HR-7914-119
Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation, Research, and Biotechnology.
Sponsored by April McClain Delaney (D-MD)
What it does
This bill would amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to expand the USDA's "experienced services program" to include assisting cooperative initiatives that improve teaching programs at colleges and universities, including paid work-based learning opportunities. It also adds formal definitions for "institution of higher education," "land-grant colleges and universities," and "work-based learning" by referencing existing federal education statutes.
Who benefits
Retired or experienced agricultural professionals participating in the experienced services program who could now work on higher education teaching initiatives, land-grant colleges and universities seeking to improve agricultural teaching programs, and students who may gain access to paid work-based learning opportunities in agricultural fields.
Who is hurt
No group appears to bear significant direct costs; this is a narrow administrative expansion of an existing program's scope. Taxpayers could see a marginal increase in program administration costs, and other potential uses of experienced services program resources could see relatively less funding or staff time if resources are redirected toward the new teaching-focused activities.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that connecting experienced agricultural professionals with land-grant universities addresses a documented shortage of practical, hands-on instruction in agricultural teaching programs. They contend that paid work-based learning helps students gain real-world skills while giving experienced retirees a way to contribute their expertise, strengthening the pipeline of trained agricultural professionals.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that expanding the experienced services program's mission without additional dedicated funding could dilute its focus on its original conservation-related purposes. They contend that Congress should ensure new mandates come with matched resources rather than layering additional responsibilities onto an existing program, which could stretch staff and budgets thin without a clear cost-benefit analysis.
Constitutional context
This bill raises no significant constitutional questions; it is a routine amendment to an existing federal program's statutory authority under Congress's spending power, with no implications for Commerce Clause limits, agency major questions, or takings issues.
Checks and balances
Congress modifies the program's statutory scope directly through legislation, and USDA retains implementation authority within the amended statutory boundaries with no notable shift in power between branches.