we produce 50% of the nation's fruits. um nuts, vegetables, 20% of the milk supply, over 400 agricultural commodities that we grow, $61 billion at the farm uh gate.
▶ 0:23:15It's imperative, I think, given the current economic conditions we're facing with input costs and the cost of what farmers and ranchers and dairymen are getting for their products that it's not making it. It's not making it these days across the country. Um and and and we know that specialty crops uh are so critical to good nutrition. Uh robust uh congressional oversight uh in the area of specialty crop insurance is necessary.
▶ 0:23:43The recent farmbridge assistance program announced this week by the administration $12 billion of which only 11 billion is going to row crops 1 billion to specialty crops. I don't get it. This is deja vu all over again.
▶ 0:23:57As Yogi Bear once said, we went through this in the first Trump administration where we were acknowledging that tariffs had a negative impact upon the farmgate economy and there was an effort for the administration then to provide $28 billion out of the commodity credit corporation to try to put in a safety net. Once again, we see specialty crops being left out. What? I don't get it. $40 billion for Argentina, $12 billion for American agriculture.
▶ 0:24:27Somebody's got their priorities, I think, woefully in the wrong place. I've always said that tariffs don't win trade wars. And I think the actions of this administration prove that. The fact of the matter is is that uh we need to uh deal with the issues with our long-standing trading partners and allies.
▶ 0:24:45I've consistently led the charge for market access program, foreign market development programs, and peace programs, USI aid that frankly, I think, address the issues of nutrition, not only for the people in our country, but around the world. Our farmers, ranchers, and dairymen want to provide their neighbors and communities food on their dinner table. They don't want to cut them off. The not so beautiful bill took food assistance away from nearly 5 million Californians. 5 million Californians in my district alone.
▶ 0:25:15Almost 30% of the households rely on SNAP. 67,000 out of homes. These homes include 60% of them with a child, 34% with an elderly person, 46% include someone living on a disability. We must ensure that we strengthen and improve these programs, not weaken them. And the examples that was used in the cut off that took place earlier this year is a separation of the nutrition programs from the commodity other titles.
▶ 0:25:44And I fear I fear on my fourth form for farm do authorization that we will never be able to put the toothpaste back in that tube as a result of the separation of nutrition from the other title programs. Uh let me just talk about some other areas that I'm concerned about. Conservation programs are key to reducing fire risks. Uh we need to be bolstering our efforts there. Conserving our waist system sustainability act is another area. headarters protection, improvement, and flexibility.
▶ 0:26:14Each of these bills would strengthen the programs. The chairman, I don't know where you continue to get your sense of enthusiasm. I appreciate that. And if we can come together to deal with some of these issues next year, God bless all of us. We need to do it. Let me close by saying the following. This reorganization of the United States Department of Agriculture has been going on for six months. The reductions and the separation into four hubs, uh, I don't understand.
▶ 0:26:40And we have not had the Secretary of Agriculture testify before the committee to justify the reorganization plan. We don't know what the appropriate priorities are with the reorganizational plan. I do not get it. This committee needs to provide the proper amount of oversight for reorganization to understand where the Department of Agriculture is going in the future. We got work to do. We must work together.
▶ 0:27:04And I want to thank the chair and the ranking member for giving you giving me the opportunity to give you a little sentiment of my views and the concerns that the people of California have whether you're on food assistance or whether you're part of the vital, incredible agriculture economy that California represents. Thank you very much. Well,
▶ 0:27:23Mr. Coster, thank you and thank you for your service on this committee. Anyone have any questions for uh for Mr. Cost? I'll be real specific. What I'm asking for members are are questions for him to answer versus long statements. Anyone over here?
▶ 0:27:39Thank you.
▶ 0:27:40Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um uh uh Representative Costa, if you could touch a little bit more on how the ranchers in your district have, if they have expressed the concerns around the Argentina bailout as opposed to this new um pool of money that's supposed to assist them.
▶ 0:28:00Well, the expressions range from outrage uh to uh being mystified to uh frustration because the input costs have continued to rise as a result of inflation. And um as I told President Obama a number of years ago, farmers and ranchers, dairymen, they're price takers, not price makers.
▶ 0:28:28You grow your commodity, your product, or if you have a dairy, it's 365 days a year, and you put all this investment in it, but you at the end of the year, you get paid for whatever the market prices are. And so, they see their costs increasing, but yet what they're getting for their product, their commodity, not increasing. And the tariff war is a a real critical part of that.
▶ 0:28:5640 billion for Argentina, 12 billion for American agriculture. They don't get it. Neither do I.
▶ 0:29:03Thank you. And as we talk about those input input costs, I too have had the the opportunity to visit some farmers across the country and in in Michigan, uh Illinois, of course, Ohio where I represent.
▶ 0:29:18And the the sentiment that has been shared with me is that I I I I will um give the administration a little bit of credit because we have been so delayed with getting a farm bill over the finish line for this $12 billion, but it just does not seem to meet the moment.
▶ 0:29:36and the parameters that have been established, capping it at $150,000 will not make um will not help some of the the most um most impacted farmers, cattle ranchers and dairymen as as as I see it. Would you agree with that uh
▶ 0:29:55No, I would agree with that assessment. And I must say this is a difficult time in farm country whether you're in any region of the country or out in California because of inflation because of the input costs and because again farmers are price takers not price makers. And uh clearly this tariff war has impacted their ability to access those markets. And guess what? The other countries have the ability to retaliate and they do.
▶ 0:30:23Canada, you know, we have the trade agreement with Canada and Mexico. 40% of uh of California wines have gone to California. By the way, they're good wines. Uh but you can hardly find a bottle of California wine in a supermarket or in a restaurant in Canada today. Why? Because they're acting uh in re response to this tariff war and they they have other markets where they can access those products and enjoy them.
▶ 0:30:52and in some cases we never regain those markets. So it's it's it's it's of great concern
▶ 0:30:59and that's but one example.
▶ 0:31:01Thank you. And as I and as I close I think that um you mentioned the tariffs being part of part of the major problem as it relates to this situation that we're in which is a self-inflicted self-induced problem if you ask me. And um the fact that the president is touting that the relief that he is offering the farmers is coming from tariffs I believe is questionable because if if I understand the uh resource correctly, the source of these funds are coming from the CCC, not actually the tariffs.
▶ 0:31:29And we have uh industry folks who are um in litigation to question uh the legality of the tariffs and to fight for getting the uh recuperation of the resources that uh they had to spend on tariffs in their own um companies.
▶ 0:31:47I think you're correct and the administration won't say it, but I'll flat out make a a point. The fact that they're reducing some of these tariffs, I think, is an acknowledgment that it's impacting the costs. Why else would they reduce in the last week some of these tariffs and some of these products if in fact it were not impacting the bottom line? And and so it's a de facto way of acknowledging that the tariffs are impacting the cost to consumers and this is their response to try to address it. But, you know, it's not working.
▶ 0:32:17All right. Thank you. Um, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 0:32:21Mr. Mr. Chairman, I I would like to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a Reuters article from November the 11th. US profited from Argentina currency swap deal. The Treasury Chief Vent says our focus on
▶ 0:32:39it. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman. But it it just um the members of this committee know that it's a false narrative to call a currency swap a bailout. We actually profited from the currency swap. It was an effort to stabilize uh the economy in that country and the facts will show that we stabil that that what we did worked and we actually profited from it. It it was a it was a currency swap, not a bailout.
▶ 0:33:03Without that I yield Thank you, Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Craig for allowing us the opportunity to testify here today. Um, as you know, I serve on this committee and it's with great um pride that I serve on this committee given what it means uh to my district.
▶ 0:33:33I represent Alabama's second congressional district, which is uh consists of 13 counties. 11 of them are completely rural and the two non-completely rural counties are likely the only two places in my district that most people on this committee or in America have ever heard of in my district and that's Mobile uh in Montgomery and both of those have significant rural um portions of those counties as well. Um so the work of this committee is not abstract to uh uh to me uh or to the district that I represent back in Alabama.
▶ 0:34:02For my community, a issues are a daily uh reality. From soybean farmers and specialty crop growers to row crop growers to our forestry industry, um agriculture and the work of this committee has real life ramifications on my neighbors across the second district. And historically, this committee has met those needs with a spirit of bipartisanship that puts the needs of rural America first. And that's the way I try to operate myself on this committee.
▶ 0:34:26I think many people uh know that I that I go above and beyond to uh attempt to work across the aisle in ways that will bring tangible benefits to the people um of my district and of this nation. Uh and I believe that commitment right now matters more uh more than ever. And we can start with uh what has been touched on I guess a lot already. So I won't uh beat a dead horse as we say back home.
▶ 0:34:48But I think it's it's it's worth noting um you know earlier this year we did witness the largest snap cut in the history of this country by this administration through the the bill and and we also saw throughout the uh the shutdown process the refusal to to to spend available money um on SNAP beneficiaries. And so that is that is something that was was very concerning and something that my colleagues here have touched on.
▶ 0:35:11So, I'm going to spend my time touching on another aspect of those uh SNAP changes, and that's the fact that in the big bill, you know, we we held a hearing on SNAP after we made the SNAP cuts. Uh we held our our first hearing on SNAP, and every witness on the panel testified uh that we had put into control of the states the ability of whether or not they would even participate in a SNAP program or not.
▶ 0:35:35And that is one of the biggest, most concerning pieces that I hope we can come back together in a bipartisan way and rectify because as it is now, if states do not meet or cannot or refuse to meet the cost sharing provisions for whatever reason, whether they are political reasons, whether they are financial reasons, every witness on this panel testified at that hearing that there is no snap in that state. And that is not where we should be from a policy standpoint. And I don't think it's good policy.
▶ 0:36:04I don't think it's good law. Uh and it's certainly not good um uh to to allow 50 different states to say, "Well, we're not going to feed hungry people even though they would qualify in other states." And so that's something that I certainly hope that we can uh come together and work in a bipartisan way to at least fix uh that issue. Uh the rising costs and and tariffs is something that's huge.
▶ 0:36:32is something that's impacting um I think all of our districts in a variety of ways. Uh I represent a community where the median uh individual income is just north of $32,000. To say that a different way, 50% of the people who file a tax return in my district make less than $32,000 a year. Uh is one of the poorest districts in this country.
▶ 0:36:53Uh, and so even the smallest rise in the cost of putting food on the table or um or the cost of do business, it it significantly impacts people where I'm from. And so it's something that we I think have to keep uh at the front of mind as we continue our work uh in this um in this environment that we're in. And so I want to I want to cite to that the farm bill. Uh everyone knows here we're long overdue for a farm bill. I'm a rookie on this committee.
▶ 0:37:19Um, I'm hoping that I can bring some rookie good luck with us or I was hoping to bring some rookie good luck in terms of um of getting a farm bill across the table. Obviously, many of those provisions were uh were were pumped into HR1. Um, but there's still things that have to be done.
▶ 0:37:35And it is sincerely my hope that we can come back uh to the table in a meaningful way, in a timely way and and and pass some things that will support our beginning farmers, that will expand a uh a research, that will uh modernize SNAP, that will strengthen our crop insurance, something that will ensure that our rural communities have the housing infrastructure and economic tools uh that they need going forward. Uh and with my remaining time, one of the big reasons I wanted to be on this committee was for rural development purposes.
▶ 0:38:01I represent a district where rural hospitals are closing left and right, probably at the fastest rate of any district in this country. Uh we have a number of food deserts with no grocery stores. We have a number of um areas that don't have real broadband access.
▶ 0:38:14And so it is my hope that we can prioritize working together across the aisle in a meaningful impactful way uh to be able to bring some real development funds to not just my district but to everyone on this committee's districts and in Congress uh to be able to positively impact the lives of those people in rural America to show them that you know despite the environment here that we can still figure out a way to move the ball forward on a wet field. So I look forward to working with you guys to do that and thank you. I see my time is expired. I yield back.
▶ 0:38:41Mr. Fer, thanks so much. Uh, anyone have any questions for Mr. Figures? If not, sir, thank you for uh for representing your constituents. Go ahead, Miss Brown.
▶ 0:38:52Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr. Figures, you touched on the rural development. I know that broadband and internet access has been um essential in both the urban and the rural communities. Is that something you can elaborate on?
▶ 0:39:04Yes. I mean, if you um if you want to come home with me one day to Alabama, to my district, to some of the rural parts of my district, I can take you to a McDonald's parking lot in some of these rural counties. And it is more cars in the parking lot than people in the restaurant because of the need. They don't they don't have access to the internet. And I know that's not unique to my district. I'm sure if we, you know, go to communities across the um across the das, you you would see something similar.
▶ 0:39:28Uh the difference is is you know many of the communities that I represent they don't have the capacity locally they don't have the tax base some of them have uh geographical challenges u and quite frankly given the economics of it historically what we have seen is that companies are not willing to make the the middle leg or the last leg investment um in you know expanding broadband access because it'll just take them too long to reap the uh the profits of it which from from a business perspective,
▶ 0:39:59as a business owner myself, I understand that we don't want business owners being forced to make decisions that that put them um in the red. Um but I think as it relates to rural broadband, that that's something where that's an area where the federal government has to has to step up because its implications on education, its implications on being able to uh bring businesses into areas, its implications on rural tele medicine. And so it's something that ultimately is costing us in the long run. And so it is my hope that we can come together in a way to to drive some real resources to real broadband deployment.
▶ 0:40:28And I love that you touched on tele medicine because when we consider the fact that um the affordable care act is going to um skyrocket folks premiums and we already know that the the largest cuts to our health care system in our nation's history has already resulted in some rural hospitals um closing.
▶ 0:40:47Can you the farmers that I visited in in parts different parts of the country um rely on the affordable care act to provide health care to their their families as and their employees as well. Can you speak about that?
▶ 0:41:03Yeah, look, we've heard from several uh farmers and and just a number of constituents in general, as I'm sure everyone here has in terms of uh the impact that the premium subsidi subsidies have, regardless of how they got here or when they got here. they got here and they provide a meaningful benefit to millions of American families and about 50,000 or so just in my district and on average without those premiums um they will see their health co health care costs uh on average uh increase by about 106% in my district.
▶ 0:41:33Um and again this is a district where the individual median income is just $32,000 and you know half half of people make less than that and that's not even raising that number up to 35 or 37 or 38 which is still too low. Um but at the end of the day, I represent a very a very um uh poor district financially speaking. Um and so it's something that that that really matters. And and on the the hospital front, I look I say this not to like raise like alarm flags. I got 13 counties in my district. You can deliver a baby in two of them.
▶ 0:42:02Um 10 of the 13 counties either have a hospital that has closed or is in the process of converting to an RE to be able to stay open or on literal life support. um the largest hospital in my state capital, Montgomery, which I represent, is in the middle of a bankruptcy and they are like the hub of rural health care um in that region and it's only two uh hospitals in Montgomery. So, if you lose that one, you're really in a in a in a uh in a bad situation in terms of rural healthcare.
▶ 0:42:29Um and this is all in a state that has the third lowest life expectancy um in the United States of America. Um and so it it's a you know, the healthcare piece to me is it's not talking points. It's not political. It's it's how do we get to an answer um that can fix these issues and at least keep our hospitals open because you know it's hard to recruit a business or retain a business or to recruit back retirees who grew up in an area to come back uh to where they grew up or to recruit developers or builders to come to a um an area when that pitch begins with the reality of
▶ 0:42:59we don't have a hospital. Um no one wants to live in those communities. Uh no one wants to invest in those communities. And that that's that's not a red or blue or dim or uh Republican issue. that's just a pure economics issue. Um that it is my hope that we can find a way to work collaboratively um to recognize that fact uh a and and and figure out a way to to to try to address it. And I know look and there there are some members on this committee that I know have worked um on both sides of the aisle to try to address rural healthcare.
▶ 0:43:25Um but we have an ability to do it through rural development funds and and I look forward to working with you guys to figure out a way to try to do it.
▶ 0:43:32Thank you.
▶ 0:43:32Thank you.
▶ 0:43:32I yel back.
▶ 0:43:34Thank you, Mr. Fig. Thank you for testimony. Uh now recognize the general lady from Washington State uh Representative Shrier for five minutes.
▶ 0:43:46Thank you, Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Craig for the opportunity to testify today. Uh over the past year, our constituents have had their food assistance stripped away from them. Working people are struggling with rising costs. Producers and consumers are dealing with the uncertainty of tariffs. And we're leaving farmers behind in all of this. And today's member day really couldn't be timelier. The government shutdown highlighted just how important SNAP is for all of our districts.
▶ 0:44:14While people were working without pay and their SNAP benefits were delayed, food banks were then overrun. And many of my constituents actually reached out to see how they personally could help make up the difference. But the fact is that none of us can. Earlier this year, House Republicans made it even harder to access SNAP benefits. Food's not a luxury. It's a necessity. as you've heard from every one of my colleagues up here and we should be striving to make sure that everybody has the food they need and not increasing barriers for those who are already struggling.
▶ 0:44:45Uh the supplemental the special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children or wick is another program that needs our continued investment. WIC's an effective intervention to support positive pregnancy and birth outcomes and healthy child development and WIC saves lives. Studies have shown that wick reduces the risk of pre-term birth and infant mortality, reduces the prevalence of childhood obesity, and saves significant health care costs.
▶ 0:45:13And at a time uh when constituents are forced to spend thousands more on health care coverage or go without coverage altogether, this could not be more imperative. Um, we also need to invest in community resources like food banks that provide that safety net lifeline during times of crisis or to make up for SNAP deficits.
▶ 0:45:35The uh the TFAP program, the emergency food assistance program or TFAP offers this support while also investing in our agricultural community. My bill, the Eat Healthy Foods from Local Farmers Act, takes this one step further by allowing states to use TFAP dollars to purchase locally grown food from small and beginning farmers and get that to their local food banks and local food organizations.
▶ 0:45:58This bill would also fill a gap that was left by the local food purchase assistance program, which was hastily canled by the Trump administration earlier this year. I will be reintroducing the Eat Healthy Foods from Local Farmers Act this week and I urge the committee to please prioritize it and other ways to invest in family Rising costs are not only impacting consumers. Uh they're lowering profits for producers.
▶ 0:46:25The administration's tariffs have increased infrastructure costs and risked farmers opportunity to just complete compete fairly in a global marketplace. It took over two years of my fighting to convince India to drop their retaliatory tariffs on Washington apples following President Trump's 2018 tariff war which precipitated a 99% drop in those apple exports.
▶ 0:46:50We cannot afford to spend years cleaning up this new tariff mess while our local economies continue to struggle to pay Trump's tab. I introduced the Agriculture Export Promotion Act to increase funding to USDA export promotion programs like the Market Access Program to give farmers who export their crops a fighting chance in this Trump economy. My district is home to apples and pears and a variety of other specialty crops, much of which is exported.
▶ 0:47:20And I also want to thank you for your focus on expanding specialty crop research and uh and extension services. I introduced bipartisan legislation to wave the prohibitive matching funds requirement for specially crop research uh funding.
▶ 0:47:37And this will allow our research institutions and individual orchardists to more readily invest in projects to combat fungicide resistance and wine grapes and uh pestilence and onions, precision irrigation for fruit growers and a variety of other uh issues including we were talking about flies before um uh me uh me flies as well, not just mely worms.
▶ 0:48:02Uh finally, we need to support a resilient agricultural system and ensure that farmers and producers can invest in climate smart practices. My bill, the Partnerships for Agriculture Climate Action Act allows farmers to choose to implement practices that reduce emissions, enhance soil carbon storage, and improve resilience to extreme weather. It's modeled after a bipartisan Washington state program, and it is a good bill.
▶ 0:48:26I also introduced the bipartisan enable conservation act which expands the conservation reserve program county acreage cap cap so that more for far farmers can choose to restore their land and protect it for future generations. All of our US conservation programs are oversubscribed and I urge the committee to prioritize these p pieces of legislation and conservation programs that help the earth and our farmers. Thank you and I yield back. Thank the gentle lady.
▶ 0:48:56Any questions for Dr. Shrier? Go ahead, please.
▶ 0:49:00Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Dr. Shrier. So, uh, thankful for your testimony. I just want to get a little bit more insight. You talked about the 99% drop in the Apple exports. Can you walk us through that? Um, what what countries were impacted? Did the market recover? Like, how did you how did Washington work through that?
▶ 0:49:18So, most Washington apples are the best apples in the world. Most of them are exported but chances are when you go to the store down the street you will see uh apples from my my district. Uh the these particular tariffs were retaliatory tariffs imposed by India on the US after the US the Trump administration first Trump administration imposed tariffs on India. Um and predominantly India was importing red delicious apples which are not consumed so much in the US anymore.
▶ 0:49:49we with so many other varieties. Um, but they're very popular in India and that tariff brought a $120 million market down to $1 million market. Uh, it really nearly killed these apple farmers. It was two years of fighting. We finally got it flipped around and they are now up and shipping again. But this is all quite uncertain. We saw what happened the first time and retaliatory tariffs uh hurt farmers.
▶ 0:50:18And and have were they able to re recover um back up to the 120 $120 million? Are they still is it still a work in progress or it's still a work in progress. We don't know if they're going to get all the way back to 120. It'll take some time. I mean the longer that you don't have a market, the more likely it is that you're going to lose that market permanently. Um and we have already experienced that in Washington state specifically with regard to China.
▶ 0:50:43Exactly. And so that that was my point because that's something um that I also experienced when visiting farms in the Midwest um as it relates to soybeans. The the soybean market has been drastically uh impacted by these tariffs and um the concern of the farmers is if if they will be able to recover and regain those markets. and when um whether however you want to phrase it, but I'll I'll just I'll say I'll call it a bailout, too.
▶ 0:51:12When you're bailing out other countries like Argentina, when it comes to our beef and cattle market, it it it creates um a a space where our farmers are challenged to re regain those markets. And so, what do you do? And so, I appreciate you sharing that. Um and with that, I will yield back. Thank you. I just wanted to make a point.
▶ 0:51:37Um I appreciate you bringing up um your comments about the WIC program. Very important and so many of our families rely on that program. The chairman and I both sit on the committee of education and workforce which oddly enough has jurisdiction over childhood nutrition program.
▶ 0:51:55So, I would encourage you to also share that part of your testimony with the committee on education and the workforce because it is worth noting and it's very important um and that overlap needs to be um just I I guess considered because we work together with the two committees to make sure that that program is funded.
▶ 0:52:19Thank you.
▶ 0:52:22Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um just m India has long had tariffs on the majority of US agriculture products going into that country.
▶ 0:52:35Uh yes this was an additional 50% that killed the market.
▶ 0:52:38I mean there's a point where you can bend only so far and then you break.
▶ 0:52:43But but I will I will tell you just as somebody who represents pecan growers and a lot of other products that go to India. India has long had significant tariffs on our agricultural products go going into that country. Correct. Now
▶ 0:53:04but the point is really not that. The point is that we were at a great Our farmers were thriving and then additional tariffs got added on unnecessarily against essentially an ally. Where I disagree with you on that
▶ 0:53:18is is your is your term equilibrium because we we what we want to reach is equilibrium. And I know what their tariff was on pecans. I know what it took for my good friend and colleague uh save Sanford Bishop, what it took for David Scott, what it took for myself to work to get the India tariff simply back down to uh a level where they were even affordable in their country.
▶ 0:53:48And so I just I we we can disagree on things but but India had long been tariffing US agriculture products going into that country. our goal is to reach an equilibrium with them where we get the tariffs reduced. Would that our yield? If
▶ 0:54:04I could just add the US feeds the whole world. Um if we had calibrated our country just to supply food for our own country, um we would not have farmers, you know, stuck in this position where they're getting lowballed by local supermarkets. So they can't make ends meet if they only sell domestically. We don't have enough people in this country to eat all of this. And we need to figure out we might agree we might agree more on that than you think we do. They're not actually being lowballed by the supermarket.
▶ 0:54:30They're being lowballed because they're very few people that are actually buying the commodity and turning it into food anymore. So there are very few there are very few cereal makers. There are very few there very few companies that are actually buying the commodity and turning it into the products that we buy at the grocery
▶ 0:54:46Uh different products. Apples are apples. You just eat an apple.
▶ 0:54:51Fair enough. Fair enough. I'm talking I'm fair enough. I'm talking about peanuts. I'm talking about grains. I'm talking That's fair enough. But pecans are pecans, too. Actually, the pecans until you bake a pie with it, then it's pecans.
▶ 0:55:05Well, I as we finish up, Dr. Shrier, I just I wanted to say Dr. Shrier is a uh has been a champion on child nutrition. Uh next week we will have on the floor um whole milk for healthy kids which she is an original co-sponsor of restoring that nutrition as an option back into our schools as as many of this panel actually are are co-sponsors of it. Dr. Shrier was one of the leaders on it. So thank you for that.
▶ 0:55:33uh please recognize uh a very patient member of Congress who's waited through this panel. I apologize. Uh, Representative Underwood for five
▶ 0:55:42Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Craig. Americans across the country and especially in rural communities are feeling the impact of President Trump and MAGA Republicans extreme policies. Families are paying more for basics. Hospitals are closing. Farms are facing higher costs and more extreme weather due to man-made crises like climate change and Trump's tariffs. And instead of strengthening our rural economies and improving affordability, Trump's big ugly bill made things worse.
▶ 0:56:10It cut Medicaid by nearly $1 trillion, threatening access to life-saving care for rural communities and increasing the cost of health care for everybody. It also undermined vital conservation payments that help farmers face the dual challenges of rising costs and a a changing climate. And on top of the big ugly bill, President Trump and his tariffs have created chaos for the communities that keep this country fed. The damage is obvious, and rural communities are the ones paying the price.
▶ 0:56:39That's why I've introduced two bipartisan bills to undo some of the harm House Republicans have caused. The Prioritizing Rural Hospitals Act and the Strong Farms Strong Future Act. Together, these bills address two of the biggest challenges I hear about from farmers in my district. Access to health care and affordability. Republicans just passed the largest cut to health care in American history. And now hundreds of rural health care facilities are projected to close.
▶ 0:57:09When a hospital closes, families are forced to travel for hours for emergency care. Preventive care plummets and conditions worsen before people can get help. That means higher costs for families and higher costs for the entire health care system. We must act immediately to address the significant challenges people in our rural communities face in accessing quality health care.
▶ 0:57:32My bill, the Prioritizing Rural H Hospitals Act, would address these disparities by prioritizing funding for rural healthc care facilities applying for rural development funding through USDA. This bill gives communities the ability to renovate outdated buildings, reopen shuttered clinics, expand teleaalth, and equip providers with the tools that they need to expand care.
▶ 0:57:56The Prioritizing Rural Hospitals Act is a crucial step towards reversing the damage done by Trump and House Republicans when they passed uh when they slashed federal investment in rural health care. We need to act quickly to provide rural communities with the resources that they need to ensure everybody can access care when they need it, no matter where they live. Unfortunately, Trump and House Republicans didn't stop at cutting healthcare to pay for tax cuts to the wealthy.
▶ 0:58:24They also stole from the conservation programs that farmers rely on. Family farms keep rural economies running, and they've been hit hard by rising costs and the financial uncertainty that comes with a changing climate. The big ugly bill undermined conservation programs that farmers rely on to manage risk, improve soil health, and stay competitive. It pulled the rug out from under farmers who are acting as good as good stewards of their land.
▶ 0:58:51My bill, the Strong Farm, Strong Families Act, I'm sorry, the Strong Farm Strong Future Act, is a common sense measure that puts farmers back on solid ground. It makes sure that when costs go up for things like cover crop seeds, labor, and equipment, conservation payments rise with them. Finally, farmers will receive inflationadjusted payments for implementing and strengthening climate practices on their farms.
▶ 0:59:16It also builds on the conservation stewardship program so farmers who adopt or improve conservation practices can renew their contracts with ease. Plus, it expands climate smart bundles so that farmers can access region specific bundles for different types of land. These practices are helping farmers reduce input costs and stabilize yields. Better soil health means fewer expensive Better grazing systems mean healthier herds and lower feed costs. Better water retention means fewer crop losses during drought.
▶ 0:59:47These bills give farmers and families the support that they're being denied by this administration. As Congress works towards a bipartisan farm bill, we cannot ignore rural hospitals or the financial pressure on family farms. Both of these bipartisan proposals should be included in a farm bill and brought to the House floor without delay because rural communities need action now.
▶ 1:00:08Thank you and I yield Well, I thank the general lady and certainly um I think the the economic u devel rural development aspect of the farm bill has been a force for good. Yes.
▶ 1:00:21when I look at um uh the construction of hospitals or uh whether it's um maybe a new diagnostic machine or an emergency room upgrade and um and I think it is uh uh I think it's something that's overlooked by uh maybe a lot of members of Congress and um where it actually is a significant um significant to appreciate your your focusing on that. Yes.
▶ 1:00:49Um, represent any other any other members that have questions or anything?
▶ 1:00:54I would I would just mention to you, ma'am, one of the challenges for those of us that represent rural America with our hospitals is that many urban hospitals are claiming rural access and that small pot of money that is put aside for rural rural health care. uh because of of urban hospitals claiming rural status um they are dipping into that money and so so in many cases that's leading to the wealthiest hospitals in the country taking money from the poorest.
▶ 1:01:23I would just point that out.
▶ 1:01:25Well, what this bill would do is that it takes the USDA rural development pot of money that only those communities that are certified and that are accessing the rural development programs across the board. It would allow a prioritization for the health care programs when a community applies for those funds. That's important because as you know, sir, when there's a closure of a of a rural healthc care facility, um that infrastructure gets depleted very quickly.
▶ 1:01:51And if there's another uh company or nonprofit that wanted to come into that physical space, they often need help to afford the renovations to reopen. And that's what this bill is designed to address. It's not addressing what you're talking about. Um, it's really talking about the communities that are being directly served by the existing rural development program.
▶ 1:02:11I I I represent 30 counties and
▶ 1:02:14Oh, yeah. I'm not doubting.
▶ 1:02:15And and so uh I'm I'm I'm just pointing out that there there are a multitude of of problems
▶ 1:02:22and uh I mean I've I've just watched as my the county next to me uh was able to secure some funds to rebuild an older healthc care facility that had shut down so that they will now have a physician in that community who by the way happens to be my personal doctor. Uh so now I'll travel 20 minutes instead of an hour. So, uh, the issues you're talking about affect a lot of us.
▶ 1:02:48Thank you.
▶ 1:02:50Thank you so much for your service to your constituents and, uh, and, uh, bring those before the committee. We're going to take, uh, we just, I think we're going to have some folks coming up. We're going to keep going, um, uh, as we get other folks seated. We have the the, uh, gentle lady from Wyoming is uh, seated. So, we're going we're going to jump right into and proceed as other members uh uh uh the rest any of the other members come up for the panel.
▶ 1:03:17And we get the water passed out. All right. Thanks very much for the staff for helping us. That was real quick.
▶ 1:03:42Um, I represent the recognize the gentle lady from Wyoming um for five
▶ 1:03:48Thank you, Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Craig. I want to thank you for allowing me the opportunity to testify today. I was raised on a ranch in Gan County, Wyoming, and dozens of my immediate and extended family members remain in the ranching industry to this day.
▶ 1:04:03I have become increasingly concerned by the disappearance of ranching families in my community over the last 25 years or so due in large part to numerous federal policies that have not only caused the current out migration of our a producers but accelerated it in recent times. 2025 started as a year of optimism. Wyoming livestock producers were selling at higher prices, finally turning profits after years of losses, drought, and skyrocketing costs and expenses.
▶ 1:04:32One impact I have heard from constituent ranchers who for the first time in years didn't find it necessary to take a second job to keep the family ranch alive. Unfortunately, those gains for many were wiped away after unnecessary market disruptions exacerbating larger issues that make it increasingly difficult to ranch in Wyoming. Because so many of these challenges originated in Washington DC, we should be able to fix them in Washington DC, but only if we have the courage to do so.
▶ 1:05:00The Trump administration has again taken a bold step forward in issuing its plan to fortify the American beef industry and I believe we can build off this work. I have submitted a number of priorities to this committee for the farm bill to do just that and I want to touch on a few of those today. First, the electronic identification ear tag rule issued by Aphus in 2024.
▶ 1:05:22While I know there are members of this committee that do not agree with my opposition to mandatory EID, I am very grateful for your willingness to let me weigh in on this policy. There have been several challenges to the rule's implementation that must be addressed regardless of whether we support it or not. Since the EID rule went into effect, Wyoming and its surrounding states have run into persistent shortages, making compliance nearly impossible. Aphus and the tag manufacturers assured us that they were prepared for the rule, but the fact is they were not.
▶ 1:05:52There is however another issue exacerbating the shortages. State veterinarians in an abundance of caution to ensure compliance with this federal mandate are instructing their cattle producers that they must put EID tags on all cattle from birth to grave regardless of the type of animal. And despite the fact that the rule requires no such thing, the rule instead applies to sexually intact cattle that are 18 months of age or older and that will be s ser sold or moved across state lines.
▶ 1:06:20Many of our cattle do not meet this criteria including replacement huffers, other breeding and non-breeding stock and they should not be required to sport an eid tag. problem is that ear tag manufacturers and state livestock boards are saying that they are now prohibited from manufacturing anything but eid tags. There are thus no banks tags available for those cattle that do not come within the definition of the rule. Ranchers are thus being forced to use eid tags for those cattle that were never included in the rule.
▶ 1:06:49This not only creates shortages but is going to skyrocket the cost of the program. The rule, for example, was designed to cover only 11% of the cattle industry with the USDA estimating the related cost to be 26.1 million per year. If the rule is instead implemented against 100% of the cattle industry, the cost for the year tags alone would be over $260 million. Congress has not and most likely would not appropriate funds to meet that price tag.
▶ 1:07:17So, we need to address this this I believe that this uh another priority of mine includes muchneeded reform to the conservation reserve program or CRP. While there is of course a legitimate use for this program, it is now time to update and modernize it to safeguard US food production. In summary, I believe that CRP programs which are really designed to disincentivize the productive use of land are a top contributor in the decline in rural ranching families I referenced earlier.
▶ 1:07:47This has played out in my home community by literally removing essentially all families with young children across tens of thousands of acres in Gin County alone. Why? Because our young producers simply cannot compete with the federal government when it comes to being able to purchase or lease land for cattle production. When it comes to CRP, the CRP program has risen to cover 27 million acres of land since the 2018 farm bill.
▶ 1:08:12In Wyoming, fully one half of our CRP lands are in Gan County, affecting our schools and the future of our young producers. We now have people who buy land solely for the purpose of the purpose of putting it into CRP, thereby taking it out of production simply for the federal payments that they can reap. I believe we must seriously consider lowering this overall cap and other reforms as well. Another important target for CRP reform would be to expand the types of approved management tools to include livestock grazing.
▶ 1:08:42Cattle production is good for the land. Cattle ranchers produce some of the healthiest protein that we can consume and we need to increase cattle numbers in this country. This is one way to incentivize ranchers to do so while also furthering the intent of the CRP. Lastly, I would like to express my appreciation for the committee's recognition of the importance of the secure rural schools program and [snorts] for the passage of its reauthorization in the House last night.
▶ 1:09:08Rural communities in my state have received vital economic assistance to support public infrastructure along with search and rescue and other emergency services. Thank you again for this opportunity to testify.
▶ 1:09:22Well, Congresswoman, thank you. Thank you for your leadership. Part of the team was getting secure rural schools uh across the floor last night. That's a great victory for those of us like yourself and myself that have school districts within national forests have been living over a shadow of of just a 75% or 70% decrease in in funding. So, thank you for that. Yeah. Uh CRP is the longest I appreciate your perspectives on on CRP modernization.
▶ 1:09:50and it's the longest uh um operating or existing uh conservation program, but it's never been modernized and it has slipped towards um incentivizing taking uh productive farmland out of production and that's not uh what what the conservation programs are all about. So, we look forward to addressing that in uh farm bill 2.0. Um and I um and we do need some uh accountability with that eid program.
▶ 1:10:19you know, the problem has been in is a problem many times is in the implementation. Um, and this uh in certain states seems like it's been out of control. So, look forward to doing more oversight on that than what we've than what we've done in the past. So,
▶ 1:10:35Chairman Thompson, I look forward to working with you on all of these issues.
▶ 1:10:38Yeah, I look forward to it, too. Any any questions for for the Congresswoman Hegman? Go ahead.
▶ 1:10:44Thank you, Representative. Um, appreciate your expertise in sharing that. Can you just elaborate a little bit more on on um some of the changes you would like to see as it relates to the EIP program and its implementation? Like is it more administrative funds to to because it sounds like from the chairman's perspective, we don't have enough to properly implement the program. So could you touch on that for me please?
▶ 1:11:07So the the program was underfunded from the very beginning. So the estimate was that it would that it would apply to 11% of the cattle uh industry, the cattle in the United States. It was designed to do that because I think it was an incremental program and it was intended to be.
▶ 1:11:23It's an astronomically expensive program and in fact I think ultimately will cost over $2 billion if the state vets are successful in forcing all livestock producers to use uh eid on all cattle regardless of whether they cross state lines. So it's an unfunded mandate on our cattle industry that's potentially going to cost upwards of $2 billion. So uh that's one of the challenges associated with it. Anytime that the government mandates something, you create short shortages and skyrocket the price.
▶ 1:11:52That's exactly what's happened here. The other reality is that I see the challenges of how it could be used in the long run to control our cattle industry and our cattle producers and actually vertically in integrate the industry much more than it already is. uh the way that we have uh vertically integrated our our poultry and our pork industries. So from the the standpoint of implementation, we need to make sure that it is implemented pursuant to the clear language of the rule as it exists right now.
▶ 1:12:22And that's one of the problems is it is not because there's a lot of confusion as to which livestock it ought to apply to. As I indicated, it's sexually intact over 18 months of age that cross state lines. But if I have a replacement huffer that I keep for eight or nine years or 10 years on my own ranch, I may sell it as a coal cow eventually, but at that point she could put an ear tag on any ear tag on it. But right now, I need to have banks testing done for brucyosis.
▶ 1:12:48And I need to make sure that I can put a tag on there, but the manufacturers are saying their understanding is they can only manufacture the EID. They can't manufacture the metal bang bangs tags. We need to clarify that if you are going to have a replacement heer again as an example that stays in state rather than moving intrastate interstate that they could uh continue to use the historical metal bangs tags that we could then have manufacturers produce at a much lower
▶ 1:13:16Thank you so much for that. And then um have you heard anything from your cattle ranchers with regards to the $40 billion as it relates to Argentina and um the United States?
▶ 1:13:29There's been concerns about the the trade deals. So I went immediately to the trade office to find exactly what the situation was. I think there's been an awful lot of misinformation about the arrangement and the deal that was being has been being negotiated between the administration and Argentina. It shouldn't have impacted our cattle market the way that it did. In fact, no live cattle uh were being considered for importation when we were looking at lean trim for mixing with hamburger. No premium cuts.
▶ 1:13:55So, I think there was a lot of hysteria around that when it was when there was discussion about the trade deal being put in place. But in fact, again, I think it was more misinformation than truth. The problem is it really did in real time hit our cattle market despite the fact that it wasn't targeted to live cattle at all.
▶ 1:14:12Right. Thank you. your back.
▶ 1:14:16All right. Thank you very much. Now, please recognize another outstanding member of the of the all powerful agriculture committee, uh, Congresswoman Hayes from Connecticut for five minutes.
▶ 1:14:29Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee as part of member day to discuss my top top priority as the ranking member of the subcommittee on nutrition and foreign agriculture and that would be cuts to SNAP.
▶ 1:14:44Today I would like to discuss my legislation, the Restoring Food Security for American Families and Farmers Act of This legislation would repeal the devastating cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, otherwise known as SNAP, that were included in HR1, the one big beautiful bill. I was joined by nearly 200 House Democrats, including House A Committee Ranking Member Angie Craig to introduce this critical legislation.
▶ 1:15:13Companion legislation has also been introduced in the Senate by Senator Ben Ray Luhan. This bill also has the support of more than 1,400 organizations nationwide. SNAP is the most effective anti-hunger program in our country, serving nearly 42 million Americans, including children, seniors, and veterans.
▶ 1:15:36Also, the loss of SNAP by so many people would affect categorical eligibility, which impacts programs like WICK, school mills, heating assistance, and other programs. This is very important. Approximately 360,000 people in Connecticut utilize SNAP program. Despite serving as a lifeline to keep families fed, we have seen repeated attempts to defund SNAP and keep those in need from accessing benefits.
▶ 1:16:04In July, the majority advanced HR1, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which included the largest cuts in the history of the program. HR1 cuts $187 billion from nutrition programs and creates administrative barriers designed to make it harder for people to get assistance. Equally as damaging are the cost share provisions that will force states to either cover the cost or opt out completely.
▶ 1:16:30As we've heard from other members on this panel during the government shutdown, we witnessed just how disastrous it will be for states to shore up benefits without support from the federal government. As the administration withheld contingency reserve dollars to cover SNAP benefits for November, states scrambled to come up with plans to cover the costs.
▶ 1:16:51Every state, every congressional district, every community, rural, urban, suburban, were panicked about how they would feed people in their community. This is only a microcosm of what will be on the horizon for states if the cost share provisions included in the one big beautiful bill go into effect. My bill would repeal these unfunded mandates to ensure that states do not have to make tough decisions about which programs will be lost as a result of federal funding cuts.
▶ 1:17:21The bill also helps to mitigate the negative impact SNAP cuts would have on farmers, ranchers, producers, and the nearly 250,000 grocerers authorized to accept SNAP dollars. In the year 2025 in the United States of America, we have the ability to feed our people.
▶ 1:17:40I strongly urge this committee to reverse course on the cuts to SNAP, stop weaponizing hunger, and let's have some real discussion about what this looks like and bring this bill to the floor. I also would encourage, we've heard a lot from different members about the interpretation of things and um the member before me just talked about misinformation and how people are interpreting things like the tariffs or some of the actions by the USDA in this administration incorrectly.
▶ 1:18:10The best way to address that is with transparency. The Secretary of Agriculture should be before this committee explaining to us the motives behind many of the actions, letting this committee work with her to decide what next steps are. States should not be left scrambling for a tweet or an email about guidelines about how they should proceed.
▶ 1:18:30This committee must begin to exercise our constitutional authority as a separate separate and co-equal branch and bring secretaries and administrative administration officials before this body to share with the American people how these plans will be implemented, how they will roll out, what they will look like by the time they get to the ground. And governors should not be left to wonder what is happening.
▶ 1:18:56I don't care if you are in a red state, a blue state, a dem people on the ground don't care. They want to know how these programs will work. And if this administration and this secretary has such a wonderful plan that the American people will be happy with the changes, then they should be coming here before this committee and sharing those changes not only with us, but with the American people. And with that, I yield back.
▶ 1:19:20Thank you, General Lady. Any questions for Congresswoman Hayes? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, and you Connecticut is what is considered a donor state. Can you elaborate on that and how these um the federally mandated expectation for states to pay into the program would impact not only a donor state, but a state like mine that does not have the resources?
▶ 1:19:46Well, you're absolutely right. Connecticut is a donor state, which means we the the residents of the state of Connecticut through their taxes pay more send more money to the federal government than we receive as a state to help support these programs. We actually might be much better off if we just kept our SNAP dollars at home and took care of our own people.
▶ 1:20:05and our governor has made the decision in Connecticut that we would use reserve funds or mo shift from other programs because it is a it is a priority for us in the state of Connecticut to feed people. So I I just wonder and this is why it would be really important for for us to hold hearings or for the secretary to come before this body because in many states that rely heavily on the federal government that send less than they I mean get back more than they send to the federal government, they will be
▶ 1:20:36left with just not being able to come up with the funds and completely eliminating a program like SNAP. This idea that the state should have to pay for it. I would argue that in my state of Connecticut, we already pay for it because we send more to the federal government to help um fill in the gap for some of the other states. And if you look at the map of um where benefits are accessed, it's not just in democratic states or urban communities. It is our rural communities.
▶ 1:21:06It is our bright red states. It is our suburban communities. It is everywhere across this country. And I think one of the things that was amplified during the shutdown is the fragility of our food security networks. It wasn't just pockets around the country. It was every congressional district, every community.
▶ 1:21:28So, it it really is difficult for me to understand or wrap my head around how states who already um rely so heavily on the federal government uh are going to be able to fund these programs with even less help and support from the government.
▶ 1:21:46Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, with that, I yield back.
▶ 1:21:50I thank the gentle lady for yielding back. Oh, Mr. I I agree with you. So, I'm looking forward to having uh um individuals from the administration before the committee. So, I I think that's a really important thing. I went through um four years in the last administration. We got very little of that. That frustrated me. So, I don't want any of us to be frustrated. We we need to have uh um those communications. Um and I I'd like to take it one step forward actually. And I've talked about this for some time.
▶ 1:22:18Um I want I would like to require request the the governors uh certain governors to come and sit before us to be able to share um uh how they're implementing their their programs and and uh given the fact they've got three years in order to do the state share uh that's uh with an error rate of 6%. H how are they working towards getting that error rate down? I know in the state of Pennsylvania, ours is coming down, I've heard, and that's wonderful. Um because errors only hurt the beneficiaries, the the people that are struggling financially.
▶ 1:22:48So, thank you for your passion.
▶ 1:22:50Well, I would just say that I mean, as uh as the chairman of the committee, respectfully, when you know better, you do better. And on this committee, I don't care what state it is, what secretary it is, we should be calling people before this committee. and we could call a hearing next week and have governors come in and talk about those things. We actually have the ability to do that.
▶ 1:23:12Yeah. We would have probably had someone before the committee if we wouldn't have been shut down for a month and a half, that delayed a delayed everything. So,
▶ 1:23:19well, when you put a bill in front of us that asks us to either feed people or accept some of the unreasonable cuts, which were an impossible choice, that's that's really not the premise that we should be operating from. But the fact that this committee and every committee tries to throw that out at every turn as if um the reasonable choice would have been to accept $187 billion in cuts or get November benefits out on time.
▶ 1:23:46I would argue that um it required a lot more negotiation, which is what we attempted to do. And had we had more than one committee in the preceding year, I think we could have addressed some of these things.
▶ 1:24:00Yeah. one committee hearing on this topic. In the preceding year, we could have addressed some of these things.
▶ 1:24:04Well, I I think how we portray that is really important, too. There's uh a lot of savings came from from uh folks who were not truly eligible for SNAP, non-citizens, and um and a whole
▶ 1:24:17that still hasn't been and again, if we have if we had hearings, we would have been able to demonstrate that because that has not been demonstrated. And the savings didn't go back into the treasury. they went to um uh fund the tax cuts and when we look at some how is the data being collected or disagregated.
▶ 1:24:37One of the things I've heard at home is we have a lot of mixed status families where um the the children may have status where and one of the parents does not those children are still eligible for benefits. So that doesn't that's not but if this was truly about fraud or ineligibility, we would be having hearings on fraud and ineligibility and rooting out those things and preserving and protecting the parts of the program that works.
▶ 1:25:04That's not what this committee has done and any characterization other than that is just not true.
▶ 1:25:10I I appreciate your opinions and your testimony before the committee.
▶ 1:25:14Thank you.
▶ 1:25:15So thank you. Um, and now I please recognize the uh resident commissioner from uh the great territory of Puerto Rico, uh, Pablo Hernandez for 5 minutes.
▶ 1:25:27Thank you, Chairman Thompson and Ranking Member Craig, esteemed colleagues. I come here today with a single simple bipartisan ask, SNAP for Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico has been excluded from the SNAP program since 1982. And we've submitted a bipartisan bill that has the support of nine Democrats and six Republicans to ensure that Puerto Rico gets to transition from its current block grant nap program to the national SNAP program.
▶ 1:25:56Now, this bill has been presented in the past and members have raised concerns which we have addressed in this newer version. First, we are providing for a longer transition that addresses the concerns about having the state government be ready for the implementation and administration of the SNAP program. We've also requested a CBO score which should help address some of the concerns. And I urge you to view this as an investment, not as an expense.
▶ 1:26:26It is an investment because it would just be $1 billion more for the program for an island that trades over $7 billion with the mainland in agricultural products. So if we get more money under SNAP as opposed to NAP, we would be buying more products from the mainland from your districts for our people, thus strengthening our economies. Moreover, do not view this as additional welfare.
▶ 1:26:54view this as economic development and empower. By having SNAP in Puerto Rico, we would be able to raise the income levels that allow people to work and keep their benefits, thus driving more people into the workforce. And finally, I urge you to view this as an investment in justice.
▶ 1:27:12During my time in the district, I've spoken to students who because they do not have SNAP and do not have the level of benefits that they would have under SNAP have had to decide whether to buy a chemistry manual or to buy food to feed themselves. This is a loweffort initiative with a high impact.
▶ 1:27:33When you look at the fact that you have families of three that have an average benefit of $315 a month in an island where food stuffs are more expensive because of shipping and under SNAP they would have $535. You are doing something to end hunger. So uh I urge you all to support this initiative. As I said this unites Democrats and Republicans.
▶ 1:27:59This has the support of your former colleague and current Republican governor of Puerto Rico, Jennifer Gonzalez Cololong. And in the island, this unites people who support continuing its Commonwealth status, transitioning to become a state or even to become independent. So this crosses party lines. This is a matter of justice, but this is also an economic opportunity for Puerto Rico and for the United States. Thank you, and I yield
▶ 1:28:26Commissioner, thank you very much. Any any members have some questions? Go ahead, please.
▶ 1:28:31I just want to thank you uh Mr. Hernandez to for uh your work on this issue. I'm a strong supporter of extending SNAP benefits uh to those Americans living in Puerto Rico. Uh and I commend your efforts. Thank you.
▶ 1:28:50If not, Commissioner, thank you so much. I appreciate uh appreciate your service. And I know this is a um certainly a bipartisan issue u as you mentioned uh yourself and uh and Governor uh Gonzalez Cologne. Um so I appreciate it. Thank you. Now please recognize the gentleman from North Carolina uh Mr. Moore for five minutes.
▶ 1:29:14Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. It's great to be with you. Uh and let me first start off by thanking this committee and its work to deal with a lot of issues I know that are that are there and I from what I hear probably one of the biggest issues facing agriculture right now are input cost. I hear that from you know particularly from rowcrop farmers but I also hear it from folks uh who who are dealing with you with with animals. And so it is I I applaud this committee's work Mr.
▶ 1:29:42Chairman your leadership on that to do what we can to help the agriculture industry. uh in my home state, agriculture is the leading industry in the state. Full stop. So, um very proud of where we are in North Carolina, but understand the issues facing our country, and I wanted to thank this committee for its work on that. Um I did want to address something that happened and and I this was something that was uh a gift from our friends in the Senate.
▶ 1:30:08Uh as you recall, as a part of the uh government funding package that ended the shutdown, the bill included included some major changes to the federal hemp policy without industry input and really without any stakeholder involvement. Specifically, it changed the federal definition and regulation of hemp derived products. These changes were made completely outside of regular order. There were no hearings, no stakeholder engagement, and no meaningful debate.
▶ 1:30:34As enacted, this new law would effectively eliminate over 95% of North Carolina's hemp industry and put more than 220,000 American jobs at risk. It would have major consequences for small businesses and farmers in North Carolina and across the country. Um, this very committee was at the heart of enacting the hemp provisions in the 2018 farm bill that that this, you know, this one provision just whole cloth essentially eliminated.
▶ 1:31:01I can tell you that farmers in North Carolina have have relied on this framework for the past several years. They've invested in land, capital, etc., uh, as well as retail operations. They entered this industry in good faith, follow the rules and guidance set out in the farm bill. And, Mr. Chairman, I submit it simply isn't right uh that to change the rules of the game overnight, certainly not without going through the proper legislative process.
▶ 1:31:26Um, I can tell you that that we as House Republicans are doing a lot to restore the American dream in rural America. And I would submit to you that this provision that was put in that provision, it it does not help our our rural hemp farmers around the country. You know, small businesses and farms across this industry are already being forced to consider laying off employees and pulling long-term investments, and this change is set to go into effect next year unless Congress acts to stop it. In the months ahead, Mr.
▶ 1:31:55Chairman, my ask is that this committee use regular order to thoroughly examine the issue and to develop legislation that addresses uh these changes that were made. The uh the agriculture committee is the appropriate venue to evaluate the full scope and impact to hear directly from our farmers and determine the best path forward. These hardworking folks deserve the opportunity to have their voices heard.
▶ 1:32:18They deserve a clear regulatory framework that reflects real world real world conditions and ensures fair competition. I look forward to working with this committee and stand ready to serve as a resource and a partner uh as you take up this issue. I do believe, Mr. Chairman, there are ways to address any of the criticisms that are out there and to do so in a in a more effective way than than what was put upon us in that provision. Like everyone here, you know, it was put into a bill to reopen the government.
▶ 1:32:47I voted for it because we needed to reopen the government, but that doesn't mean we can't go back and fix this. Um the this committee did a lot of work on the farm bill in 2018 and it's opened up a lot of opportunities in agriculture that not only in my home state of North Carolina but across the country and I can tell you that it is um it's something that has created jobs and we need to do all we can to make sure those jobs remain in place and to allow this is a viable industry for our friends in agriculture.
▶ 1:33:15Uh, with that, with time left over, uh, something very rare for a former lawyer to do, I yield back.
▶ 1:33:22Well, thank you, Mr. Moore. Open this up. Any any questions from any members? Go ahead, please.
▶ 1:33:28Representative Moore, uh, thank you for your testimony, and I just want to say, uh, from Minnesota [clears throat] hemp growers, we are in complete agreement. Uh, we've spent a lot of time back home creating a regulatory structure, uh, for hemp that I would sure hate to see uh, completely wiped away. So, we'll uh be joining you in this fight to make sure we fix this over the next year. Thank
▶ 1:33:50Thank you.
▶ 1:33:51Yeah, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Mayor, Dr.
▶ 1:33:54I'd like to I'd like to add my appreciation for you bringing this issue before the committee and we have some of the same concerns in Indiana. Thank you.
▶ 1:34:03Thank you, sir.
▶ 1:34:05I turn yield back.
▶ 1:34:06Very good, Miss Moore. Thank you so much for your testimony and representing your constituents back home.
▶ 1:34:11Thank you. Always great to be with you,
▶ 1:34:13Yes, sir. Now, please recognize Representative Schlutton for five minutes.
▶ 1:34:18Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and uh Madame Ranking member for holding this hearing, giving us an opportunity to weigh in on the important agricultural issues facing our districts. Uh I want to use my time uh very briefly just to highlight an important bipartisan [clears throat] bill that I am working on called the Catch It Act, which stands for community access to treatment and care for health through increased testing.
▶ 1:34:41This is a bill that would help rural communities better screen for diseases uh and and certain cancers like breast cancer. Whether our constituents live in a major city or a small town, everyone deserves access to life-saving early detection services.
▶ 1:34:58Our bill would build on the Department of Agricultures Community Facilities Grant Program by boosting the federal cost share to 25 by 25% for rural projects involving preventative health equipment like mammogram machines, mobile health units, and early detection tools. I introduced this legislation with my good friend and colleague from Iowa, Congresswoman Ashley Henson, because rural health is top of mind for both of us, as it is for many individuals on this committee.
▶ 1:35:26Our catch it act helps small communities afford the equipment that they need to keep people healthy. Catching diseases earlier avoids costly increase in health care costs by uh allowing the de disease to be treated earlier and and not progressing to a later stage which again becomes more costly and deadlier to treat.
▶ 1:35:49This common sense legislation would expand affordable, accessible care in our smallest communities, too many of which have been overlooked for far too long. We appreciate the committee's attention to this bill. Thank you and I yield back.
▶ 1:36:05Well, I thank the general lady as uh rural development and and what it does, you know, the impact it can have on rural health is significant and uh and little no impacts big. I think the awareness is low. Um and certainly an investment in from a preventive perspective as uh someone who practice healthc care for 28 years.
▶ 1:36:28That's some of the best dollars we can spend um better for uh outcomes, quality of life and uh and uh and quite frankly the economy as well economically um in terms of uh saving that the burden of things that are not caught early. Represent recognize the ranking member. I just thank you so much for your testimony, Representative Schultton, and we will uh continue to work uh toward good partnership to get your legislation across the finish line. Thank you.
▶ 1:36:59Very good. Well, thank you so much. Now, please recognize the gentleman from California, Mr. Cono, for five minutes. Mr. Chairman,
▶ 1:37:07Mr. Chairman and Miss Ranking member, thank you for hosting this member day hearing. As we sit here, we must acknowledge that veterans, their families, and caregivers across the country are facing higher costs of living. Veterans are not immune to the economic realities facing the general population. VA programs can only mitigate, not shield veterans from the impacts of larger economic trends.
▶ 1:37:33I have to tell you, I'm incredibly frustrated that this Congress and this committee delivered devastating SNAP cuts earlier this year. Under what I call the big ugly bill, veterans will now be subject to work requirements. And what that really means is paperwork requirements. And these paperwork requirements do not help people find jobs. They just cut people off of food. In my district, over 35,000 households and nearly 116,000 people rely on SNAP.
▶ 1:38:03One constituent told me, quote, "I am a low-income senior citizen. I re I only receive $40 from the SNAP program, and I can barely make it each month after my rent and bills are paid. I use all the rest of my money on food, and usually by the end of the month, I'm out of food." It is very distressing to think about them cutting off the $40 I get. I know that is not much to a lot of people, but it is to me. End quote. Mr. Chairman, your committee's markup of the reconciliation package.
▶ 1:38:33During that markup, you stated, quote, "Our veterans are exempt from the SNAP work requirement, which is the law, and we're not changing it." End quote. Yet, here we are. I ask you to hold joint hearings with the VA committee and to hear directly from veterans and families regarding the impacts hunger is having on their lives.
▶ 1:38:56Today we see a heavy use of food pantries at VA facilities on military bases and in military communities across the country. We know the need is there. Kicking people off SNAP doesn't reduce poverty. It just exacerbates it. Makes it worse. As the wealthiest country on earth, we have no excuse for this. I would also like to take a moment to highlight the over 300,000 veteran farmers.
▶ 1:39:21Knowing that farm bankruptcies are rising and veteran producers tend to run smaller farms with thinner margins, I worry about how the Trump tariffs are damaging veteran farmers livelihoods. And I'm not confident that USDA or and VA are postured to help these veterans and families as they face foreclosures. We know that early intervention and prevention is much more cost-effective than addressing needs once in crisis. It holds true for housing. It holds true for hunger.
▶ 1:39:50It holds true for employment. And it holds true for mental health. Every dollar you're taking away from hungry veterans through SNAP cuts or every dollar a veteran farmer loses in Trump's trade war, we are going to have to spend two or three or 10 times over at VA. VA's resources are already thin. As we stare down over a trillion dollars in Medicaid cuts, more veterans will turn to VA and the Indian Health Service for care.
▶ 1:40:17But accessing care is difficult for rural veterans and families because they must travel such long distances to medical facilities. These disincentives uh and reductions uh this what this does is disincenti disincentivizes and reduces preventive care. It negatively impacts rural veterans physical health which is inextricably tied to their ability to earn a living and in turn their mental health. It affects their mental health.
▶ 1:40:44Again, Congress cannot gut essential social safety net programs without impacting veterans. My predecessor on the VA committee, who also served as a distinguished member of your panel, Governor Walls of Minnesota, constantly reminded us that we show our true priorities through how we spend the VA budgets and the committee's time. I'm sure he had the same thing. He said the same thing to you all on this very room in this very room as well. He was right.
▶ 1:41:12And I challenge every member of this committee to put their money where their mouth is. I'm sure every one of us will give eloquent speeches on Memorial Day and Veterans Day thanking our military members for their service. But will this committee vote to restore exemptions to snap work requirements for veterans?
▶ 1:41:28I tried to do that in the rules committee when they were moving the reconciliation bill through this body and I was I was uh told no, we have to keep uh we have to keep uh the the work requirements for veterans in the bill. Or will we prevent or will you vote to prevent a billion dollar bailout of Argentina while veteran farmers right here in the United States are on the brink of bankruptcy?
▶ 1:41:52or will this committee rubber stamp continued cuts that undermine rural health care, bankrupt veteran farmers, and cause veterans and their families and their survivors to go hungry? We are here in Congress. We here in Congress must do better. Mr. Chairman, I ask you to lead us uh in that regard with the power of your gavl and I yield back.
▶ 1:42:15Well, I I thank the gentleman. Um, I've been very pleased with u the past number of including the National Defense Authorization Act that passed yesterday with a I think it was three 3.8% um the increase wage increase for soldiers. as someone who's an active duty military family.
▶ 1:42:33Um uh just uh very pleased how the successive years of significant increases uh because we had a lot of families that especially those uh members of the military that joined a little older so they came with a spouse and kids um and quite frankly they were uh um I always say that um what we pay a private is is probably pretty adequate because we also house them and feed them.
▶ 1:42:59But if you come with a a little older in your 30s maybe or late 20s and you come with a family, it's um it's challenging because you're usually using off-base housing and and uh and I just really appreciate what uh the the NDAAS have been doing of recognizing the importance of our our military and u and Congress as a whole with these increases that we have have provided uh to make sure that uh which I think they they use that for
▶ 1:43:30a lot of purposes but including their own food food security. I assure you we have a significant programs already in existence um in terms of u uh for our returning veterans um uh that u in terms of uh the agriculture field as well. We recognize the value of that the importance of it as well and the commitment to that. So in addition go
▶ 1:43:53Yeah. Uh, Ranking Member Tano, I want to thank you for standing up for hungry veterans in our country and in our uh, community. I also would like to extend a very happy birthday publicly to you. Happy birthday to you.
▶ 1:44:09Um, and then I just I just have one question. What are the unique
▶ 1:44:13needs of the veteran population um that cause you the greatest concern as it relates to what the Republican le Congress has done in the SNAP program, which of course uh was to put work requirements on our nation's veterans?
▶ 1:44:29Well, you know, onethird of our veterans choose to live in non-urban areas. um they like the quiet and the peace they get living in more rural areas. Um and it's directly related to um their service history. They don't like noise and bangs and all of that. Um that puts them in greater challenge in terms of access to health care.
▶ 1:44:55Uh the the more rural they get, uh they often are very far away from medical centers. But um you know significant numbers of our veterans face food insecurity. Um, and notwithstanding what the chairman said about what the NDA has done to improve pay, uh, we have a number of active duty military service members and their families that were qualifying for SNAP and to subject, um, our veterans uh, to the work requirement uh, which
▶ 1:45:25is really which is really a very insidious way uh, to make it difficult for them to to get uh, food benefits. uh our veterans who served our country and their families, they're going hungry. This is Um it's wrong.
▶ 1:45:44And I thought it was very heartless when I couldn't I couldn't even get an exemption for our veterans uh to this requirement that this committee uh the agriculture committee that they they put it into the the A bill uh the snap cuts that would affect our veterans. That that to me was a shameful shameful day. Thank you so much, Representative Takano. And uh Mr. Chair, I yield back.
▶ 1:46:10Thank the gentleman. Um quite frankly, as a father of a u a wounded warrior serving active duty, um I will tell you what's not fair is when your your ch middle child retires before you do. He uh February hits his 20 years of service to this great nation. um uh earning a Purple Heart, which uh he was quick to tell me that uh Dad, you know how you get a Purple Heart, right?
▶ 1:46:35He says, "You're in the wrong place at the wrong time." And um um I will say that any of our veterans who are beyond this the age, the designated age, are going to be exempt. um any veteran that has a disability.
▶ 1:46:49And I think the uh I think the VA has done a better job u than what perhaps years ago of um of working and doing those disability ratings uh because it is takes a wear tear on the body uh serving in in the military depending on your MOS and what it is that you perform every day.
▶ 1:47:11Um, and honestly, if you're if you're coming out of the military and and and you don't have a disability and and um uh uh I don't know. I mean, I just find that uh someone is going from active duty status to veterans, they want to work and anything uh uh what we've done is now we're investing dollars to help them with uh uh SNAP education and continue education.
▶ 1:47:40are we're investing in those veterans for them to be able to to maybe get a different skill set or maybe just to refine the skill set that they've worked on and they performed uh bravely uh while they're part of the military. I I appreciate your your passion for the military and our veterans specifically and appreciate you um you know bringing those perspectives and those of your constituents before the committee.
▶ 1:48:04Well, can I just say with regard to uh those veterans who don't have disabilities uh who don't have an actual disability rating, that could be for many many reasons. And we have uh homeless veterans that were going to have it's going to be more difficult to serve their needs if uh they have to go through these ownorous work requirements. Uh and uh you know, maybe for a lot of reasons why that veteran never got connected with the VA.
▶ 1:48:29Um and for us to address uh this shameful problem of having veterans on the streets living without shelter um and now facing a more difficult challenge of being able to u you know have a sustainable path uh to self-sufficiency. You know these these work requirements um are simply not helpful. So that's my my response. Thank you.
▶ 1:48:55You're welcome. Um, seeing no other members uh before the committee, I'll just make it clear that any any members that u would like to submit for the record and we have some statements have been have been submitted already. Uh the committee would welcome those in terms of their input and now uh recognize the general lady uh the ranking member for any closing comments.
▶ 1:49:22Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh I would just close uh with great thanks to those members uh throughout uh both of our parties who came today to express what their priorities are in this country as it relates to uh the jurisdiction of this committee and uh we appreciate the opportunity um to listen and uh your work on behalf of your constituents. Thank you.
▶ 1:49:47I thank the general lady. I want to thank all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle for sharing their priorities before the committee. Many of these issues presented have been long-held priorities for our agriculture stakeholder community and have been championed by both Republicans and Democrats. We heard from members on the vital role of USDA trade promotion programs, including our Democratic colleague from Washington on the need for more funding for the market access program. We heard from our colleague about the vital need for greater investment in agriculture research programs.
▶ 1:50:16We heard from our colleagues about the need for greater investment in conservation programs among other priorities. And what some were unaware of and others failed to acknowledge or intentionally admitted uh is a historic investments accomplished in HR1. And I know budget reconciliation is all always partisan. I think we had that discussion long before we actually that train left the station.
▶ 1:50:40I have been on both sides of budget reconciliation as um and uh but the fact is we were able to accomplish uh a historic increase in baseline funding for our popular locally led conservation programs with total funding for equip and RCPP increasing by 54% in total by 2031. That's now in law as part of the uh HR1 or the one big beautiful bill.
▶ 1:51:09um historic increase in funding for the market access program and foreign market development program. Those were both doubled in funding uh by the big beautiful bill. A historic investment in the specialy crop research initiative, specialy crop block grants to support our specialy crop industry. That's right. It's now law as a part of HR1. $125 million per year.
▶ 1:51:34The first mandatory funding in history for the agriculture research facilities act and it's in the big beautiful bill. Historic $ 1.5 billion dollars over the next decade and livestock biocurity supporting more large animal veterinarians, USDA laboratories, vaccination developments, APHUS and assistance for farmers impacted by animal disease. And yes, we also secured that in HR1.
▶ 1:52:00it's now law and a historic involvement investment in our farm safety net in at least a generation uh part of HR1. My my hope is going forward is I mean there are some things bills that I in past years that overall I was not able to support for whatever reasons. Uh um although I did take the opportunity to celebrate some of the individual wins for the people that I was serving and working for.
▶ 1:52:28I'm hoping that that's what uh whatever the feelings are with with budget reconciliation that we can as we look at the agriculture title of that uh the biggest investment in putting the farm back in the in the farm bill um probably over at least 25 years. So uh um and those ideas were all that I just named were all bipartisan. um we ones that we worked on together as we listened to the key constituency of agriculture as we traveled the nation.
▶ 1:52:58So very pleased that we were able to serve and and provide that. And so with that um um I think that concludes our business with our member day. Um u would encourage members to submit any additional comments to the committee of their uh priorities, issues uh wishes wishes they might have as we move forward and prepare to uh um finish the farm bill process with farm bill 2.0.
▶ 1:53:27So with that uh this hearing is now