Last week, House Republicans released their draft bill to cut government funding for the remainder of the fiscal year, that ends September 3rd, by much larger amount than previously discussed.  The bill would cut government spending around $60 billion. This is huge, obviously but the agriculture function would take an enormous $5.2 billion or 22 percent cut under the House GOP proposed bill. 

Unfortunately, feeding programs are the top such as the Women Infants and Children (WIC) program slashed by $747 million. In our state, this program administered by the WA Department of Health, provides its constituents, basically young mothers and families who qualify via their income level, a set of vouchers which can be used to purchase fruits and vegetables grown by small farmers, at community farmers' markets. In the last few years, the program has provided Washington families with hundreds of thousands of dollars of purchasing power which goes directly to local farmer markets.

Also under the knife are Food for Peace by $687 million (all in the humanitarian donations part of the program), and the McGovern-Dole international school lunch program by over 50 percent or $109 million.

Mission areas and agencies would be cut by the following amounts under the terms of the bill:
Rural development by $482 million; National Institute for Food and Agriculture cooperative research and extension by $217 million; Farm Service Agency by $190 million; Agricultural Research Service (ARS) federal research budget by $185 million; Natural Resources Conservation Service by $173 million; Food Safety and Inspection Service by $88 million; and Food and Drug Administration by $241 million.

The national Sustainable Agriculture Coalition has a good post on the food impacts HERE. In a response to the House proposal, Senate Appropriations Chair Daniel Inouye (D-HI) said: “It is clear from this proposal that House Republicans are committed to pursuing an ineffective approach to deficit reduction that attempts to balance the budget on the back of domestic discretionary investments, which constitute only a small percentage of overall federal spending.  The priorities identified in this proposal for some of the largest cuts—environmental protection, health care, energy, science, and law enforcement—are essential to the current and future well-being of our economy and communities across the country.”

This is ineffective and unfair to say the least. I'll keep you posted as this story develops.

---

---