Washington Digest: House passes farm bill

WASHINGTON — The House last week broke a two-year impasse and approved a farm bill that would authorize almost $1 trillion for crop subsidies and nutrition programs.

Lawmakers voted 251-166 for the sweeping bill that drew support from both Democrats and Republicans, but also was opposed by members from both parties.

Debates over food stamps, crop insurance, food inspections, dairy support and the allocation of subsidies to commodities grown in different parts of the country tested the coalition of urban and rural lawmakers that customarily form the base of support for the bill.

In the end, the bill cut food stamp funding by $8 billion over 10 years, eliminated $5 billion in direct subsidies to farmers, expanded crop insurance and limited milk production that would be covered by federal insurance.

The measure also included the Payment In Lieu of Taxes grant program that mostly benefits Western states.

The Congressional Budget Office projected the bill would reduce spending on farm programs by $16.6 billion over 10 years, an estimate some watchdogs said was overly optimistic.

Reps. Steven Horsford, D-Nev., and Joe Heck, R-Nev., voted for the bill. Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., voted against it. Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Nev., did not vote.


The House voted 227-188 for a bill forbidding the use of taxpayer money to pay for abortions or for health plans that cover abortion. There is an exemption for cases of rape, incest or where a woman’s life would be in danger.

Republican sponsors said the measure would make permanent abortion policy that has been renewed regularly in annual appropriations bills, and to ensure it is followed under the new health care law.

“The premise of this legislation is nothing new,” said Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-N.C. “Most Americans recognize it is unfair to force every American in this country to subsidize abortion.”

Rep. Lois Capps, D-Calif., one of the bill’s critics, called it “a cynical attack on women’s personal decision making.” Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., said it would effectively “drive out abortion coverage” among private insurers.

Heck voted for the bill. Titus and Horsford voted against it. Amodei did not vote.

The Democrat-controlled Senate was not expected to take up the bill, which also was opposed by the Obama administration.


The Senate voted 67-32 to delay a sharp hike in premiums for federal flood insurance.

The bill would delay increases for four years. The higher premiums were designed under a law enacted in 2012 to stem red ink in the national flood insurance program.

But senators said the dramatic rise in premiums threatens homeowners who live along the coasts. Debate comes at a time when experts say climate change is raising the level of the oceans and creating more intense storms.

“We’re in a situation where there are a lot of very innocent people who didn’t have any role in creating this intensified warming of the ocean and, as a result, more intense storms,” said Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass. “But they shouldn’t be caught as the victims without a better plan.”

The bill delays increases until the Federal Emergency Management Agency finishes a study of flood insurance affordability that is expected to take four years to complete and review.

Critics of the bill said it was too soon to throw out reforms enacted just two years ago. By doing so, “we go right back to the insolvent, unsustainable program we had before,” said Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., voted for the bill. Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev., voted against it.

Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or 202-783-1760. Follow him on Twitter @STetreaultDC.


Comment section guidelines

The below comment section contains thoughts and opinions from users that in no way represent the views of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. This public platform is intended to provide a forum for users of reviewjournal.com to share ideas, express thoughtful opinions and carry the conversation beyond the article. Users must follow the guidelines under our Commenting Policy and are encouraged to use the moderation tools to help maintain civility and keep discussions on topic.