Big, Beautiful Bill doesn’t include any common-sense policies to improve efficiencies, according to Rep Craig

“Republicans want states to do their dirty work and take food away from people, and it doesn’t end there.”

Right now, a marathon debate is still going on in the House Rules Committee.

They are debating President Trump’s Big, Beautiful Bill, which could have big implications for farmers.

A pre-dawn debate started around 1 AM ET and is still underway.
Ag leadership is there. Committee Chair GT Thompson earlier broke down the cost savings in his portion of the budget, but the ranking member of the Ag Committee called the process shameful, reflecting on potential cuts for SNAP.

According to Rep. Angie Craig, “It puts a huge burden on the states by forcing them to pay for anywhere from 5-25% of food assistance. Chair Fox, the governor of your state said, ‘If Congress does forward with these plans, our state will be forced into a perilous budget decision. Should North Carolinians lose access to food, or should we get rid of other essential services?’ North Carolina’s on the hook for up to $700 million per year under this proposal. That’s the equivalent of 8,900 public school teacher salaries in North Carolina. Republicans want states to do their dirty work and take food away from people, and it doesn’t end there.”

The Congresswoman went on to say that the Big, Beautiful Bill does not include any common-sense policies to help improve program efficiencies as some claim, and instead of helping those who need it most, the cuts will fund tax breaks for large corporations and the super wealthy instead.

Related Stories
Lewis Williamson of HTS Commodities joined us with an update on the historic winter storm impacts and his outlook on today’s ag markets.
RFD NEWS correspondent Frank McCaffrey recently spoke with Dr. Mike Vickers, a South Texas rancher, who says illegal border crossings have dramatically declined in the last year.
New rule speeds leasing and permitting for federal oil and gas development
Payment totals alone do not show financial stress — production costs and net losses complete the picture.
Year-round E15 remains on the table, but procedural caution and competing regional interests pushed action into a slower, negotiated path.
Without additional support, many soybean operations will continue to face financial stress as they prepare for the 2026 crop.