Family farm advocates are pushing for major changes in the new Farm Bill, including reduced subsidies for large factory farms, mandatory beef country-of-origin labels and measures to boost competition.

Proposals also include creating a meatpacking special investigator position at the USDA, and requiring meatpackers to purchase a set amount of livestock in cash markets.

Noah Earle, a member of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center, a farmer and co-owner of Clovers Natural Markets, explained country-of-origin labeling for beef is not controversial among Missourians.

"Regardless of political affiliation, in Missouri you talk to cattle farmers or just citizens who consume beef, everyone agrees that we should have country-of-origin labeling for beef," Earle observed. "That's not controversial here on the ground."

Earle argued not labeling beef lets big meat companies sell foreign beef as American, harming local farmers and shoppers. Advocates want the Farm Bill to boost competition, help small farms and curb big corporations' control.

The U.S. House Agriculture Committee approved its Farm Bill version, but passing the full House is uncertain. Senate Democrats have outlined their version, while Senate Republicans have not yet. The current Farm Bill is an extension from 2018 and ends on Sept. 30. Differences persist in items such as SNAP funding and climate program funds from the Inflation Reduction Act.

Earle criticized the House bill for cutting funds for vital programs.

"The current version of the House farm bill that's been put forward is regressive," Earle contended. "One of the main ways that it's regressive is it's trying to take away funding to feed people that need to eat and the reason they need help with that is because of massive wealth extraction from their communities."

Earle added Congress has had ample time to work on the Farm Bill, yet family farm advocates feel the proposed measures do not go far enough. They called for meaningful changes to foster competition, reduce corporate control and address harmful agricultural practices. The status quo is not sufficient, and they urged Congress to take substantial steps toward a more equitable and sustainable food system.

High taxes and a weak economy are the top concerns of Illinois residents according to a new poll, with nearly half of those surveyed saying they would leave the state if given the opportunity.

The poll, conducted for the Illinois Policy Institute, showed more than half of those surveyed rank the state's high taxes as their number one concern, with the overall economy coming in second. Half of voters surveyed said they would move out of the state, regardless of whether they can afford it.

Dylan Sharkey, assistant editor for the Illinois Policy Institute, said the group started conducting surveys to shed light on tax issues.

"It's impossible for lawmakers to deny that these are the issues that people care about," Sharkey contended. "Because when you have a survey or a statewide poll, it's hard to deny those voices."

Illinois residents have the highest combined state and local tax burden in the nation, accounting for nearly 17% of their paychecks, and the second-highest property taxes in the country, according to the financial website WalletHub.

Since 2020, it is estimated Illinois has lost close to 500,000 residents. Sharkey argued the poll helps to dispel the myth people are leaving the state due to the weather. He added states of similar size and climate, such as Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan, are also losing residents but at a much slower rate.

"This might seem obvious to some people, but of course, high taxes are number one," Sharkey emphasized. "Part of the reason we do this polling is because there are lawmakers and groups out there who look at our state and think, 'Well, we just need more money to fix the problem.' And the reality is, if you take more money from people, they're just going to find a new home."

Sharkey added he hopes the poll will serve as guidance for Illinois lawmakers as they consider new legislation which could add to the tax burden residents already carry.

"Even if lawmakers aren't in consensus over new taxes, their constituents are," Sharkey asserted. "The bottom line should be that taxes should not be a first resort. The first resort should be to do more with money they already have."


get more stories like this via email

Groups fighting hunger in Oregon are urging residents to speak up if they are concerned about the cuts Congress could make to food, health care and housing assistance programs.

Congress is considering proposals to reduce SNAP benefits and free school meals for students, along with cuts to health care and rental assistance programs. About one in six Oregonians receives SNAP benefits and about a quarter use Medicaid.

Alejandro Queral, executive director of the Oregon Center for Public Policy, said the proposals are not really about cutting waste and fraud, as the Trump administration contended. Instead, Queral argued they are about tax cuts.

"Extending those tax cuts from 2017 to the very rich will add to the deficit and will have a direct impact on people's lives," Queral asserted.

Research shows policies implemented during the pandemic, like the Child Tax Credit, led to a record drop in poverty across the country in 2021. When the policies were revoked, the nation saw a record increase in poverty the following year.

One proposal on the table would reduce SNAP benefits for more than 700,000 Oregonians by changing how the benefits are calculated. Another would end free school meals for 12 million children across the country, as well as the Summer Food Service Program.

Queral believes funding such programs is the responsibility of the federal government.

"What the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress are proposing is, in essence, playing a budget 'trick' by shifting those costs to the state," Queral emphasized.

Congressional Republicans also aim to add more paperwork and work requirements to receive SNAP and Medicaid benefits. Queral noted creating more barriers often means fewer people get the services. He stressed it is essentially a way to indirectly cut popular programs many children and lower-income Oregonians depend on.

"Lack of nutrition early in life, lack of access to health care early in life, have repercussions for future generations," Queral underscored. "We have to really think about the long-term consequences of the choices that we're making today."


get more stories like this via email

Minnesota lawmakers have a few weeks left to wrap up their legislative session on time. A new state budget tops the list of remaining tasks, with observers wondering if both chambers have just enough bipartisanship in them to get it done.

Minnesota still has a surplus for the next two years but elected officials from both parties are trying to get ahead of a projected deficit for 2028 and 2029 by looking at spending cuts. Gov. Tim Walz and fellow Democrats have also eyed raising certain taxes and fees to keep a negative balance at bay.

Kevin Parsneau, professor of political science and Minnesota State University-Mankato, said after a rocky start, things have been relatively cordial.

"They've gotten a lot done, a lot faster than you might've expected," Parsneau observed. "Although there are some very big issues that have to be resolved within the next few weeks."

The start of the session was mostly delayed because of a power-sharing dispute between House Republicans and Democrats set off by the need for a special election. The chamber is now in a tie and while they have to work together, Parsneau acknowledged the scenario has the potential to derail progress. He echoed others by noting large federal funding cuts led by the Trump administration make things hard for states to plan spending.

While the White House has been aggressive in recent months to cut aid, the next federal budget is not scheduled to be finalized until later this year. With Congressional Republicans in control, Parsneau pointed out states could lose even more assistance. Because Minnesota's budget has to be in the books beforehand, he wondered if lawmakers will have to come back later this year.

"I assume they're hoping to avoid a special session," Parsneau added. "But it seems like it's gonna be difficult to do that."

He suggested it is a tough situation because voters might view a special session as another example of political drama. Parsneau emphasized voters are locked into a mindset of wanting decisive action from their representatives. Beyond a budget, a bonding bill for infrastructure projects has been debated. As for cuts, education and health programs are getting heavy focus.


get more stories like this via email