Ag federal legislative update brings less than good news

By PRISCILLA WAGGONER, Courier Reporter
Posted 2/5/25

MONTE VISTA — The first day of the 2025 Southern Rocky Mountain Agriculture Conference and Trade Show started with an update on federal legislation provided by Ashley House, Vice President of Strategy and Advocacy with the Colorado Farm Bureau.  

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Ag federal legislative update brings less than good news

Posted

MONTE VISTA — The first day of the 2025 Southern Rocky Mountain Agriculture Conference and Trade Show started with an update on federal legislation provided by Ashley House, Vice President of Strategy and Advocacy with the Colorado Farm Bureau.  

House’s presentation began and ended on a note of uncertainty, first in regard to the Farm Bill and, last, the tariff imposed by President Trump scheduled to go into effect on Tuesday, Feb. 4. 

For context, the Farm Bill, also known as the Farm, Food and National Security Act, is referred to as a “must pass” bill that is typically reauthorized every five years. The last time the Farm Bill was passed by Congress was in 2018 with the deadline of a new bill being passed in 2023. When that deadline wasn’t met, lawmakers extended the bill to Sept. 30, 2025.  

A package included in the extension, titled the American Relief Act of 2025, maintains the continuity of current programs, House explained, alleviating fears that there would be a lapse in funding for crucial federal programs. 

The American Relief Act includes close to $21 billion allocated for disaster events. “Think Hurricane Helene in the Carolinas and East Coast, droughts in Texas, Oklahoma, Montana and Idaho and the wildfires in New Mexico,” she said. There are also counties in eastern Colorado that will qualify due to excessive heat, which is different from drought. “I’m pleased that we got that included.” 

House also said $10 billion of economic aid was included for eight commodities – wheat, corn, sorghum, rice, barley, oats, cotton, and soybeans. “It’s important to remember that the money gets allocated across all the states, so if you’re wondering how much Colorado is set to receive, it’s $170 million.” 

She compared that amount to California that produces over 400 agricultural products yet received only $95 million in economic aid. Idaho, a potato state, received $70 million.  “So, even though $170 million doesn’t sound like much, [Colorado] did pretty well.” 

Going forward, the Colorado Farm Bureau is looking to renegotiate a new five-year Farm Bill and “getting out of this extension window.”  In terms of a timeline, House attended a conference hosted the American Farm Bureau Federation where an update was provided by lawmakers directly involved in negotiations. 

 “They said that a Farm Bill can be expected by this summer.”  House added that it was an ambitious deadline but “farmers deserve this cornerstone legislation that is the bedrock of what we do, so I’m going to be optimistic.”  

Another priority for Colorado Farm Bureau is to make permanent ad hoc programs addressing disasters and extreme weather events.  Making provisions to crop insurance that address both quantity and quality is also a goal.  

House then brought up H-2A visas, a temporary agricultural program that allows employers, who agree to certain stipulations, to bring in nonimmigrant agricultural workers to work on a seasonal or temporary basis. 

“The lack of affordable labor is a compounding problem for farmers and ranchers and also threatens our competitiveness of American products,” she said. The ag trade deficit reached a record of $17.1 billion in 2023, a number she thinks will likely be even higher under the second Trump administration. 

Labor is the number one cost in production, totaling 38 cents out of every dollar so where to focus efforts?   

The Farm Bureau is focused on the Adverse Effective Wage Rate, she said. The Adverse Effective Wage Rate (AEWRS) is the minimum hourly wage that must be offered and paid by employers to H2-A workers. An attempt to freeze AEWRS at its current level for two years was unsuccessful.  

House praised Senator Michael Bennet for his support in this area, adding that the Farm Bureau is advocating for an evaluation of the methodology used in computing what the wage rate should be. 

House brought up the issue of grazing on federal lands, an issue which she is “constantly” addressing. “The multiple use doctrine has to be upheld,” she said, “which includes energy, recreation and grazing.” Multiple use is “emblematic of the American West” and needs to be a constant messaging imperative in lobbying lawmakers.  

In 2024, the US Fish and Wildlife Service issued some proposed rulemaking that include Environment and Health. The suggested rule was to end grazing agreements and co-operative agreements on national wildlife refuges, eight of which are in Colorado and two – Monte Vista and Alamosa Wildlife Refuges – in the San Luis Valley. 

She then cited the story of a local rancher who grazes his sheep on wildlife refuge land who said he “would have to find something else to do” if the agreements were discontinued. She also cited the benefits of grazing on federal lands, including preserving wildlife habitat and weed control. 

House included that story in her opposition to the proposed rule, and that rule was rescinded. “That’s a win that depended on these personal stories and direct experience.” 

The subject of tariffs was last on the list. House defined tariffs to participants as “taxes charged on goods imported from other countries.”  

She then summarized the tariffs President Trump placed on imports, specifically 10 per cent on goods imported from China, 25 per cent on goods imported from Canada and 25 per cent on goods imported from Mexico. Citing polls, House said support for tariffs declines among supporters the more they learn about additional costs that would impact them. The tariffs on Canada and Mexico have been placed on a 30-day hold. 

“Members want to know how tariffs are going to affect them,” she said. “Well, Canada quickly slapped back, including [exports from the U.S.] on orange juice, peanut butter, fruits, vegetables, pork, beef and dairy products. That’s everybody in this room.” 

The point is there’s a lot of backlash, she said. She then added that, in her opinion based on observations, the courts will only grant an injunction if there’s evidence of measurable harm.  

She thinks an injunction is unlikely but her immediate concern for “the folks in the room” is that the barriers broken down for fresh potatoes into Mexico will be “among the first to go.”