Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Will the Farm Bill be the next big climate package? It depends on the midterm elections

News Feed
Monday, October 3, 2022

This year’s midterm elections will decide the direction of a massive legislative package meant to tackle the nation’s agricultural problems. Republican Senate and House members are already vowing they won’t pack it with climate “buzzwords.” Roughly every five years, lawmakers pass The Farm Bill, a spending bill that addresses the agriculture industry, food systems, nutrition programs, and more. This legislation is up for reauthorization next year. The political fighting comes on the heels of both the recently passed Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law including billions of dollars for climate provisions. John Boozman, a Republican Senator from Arkansas who is a high-ranking member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, is among a growing number of Republicans who have said they will not allow additional climate provisions into the upcoming Farm Bill. If Republicans win back the House this November, which is still a possible outcome despite tightening Democratic races across the country, GOP members will be in control of drafting next year’s Farm Bill.  “In their zeal to pass their reckless tax-and-spend agenda, they (Democrats) have undermined one of the last successful bipartisan processes in the Senate,” said Boozman in a Senate floor hearing this past August. Boozman said the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act without bipartisan support threatens the future of the Farm Bill, a generally bipartisan omnibus bill. The next bill needs to be authorized before September 2023. Over a dozen members of the House Agriculture Committee, which steers the Farm Bill draft process, are up for reelection this November. For example, Abigail Spanberger, a Virginia Congresswoman whose district is near the nation’s capital, and a committee member and subcommittee chair, currently faces a contested election in her state, with inflation’s impact on farming communities a key point in the race. Glenn Thompson, a Congressman who represents a western Pennsylvania district, is slated to be the Chair of the House Agriculture Committee if Republicans win the House. After the passage of the historic climate bill this August, the Pennsylvania Republican said the Inflation Reduction Act “only complicates the pathway to a Farm Bill and creates even greater uncertainty for farmers, ranchers, and rural communities.” Thompson has expressed interest in conservation efforts in the past, but in a September hearing, he said he won’t allow unnecessary climate items into next year’s bill. “I will not sit idly by as we let decades of real bipartisan progress be turned on its head to satisfy people that at their core think agriculture is a blight on the landscape,” Thompson said in the hearing. “I have been leaning into the climate discussion, but I will not have us suddenly incorporate buzzwords like regenerative agriculture into the Farm Bill or overemphasize climate.” Ahead of the November elections, House Republicans have already released insight into their priorities for this upcoming legislation. The Republican Study Committee, whose members make up 80 percent of all Republican members of Congress, released its draft budget in July. This draft document outlines a plan that completely defunds federal programs that support conservation efforts, as well as slashes federal food stamp and crop insurance programs. The draft document heralds the preliminary budget as “ undeniably pro-farmer.” As Farm Bill debates continue, a group of over 150 progressive, agriculture, and environmental groups, from the nation’s largest federation of labor unions to the Sierra Club environmental group, have urged President Joe Biden to add climate reforms in the upcoming legislative package. In a letter to Biden, organizations urged the President to pass a Farm Bill that would help mend economic and racial divides in the industry, increase access to nutrition, support fair labor conditions in farming communities labor conditions, as well as tackle the climate crisis with a focus on agriculture.  Sarah Carden, policy advocate for Farm Action, a progressive agriculture advocacy nonprofit that signed the letter, said that no farmer will deny the industry has been plagued by increased extreme weather events and the Farm Bill needs to address climate change as much as it does other problems in the industry. She said the organization has urged federal agencies to push more funding into programs that help conservation efforts, promote soil health, and mandate the use of climate-smart solutions, instead of contributing to a band-aid funding cycle. “Farmers who are receiving federal support in the wake of increased extreme weather events and disasters should be practicing practices that contribute to resiliency,” Carden told Grist. Carden said that the United States Department of Agriculture, or USDA, has created more climate-focused solutions in recent years, such as the recently announced Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities which directs $3 billion to small growers into the supply chain, but it’s important that sustainable solutions are written into the Farm Bill this upcoming cycle as administration changes could upend individual agency efforts. Since its creation in the 1930s, the Farm Bill has provided direct, federal funding to farmers to address the evolving agricultural industry, from land management to economic development. What was created as a way to infuse cash into an industry decimated by the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl, by 1973 the farm bill turned into a massive set of legislation that addresses everything from soil erosion to federal food stamp programs. Farmers and growers need to address the changing climate, said Margaret Krome, the policy program director for Wisconsin and Midwest agriculture nonprofit research group Michael Fields Agricultural Institute. Krome said the industry is running out of time to address ongoing problems. “We have got climate change at our doorstep,” she said. Krome, who works with state and federal officials on legislation about agriculture, said the Farm Bill has always been a way to have farmers focus on their current needs. As discussions and draft legislation begin, she said three issues are likely to be at the top of the debates; climate change, the future of farming and addressing historic racial injustices in the industry, and the intersection of nutrition and agriculture.  With increasing polarization in politics and the upcoming midterm elections, she said it is important for those working on the bill to remember that farming touches everyone in the country and should, hopefully, remain bipartisan. Despite political differences at the state level across the country, a nonpartisan coalition of state agriculture department officials recently issued a letter declaring their desire for the Farm Bill to include increased disaster relief, nutrition programs, and subsidies for regional food production. As farming adapts to warming crops and increased droughts, federal agencies are increasing funding and focusing on addressing the industry’s role in spurring a warming world. According to the USDA, the nation’s agriculture sector accounted for 11 percent of the country’s carbon emissions in 2020.  Congressman David Scott of Georgia, center, speaks at a press conference in 2009. Scott is currently seeking re-election and is the Chair of the House Committee on Agriculture. Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images The Farm Bill already includes language outlining two top USDA environmentally focused programs, the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, or EQIP, and the Conservation Stewardship Program. Both of these programs are normally funded through the Farm Bill, but the Inflation Reduction Act added billions of funding to them, with $8.45 billion for EQIP and $3.25 billion for the conservation program. The infusion was praised by environmental groups and Democrats who hope the increased funding will help farmers implement climate-smart solutions like cover crops to help to increase crop resiliency or create wildlife habitats on farmland. Key agricultural leaders on Capitol Hill also predict that, alongside the addition of climate provisions, fights over Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, will stall next year’s Farm Bill. In both 2014 and 2018, efforts from House GOP members to cut SNAP funding slowed the bill’s passage. Earlier this year, Georgia Democratic Congressman David Scott, who is currently seeking re-election and is the Chair of the House Committee on Agriculture and represents a district just outside of Atlanta, warned that fights over SNAP could derail Farm Bill conservations. Given the Biden administration’s recent announcement of plans to end hunger by 2030, debates over nutrition funding are likely to flare up.   The fight will boil down to the program’s funding as from 2024 to 2028, SNAP is estimated to cost roughly $531 billion, an increase caused by droves of new users coming to the program due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In comparison, all nutritional programs, not just SNAP, were estimated to cost $326 billion in the 2018 Farm Bill. Recently passed landmark climate legislation may also interfere with what makes it into the Farm Bill, as Conservative House and Senate members have said funding from the Inflation Reduction Act could decrease the budget for climate proposals inside the Farm Bill. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Will the Farm Bill be the next big climate package? It depends on the midterm elections on Oct 3, 2022.

Republicans have already vowed to strip climate funding from the bill.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Revealed: top carbon offset projects may not cut planet-heating emissions

Majority of offset projects that have sold the most carbon credits are ‘likely junk’, according to analysis by Corporate Accountability and the GuardianThe vast majority of the environmental projects most frequently used to offset greenhouse gas emissions appear to have fundamental failings suggesting they cannot be relied upon to cut planet-heating emissions, according to a new analysis.The global, multibillion-dollar voluntary carbon trading industry has been embraced by governments, organisations and corporations including oil and gas companies, airlines, fast-food brands, fashion houses, tech firms, art galleries and universities as a way of claiming to reduce their greenhouse gas footprint.A total of 39 of the top 50 emission offset projects, or 78% of them, were categorised as likely junk or worthless due to one or more fundamental failing that undermines its promised emission cuts.Eight others (16%) look problematic, with evidence suggesting they may have at least one fundamental failing and are potentially junk, according to the classification system applied.The efficacy of the remaining three projects (6%) could not be determined definitively as there was insufficient public, independent information to adequately assess the quality of the credits and/or accuracy of their claimed climate benefits.Overall, $1.16bn (£937m) of carbon credits have been traded so far from the projects classified by the investigation as likely junk or worthless; a further $400m of credits bought and sold were potentially junk. Continue reading...

Majority of offset projects that have sold the most carbon credits are ‘likely junk’, according to analysis by Corporate Accountability and the GuardianThe vast majority of the environmental projects most frequently used to offset greenhouse gas emissions appear to have fundamental failings suggesting they cannot be relied upon to cut planet-heating emissions, according to a new analysis.The global, multibillion-dollar voluntary carbon trading industry has been embraced by governments, organisations and corporations including oil and gas companies, airlines, fast-food brands, fashion houses, tech firms, art galleries and universities as a way of claiming to reduce their greenhouse gas footprint.A total of 39 of the top 50 emission offset projects, or 78% of them, were categorised as likely junk or worthless due to one or more fundamental failing that undermines its promised emission cuts.Eight others (16%) look problematic, with evidence suggesting they may have at least one fundamental failing and are potentially junk, according to the classification system applied.The efficacy of the remaining three projects (6%) could not be determined definitively as there was insufficient public, independent information to adequately assess the quality of the credits and/or accuracy of their claimed climate benefits.Overall, $1.16bn (£937m) of carbon credits have been traded so far from the projects classified by the investigation as likely junk or worthless; a further $400m of credits bought and sold were potentially junk. Continue reading...

California Leads the Way in Low-Carbon School Meals

The IPCC assessment “was pretty unforgiving,” says the director of nutrition services for Southern California’s Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD), in making “strong connections between our food systems and climate change.” Methane is a short-lived but potent greenhouse gas that scientists say has driven roughly 30 percent of Earth’s warming since pre-industrial times. The […] The post California Leads the Way in Low-Carbon School Meals appeared first on Civil Eats.

In 2021, Josh Goddard came across some sobering news. That year’s United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report showed that globally, meat and dairy production is responsible for fueling nearly a third of human-caused methane gas emissions. The IPCC assessment “was pretty unforgiving,” says the director of nutrition services for Southern California’s Santa Ana Unified School District (SAUSD), in making “strong connections between our food systems and climate change.” Methane is a short-lived but potent greenhouse gas that scientists say has driven roughly 30 percent of Earth’s warming since pre-industrial times. “Kids and lentils aren’t good bedfellows.” But creativity and the right investments “can make something like lentil piccadillo rather special.” The news was “an impetus for action” for Goddard, who runs one of the state’s largest school meal programs serving upwards of 10 million lunches, breakfasts, snacks, and suppers annually with more than 80 percent of students eligible for free and reduced-priced meals. With blessing from administrators and the community, Santa Ana schools started offering an entirely plant-based lunch menu once a week. Milk is still available daily per U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) requirement. The revised offerings, which include creative dishes such as tempeh tacos and buffalo cauliflower wraps, have helped reduce SAUSD’s climate impact, Goddard says. His EPA-guided calculations estimate a district-wide reduction in emissions by about 1,300 tons a year. Santa Ana’s efforts, however, are not unique. Across the nation, students returning to school have found expanded plant-based options in their cafeteria offerings. But in California, an array of recent progressive school food initiatives has helped raise the bar on making lunch menus not just more climate-friendly, but healthier and more inclusive, by appealing to a greater range of dietary preferences and restrictions—as well as palettes. “Kids and lentils aren’t good bedfellows,” says Goddard. With tight budgets and complex USDA reimbursement requirements, appeasing the palettes of 39,000 students can be a challenge. But along with creativity, ingenuity, and state support, investments in kitchen facilities, equipment, and staff training, he says, “can make something like lentil piccadillo rather special.” Plant-Powered Progress As school districts across the country move to a plant-forward menu approach, many have widened their offerings far beyond cheese pizzas and nut butter sandwiches. In 2022, the New York School System introduced “Plant-Powered Fridays,” serving up hot, vegan meals such as zesty chickpea stew and a bean and plantain bowl to its 1.1 million students. Lee County schools in Florida—the 32nd largest school district in the country—have been dishing up bean burger gyros and breaded tofu nuggets weekly since 2015. At public schools in Minneapolis, “we make [plant-based dishes] a choice, every single day,” says Bertrand Weber, director of the district’s culinary and wellness services. While selections often include dairy products, they steer clear of meat analogs such as imitation chicken tenders and “bleeding vegan burgers,” he says. Instead, offerings focus on fiber-rich, whole and minimally-processed ingredients including legumes and pulses, pea protein crumble, and soy products such as tofu and tempeh—foods that are better aligned with the nutritional guidelines of leading public health organizations. “We want to normalize plant-based food and not stigmatize it.” Plant-based foods are not the most popular items on the menu, Weber concedes. He estimates the “take rate” is about 10 percent—though he has seen steady growth in demand since implementing the change two years ago. In nearby Richfield, the district reports that on some days, nearly half of its students reach for the vegan choice. “Our approach is, here are the [daily] options that you have,” he says, “and one of those is always non-meat.” Such broader selections caters to the shifting trend among Gen Z towards plant-based diets—which, despite an increase in overall U.S. meat consumption, has jumped sevenfold since 2017. “Everybody seems to have a different reason for eating plant-based foods,” says Kayla Breyer, founder of Deeply Rooted Farms. The plant-based protein manufacturer supplies a pea crumble to schools across the country that replaces ground beef “one for one,” without changing recipes. The product checks many boxes including environmental, health, and animal welfare concerns, says Breyer, while helping schools respond to dietary, religious, and cultural restrictions. Unlike imitation meat burgers decried by environmental advocates for their heavy carbon footprint, the shelf-stable crumble requires minimal processing and ships dry, thereby lightening transport costs and freeing up refrigerator space. The low-allergen ingredient is also certified kosher and halal, “so it has broad appeal” in an understated way, she adds. “We want to normalize plant-based food and not stigmatize it.” Revamping the Menu Back in California, a new report from Friends of the Earth (FOE) finds that in the state’s 25 largest school districts, lunches are increasingly leaning towards inclusivity. The study, which reviewed changes in menus from the past four years, found that more than two-thirds now serve non-meat, non-dairy entrees at least once a week—a 50 percent spike since 2019. Additionally, more than half of middle and high schools offer a plant-based option every day. “We were astonished to see the progress, despite 2020 being such a tough year for school nutrition services,” says Nora Stewart, FOE’s California climate friendly school food manager, who led the study, noting the unprecedented challenges in staffing and supply chains during the height of the pandemic. Stewart points to a confluence of major state initiatives that helped propel the effort, starting with the Universal Free Meals Program. Along with nine other states, California has extended federal pandemic-era benefits to offer free breakfast and lunch to all students, regardless of income status. Along with ensuring equitable meal access, the state has also made significant investments in school food policy reform aimed at improving the quality and sustainability of cafeteria menus. California’s $60 million Farm to School Incubator Grant Program, a first in the country, supports districts in sourcing organic and locally grown foods. Additionally, the Kitchen Infrastructure and Training (KIT) fund allocates $600 million to upgrade school cooking facilities and train staff to expand on-site meal preparation. And a one-time $100 million fund helps districts implement these and other nutrition- and climate impact-minded measures. The state support is invaluable to menu transition, Stewart says. While beans and legumes are cheap, procuring and transforming plant-based ingredients into appealing meals—ones that can compete with popular options—can be a challenge, she adds. And the USDA Foods program, which provides schools with subsidized meat, dairy, and other select commodities, covers a limited range of plant-based proteins such as beans and nut butters, “so the [state] funding helps to really offset some of those costs.” Moises Plascencia, farm to school program coordinator in Santa Ana, says that the new programs help elevate plant-forward menus to a whole new level. The support for local sourcing allows procurement from farms within a 70-mile radius, giving the district access to a greater choice of fresh produce. With a near-90 percent Latino population, ingredients such as tomatillos, Mexican squash, and herbs resonate with students, he notes, and lets kitchen staff “provide culturally relevant foods.” And that ups the appeal of any school lunch, he adds, “because then, you’re providing folks with things they want.” “We’re increasingly drawing the connection between food as a driver of climate change … even just a small shift [towards a plant-based diet] could have a profound impact.” Nevertheless, the tight $5 per-meal federal reimbursement rate often hamstrings budgets. “Nutrition service directors are hugely incentivized to use their pot of money on the USDA foods program,” says FOE’s Stewart, which ultimately skews the menu towards a heavy reliance on federally subsidized animal products. Further south in Temecula Valley, limited budgets aren’t the only deterrent to embracing a full plant-based menu, says Amanda Shears, Temecula Valley Unified School District’s (TVUSD) assistant nutrition services director, in an email. Overall demand in the 27,000-student district—where nearly a quarter qualify for free and reduced lunches—is “minimal,” she adds, so “my goal is to design menus for everyone . . . using the resources and funds available.” All district schools offer daily vegetarian options, but most contain cheese and dairy, says Ava Cuevas, a junior at TVUSD’s Chaparral High School. And the two vegan options—the bean burger and salad bar—are served in limited quantities, so they’re “sold out in minutes,” she adds. As an animal welfare activist, Cuevas sees plant-based diets addressing a range of concerns, including climate impact and access to healthy food. She has also experienced food insecurity in the past, so the value of school lunches is not lost on her, she says. “Knowing that I can’t rely on [it] is definitely a distraction.” She’s stepping up her advocacy this fall—though until things change, she adds, “it’s [going to be] a lot of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.” Meanwhile, Shears maintains that “making more plant-based meals available is important to me,” noting that the district is trying to ramp up scratch cooking and local sourcing of fruit and greens. Yet her department faces pressing priorities: Since the pandemic, school kitchens have been “severely understaffed,” she says, and equipment and facilities need an upgrade to better accommodate onsite food storage and preparation. The state funds, she adds, will be definitely helpful in the endeavor. Statewide, the FOE report found that beef, cheese, and poultry together accounted for more than two-thirds of school purchases through the USDA program. Plant-based protein, on the other hand, made up just 2.5 percent of the pie, despite representing 8 percent of menu offerings. The USDA is currently considering a proposal for expanding credit options to include whole nuts, seeds, and legumes, according to an agency spokesperson contacted by Civil Eats. Not surprisingly, cheeseburgers and ground beef entrees are among the most popular lunch selections in California schools. Yet, because of cattle’s large methane footprint, those choices result in 22 times more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere than tofu noodle bowls or a plant-based wrap, Stewart notes, and account for nearly half the climate footprint of all protein served at lunch. And while pizza and other cheese-heavy dishes have only a quarter of the impact, the relative inefficiency of cheese production—it takes almost 10 pounds of milk to make a pound of cheese—still equate to sizable emissions, along with high water and land use requirements. “We’re increasingly drawing the connection between food as a driver of climate change,” Stewart adds. With an enrollment of nearly 6 million students in California public schools, “even just a small shift [towards a plant-based diet] could have a profound impact” in reversing the course. Yet revamping menus to steer schools in a plant-forward direction—and for that matter, a more nutrition-minded one—requires equipping them with adequate resources, says Brandy Dreibelbis, executive director of culinary at the Chef Ann Foundation, a nonprofit that promotes whole ingredient, scratch cooking and better nutrition in schools. Investing in kitchen facilities and culinary training for staff is key to tailoring healthier meals, Dreibelbis says, and transitioning lunches away from processed heat-and-serve foods. “Cooking from scratch gives [schools] much more flexibility in their menus,” particularly whole ingredient, plant-forward ones. And other upgrades such as larger refrigerators can boost the procurement of fresh, locally grown ingredients, helping to truncate the supply chain and create more transparent connections to the food source. As part of a national organization, Dreibelbis has seen progress in all 50 states, but California is way ahead of the game, she says, especially with the recent flood of initiatives. “There’s so much more momentum and progress [in the state] around school food in general.” And ultimately, schools have an influential role in shaping the eating habits of their students—and steering the course of consumption towards more climate-conscious choices. “It’s a big opportunity to make sweeping changes to our food system right now,” says SAUSD’s Goddard. “If the federal government [runs] one of the largest feeding operations on the planet, why shouldn’t that be a venue for change?” The post California Leads the Way in Low-Carbon School Meals appeared first on Civil Eats.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.