The House Agriculture Committee has forwarded H.R.7567, The Food, Farm and Nation
al Security Act by a 34 -17 vote to the entire House. The legislation colloquially termed “Farm Bill 2.0” includes commodity price supports supplementing the 2025 ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ in addition to designated programs.
Non-contentious items in the Bill included permanent funding for the feral swine eradication program, supporting the USMCA and launching an Agricultural Trade Enforcement Task Force to oppose trade barriers.
An important component of the Bill is inclusion of a provision setting aside California Proposition #12 (and Massachusetts Question #2) relating to housing of livestock and poultry. States would be permanently enjoined from applying housing and production standards applicable to other states. This provision was incorporated in response to aggressive lobbying by the National Pork Producers’ Council that has long supported the retention of gestation crates for pregnant sows. This is notwithstanding, the extent of conversions to group housing that has engendered overwhelming retailer and consumer support.
The Bill will now have to be approved by the House. It is understood that the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Food and Forestry has yet to mark-up parallel legislation. Senator John Boozman (R-AR) Chair of the Senate Committee characterized the House legislation as “advancing the remaining components of the traditional Farm Bill” and he is on record as being committed to the legislative process to reach enactment”.
Angie Craig (D-MN), Ranking Member of the House Agriculture Committee, voted “No” asserting that her Republican co-members “refuse to invest new money in many farm programs that have stagnated after nearly a decade of inflation”.
The American Meat Producers Association condemned the inclusion of provisions setting aside California Proposition #12, stating that the Bill “pulls the rug out from under farmers who already have made significant investments to meet consumer demand”.
The Farm Bill would not have any direct impact on egg production since forty percent of hens are now housed in various alternatives to cages. The relative proportions of current housing systems are consistent with consumer demand. This situation reflects the pre-California Proposition #2 and subsequent Proposition #12 ballot legislation in which the industry supported a range of alternative systems with free-choice by consumers based on price and personal evaluation of attributes.