The U.S. House of Representatives is set to vote on the most consequential piece of food-and-farming legislation in nearly a decade. Congress hasn’t passed a farm bill since 2018, and the new legislation touches nearly every corner of the food system, from farm subsidies and crop insurance to food assistance, conservation, research, and rural development.

The vote is coming at a moment when food prices are still painfully high, farms are going bankrupt at an alarming rate, and Americans across political divides are waking up to the toll that toxic agrochemicals are taking on the nation’s health.

The problem is: the Republican farm bill would make all of those challenges worse.

LAWMAKERS PROBE NATIONAL FFA OVER CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY TIES AND DEI PROGRAMS

A farmer picks up soil with his hands. (iStock)

At its best, a farm bill is supposed to do something straightforward and practical. It is supposed to help keep farms financially solvent, lower costs for consumers, strengthen rural communities, and improve access to healthy and sustainable food. It is one of the main ways the federal government decides what kinds of farming it rewards, what kinds of food it makes easier to buy, and what kinds of risks it is willing to tolerate in the name of production.

This year’s Republican bill is, alas, all about giveaways to the biggest industrial producers and chemical companies, as well as cuts to key anti-hunger programs and healthy food-and-farming investments in order to pay for unpopular priorities like the war in Iran. The bill enshrines the GOP’s major cuts to SNAP and other food assistance programs for hungry kids. It would reduce funding for federal conservation and healthy-soil programs. And it includes language that would reinforce legal immunity for chemical companies and undermine local standards, including around schools and parks. 

The legislation is especially reckless in the context of what’s happening right now. USDA says food prices in February were 3.1 percent higher than a year earlier. Farm bankruptcies rose 46 percent in 2025. USDA also forecasts that net farm income will fall again in 2026. This is the moment when Congress should be helping farmers get off the costly chemical treadmill and helping to make healthy food affordable.

This week’s vote coincides with oral arguments at the Supreme Court in Monsanto v. Durnell, where a major chemical company is seeking a ruling that could make it far harder for farmers and families to sue after documented evidence of cancer from chemical exposure.

Tractor with combine on farm field and chimney rock, Scotts Bluff National Monument; Scottsbluff, Nebraska, United States of America. (Photo by: Hawk Buckman/Design Pics Editorial/Universal Images Group via Getty Images) (Hawk Buckman/Design Pics Editorial/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

The Trump Justice Department filed an amicus brief siding with Monsanto against American farmers.  This isn’t a technical legal dispute. It’s the question of whether people who were harmed by toxic pesticides can still seek accountability. Trump is on the wrong side of that argument. 

This isn’t an isolated case. In February, the President signed an executive order expanding domestic supply of carcinogenic glyphosate-based herbicides. Around the same time, the EPA reapproved dicamba for over-the-top use on cotton and soybeans, despite years of controversy over its drift onto neighboring crops and wild plants. Meanwhile, the arm of USDA that farmers rely on for help adopting organic, lower-input, and soil-building practices, has lost nearly one in four staff. 

That is why this farm bill debate is such an important test of whether Republicans are serious about making America healthy again.  If they are, they should work across the aisle on a farm bill that makes healthy food more affordable for Americans.

What would that look like?

First, a responsible farm bill would take on corporate power rather than entrench it. No pesticide immunity shield. No special protections for companies that keep dangers off labels while families, farmers, and farmworkers bear the costs. A serious MAHA farm bill would keep the courts open to allow farmers compensation for proven harms caused by toxic chemicals. 

Tractor spraying pesticides on vegetable field (iStock)

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Second, it would help farmers get off the costly chemical treadmill. That means fully funding conservation, technical assistance, and organic transition programs to adopt lower-cost, lower-input methods. It means supporting cover crops, crop rotations, buffer strips, and other practices that improve soil health while reducing long-term expenses. It means strengthening local and regional markets so farmers can keep more of the food dollar instead of sending it up the chain to a handful of big companies.

Third, it would make healthy food more affordable for American families. That means restoring support for healthier school meals, expanding access to fresh, local, and lower-toxin foods in public institutions, and aligning federal purchasing with the goal of making healthier food easier to buy. It also means looking seriously at concrete measures like restricting pre-harvest glyphosate desiccation and expanding pesticide-free food procurement.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

If Republicans truly want to claim the mantle of MAHA, this is the moment to prove it. 

Justin Talbot Zorn is a senior adviser at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington.