Federal Updates

The Senate Farm Bill 2.0  

On June 23, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman released the text of the Senate’s farm bill, the Agricultural Act of 2026, branded “Farm Bill 2.0.” The roughly 900-page discussion draft largely mirrors the House-passed Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 (H.R. 7567), which cleared the House 224–200 in April.  

For Harvesters, the headline is that it does not reverse the roughly $187 billion in SNAP cuts enacted under H.R. 1 last year, and it declines to delay or soften the cost shift moving billions in SNAP costs onto the states.  

With the current farm bill extended only through September 30 and any Senate package needing 60 votes to advance, the mark-up period between July 4 and the August Congressional recess is the last window to advocate for changes to the bill.  

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) stays essentially flat, even as the cuts to SNAP are likely to push more families toward food pantries.  

Beyond the obvious harm to food access in Farm Bill 2.0, there is also a farm-economy cost; taking $187M out of SNAP over ten years means tens of millions of fewer dollars that will flow back to the wheat, sorghum, corn, soybean, cattle and hog producers in Kansas and Missouri.  

At the same time, the bill has major incentives for specialty crops instead of the program-crops and livestock that define our region, and funding for working-lands conservation tools like the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program (ACEP) and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) are cut to fund the specialty crop incentives.  

Our ask of the Senate is straightforward: protect and restore SNAP and halt the cost shift before FY2028 obligations lock in; increase TEFAP commodity funding so the charitable system can meet rising need; and keep the producer and conservation programs Kansas and Missouri agriculture depends on strong.  

Click the button to send an email to your legislators with just one click courtesy of the Food Research and Action Center:

A Federal Court Halts SNAP Food Restrictions in Five States 

On June 22, a federal judge blocked a set of state waivers that barred SNAP participants from using their benefits to buy items like soda and candy. The ruling says the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) lacked authority to approve the waivers because Congress defined what counts as “food” under SNAP, and the agency cannot rewrite that definition or carve foods out of the program through a waiver process meant for limited state pilots. The court also found the USDA skipped the public notice-and-comment process required before changes of this scale.  

The ruling directly struck down the waivers in the five states that were party to the lawsuit — Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia. But its reasoning is relevant to roughly two dozen states, including Kansas and Missouri, who hold similar USDA-approved waivers built on the same legal foundation the court just rejected.  

Missouri’s waiver, approved last December, was set to take effect October 1, 2026, barring SNAP purchases of candy, prepared desserts, soft drinks, certain fruit and energy drinks, and beverage mixes for every SNAP household statewide.  

Kansas’s waiver, which targets candy and soft drinks, carried a USDA-recommended start date of February 15, 2027. With the legal basis for these waivers now seemingly in question, the path forward for both states is uncertain, whether through appeal, new federal rulemaking, or a pause in implementation. 

As the waivers stand now, there stands to be significant confusion for both SNAP recipients as well as retailers as to what foods will qualify for benefits.  

We continue to believe that nutrition education, and incentives that make fruits, vegetables, and other healthy foods more affordable and available will do far more to improve health than telling families in need what they can and cannot purchase. 

Meanwhile, the administration says it will keep pursuing the restrictions as part of its “Make America Healthy Again” initiative and may appeal the ruling.