After nearly a year of discussions and preparations, on May 24, 2024, the House Committee on Agriculture approved legislation to reauthorize the Farm Bill, sending the bill to the House floor for a potential vote. The House version of the bill, put together by Agriculture Committee Chair GT Thompson (R-PA), is one of the top priorities for the 118th Congress. It is currently the only Farm Bill reauthorization legislation that has been introduced and advanced out of committee before funding expires on September 30, 2024.

Given the hundreds of billions of dollars at stake and the wide variety of programs funded by the bill, thousands of nontraditional stakeholders are becoming increasingly involved in its development. TCIA examined the House’s bill text and highlighted the following provisions that may be relevant to tree care companies.

Background on the Farm Bill

First passed in 1933, the Farm Bill originally sought to establish price controls on agricultural products and support farmers, but over time, the application of the law has expanded. Food-assistance
programs still consume a large portion of the Farm Bill’s funding, but the legislation includes provisions for conservation, horticulture, forestry and other areas, creating broad coalitions of support among diverse stakeholders and increasing competition for funds.

The Farm Bill is evaluated every five years for reauthorization, with the last version enacted in 2018. Congress was tasked with passing a reauthorization bill in 2023 to avoid the law’s expiration on September 30, 2023, but they were ultimately unsuccessful due to partisan divides on what to include in the reauthorization. They passed a temporary extension, allowing programs under the law to be funded through September 2024. Efforts to pass a reauthorization bill in both the House and Senate Agriculture Committees have been ongoing since the 2023 extension.

Title VIII programs – forestry

Title VIII programs support forestry management as run by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Forest Services (FS). In the House version of the bill’s reauthorization, Chairman Thompson included four noteworthy provisions regarding wildfire-risk-reduction efforts and utilities’ vegetation-management plans.

Section 8201 would expand the definition of an “at-risk community” under the Healthy Forests Restoration Act to include both interface communities and groups of homes with essential infrastructure at risk from wildfires. This provision would support and expand wildfire-risk-reduction efforts in additional designated areas.

• Section 8401 would require the development of a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for managing high-priority hazard trees within 300 feet of roads, trails and recreation sites. This appears to streamline the process for hazard-tree removal to enhance public safety.
• Section 8406 would create another categorical exclusion under the NEPA for utilities’ vegetation-
• management plans. This again streamlines the process for utilities’ vegetation management to enhance public safety.
• Section 8417 would allow electric utility companies to cut and remove trees or other vegetation near distribution and transmission lines on National Forest System lands without requiring timber sales. This would streamline the process for such companies to manage trees and vegetation on National Forest System land.
• Title X programs – horticulture
• Title X authorizes funding for programs that support the production of specialty crops, USDA-certified organic food and locally produced foods. Relevant to the tree care industry, this portion of the bill includes two provisions regulating the use of pesticides.
• Section 10204 would establish uniform national pesticide labeling and prohibit state and local government from imposing additional or different labeling requirements beyond those approved by the EPA.
• Section 10205 would prohibit local governments from imposing or maintaining requirements related to the sale, distribution, labeling, application or use of pesticides that are regulated by the state or EPA, ensuring regulatory consistency.

Looking ahead

With the bill approved by the House Agriculture Committee, it now moves to the House floor for a vote. Republicans appear to have enough support from their party and some Democrats to pass the bill by a simple majority. This could change, however, as lawmakers not on the House Agriculture Committee seek amendments to the bill that could delay or derail efforts to pass it.

The viability of the Farm Bill reauthorization appears more uncertain in the Senate. After the House Agriculture Committee passed their version, Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, issued a statement implying there would not be enough votes to pass the House version of the bill in the Senate.

Instead, the Senate Agriculture Committee will likely consider Stabenow’s Rural Prosperity and Food Security Act, which pieces together more than 100 bipartisan bills to fund programs under the Farm Bill. Stabenow’s legislation has only been introduced as a framework, and it is unknown when the full text will be revealed and marked up by the Senate Agriculture Committee.

Conclusion

Given the partisan divide in the House and Senate reauthorization attempts, it is unclear whether both chambers can come to a consensus on final legislation to reauthorize the Farm Bill. If the Senate and House cannot come to an agreement, both chambers will need to consider extending the 2018 Farm Bill once again.

TCIA will keep members apprised of updates related to the Farm Bill reauthorization efforts.

Basil Thomson is a senior associate at Ulman Public Policy, TCIA’s Washington, D.C.-based advocacy and lobbying partner.