S-4951-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Sponsored by Adam Schiff (D-CA)
What it does
This bill would require the Secretary of Agriculture to submit a report to Congress within 180 days of enactment identifying barriers that certified organic farms and farms considering a transition to organic production face when trying to access USDA programs. The report would cover programs related to conservation, crop insurance, disaster assistance, export promotion, and other areas, and would include participation data and recommendations for administrative and legislative changes. The Secretary would also be required to submit annual update reports for three years following the initial report, tracking progress on removing identified barriers.
Who benefits
Certified organic farms that currently face obstacles accessing USDA programs such as crop insurance, conservation payments, and disaster assistance. Farms considering transitioning to organic production that may be deterred by program complexity or eligibility gaps. Organic industry trade associations and advocacy groups that have long sought data on program access disparities. Congressional agriculture committees that would receive structured data to inform future legislation. Consumers and businesses in the organic supply chain who could benefit if more farms successfully transition to organic production.
Who is hurt
Conventional (non-organic) farm operations that could face increased competition if barriers to organic transition are reduced and more farms shift to organic production. USDA staff and agency budgets that would bear the administrative cost of conducting the study, compiling participation data, and producing annual updates. Taxpayers who fund the staff time and resources required to complete the report. No group faces a direct, immediate regulatory burden from this bill, as it is a study and reporting requirement only.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that organic farms represent a fast-growing sector — USDA data shows certified organic operations have grown by more than 50% over the past decade — yet these farms consistently report difficulty accessing the same federal programs available to conventional farms, including crop insurance price elections that undervalue organic commodities and conservation programs that do not account for organic practices. They contend that a systematic, data-driven report is a necessary first step to identifying and correcting structural inequities in USDA program design, and that the bill's bipartisan sponsorship reflects broad agreement that better data leads to better policy.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that this bill adds a reporting mandate without any guarantee that findings will lead to meaningful action, and that USDA already produces substantial data on farm program participation through existing reporting mechanisms. They contend that the resources spent on the study and three years of annual updates could instead be directed toward directly funding organic transition assistance or other concrete program improvements, and that without accompanying legislative mandates to act on the report's findings, the exercise may produce little more than a document that sits unused in committee archives.