Congress is once again debating US food policy via the Farm Bill, which governs crop insurance, rural broadband, school lunch, and whether your bacon can legally exist. The US House of Representatives passed its version back in April. The US Senate Agriculture Committee released its discussion draft on June 23, and plans to mark it up early this month.
Scanning through both versions — from which one agreed-upon version will be the goal — a few things appear to be very much not settled.
The bacon problem. The House bill contains an actual, real, codified “federal right” for producers to raise and sell livestock products across state lines without states imposing their own production standards. This is the provision pork industry lobbyists have wanted since California voters passed Proposition 12 in 2018, requiring more space for breeding pigs sold in the state. Supporters call it protecting interstate commerce. Critics call it the “Save Our Bacon Act” and note it would nullify roughly 500 other state and local laws as collateral damage. The Senate’s version of this section? It doesn’t exist. It’s not that it’s “watered down,” it’s entirely absent.
Hemp: there, then gone. The House bill spends real legislative energy amending hemp production rules. The Senate bill mentions hemp exactly zero times. This means the psychoactive hemp-cannabinoid fight that’s been simmering in Senate offices simply isn’t happening inside this bill. It’s a fight without a venue, for now.
SNAP remains a sticking point. The two chambers aren’t really fighting each other on this issue as much as they’re both declining to fight the same fight. Neither bill touches the underlying cuts from last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill, which are projected to strip billions of dollars from the program between 2025 and 2034, including the state cost-sharing penalties and work-requirement expansions that are already in effect.
The House dresses its version up with a new “declaration of policy” preamble that cites obesity and (somewhat inexplicably) military readiness, plus a hot-rotisserie-chicken carve-out that passed the chamber 384–35. But none of that moved a dollar. The current Senate version skips the rhetoric entirely and simply leaves the 2025 cuts in place. Senate Democrats have demanded a reversal of the SNAP cost-shift onto states as a condition of their support, and neither bill gives them that. Since the Senate needs 60 votes, that omission is the major reason this bill’s path through the chamber remains uncertain.
| Provision | House | Senate | What’s different |
|---|---|---|---|
|
“Save Our Bacon”
Interstate livestock standards
|
✓ | ✕ | House creates a federal right overriding state production standards. Senate draft contains no equivalent provision. |
|
Hemp production
|
✓ | ✕ | House amends hemp production rules. Senate draft does not address hemp. |
|
SNAP policy rewrite
New “declaration of policy”
|
✓ | ✕ | House reframes SNAP’s stated purpose around chronic disease and military readiness. Senate draft omits the preamble. The Senate version does not restore nutrition funding cut by OBBB, nor does it delay a OBBB provision that shifts more SNAP costs to states. |
|
Rotisserie chicken
SNAP eligible foods
|
✓ | ✕ | House adds hot rotisserie chicken as an eligible SNAP purchase. Passed the House floor 384–35. |
The Senate Agriculture Committee marks up its draft in July. After that, assuming both chambers eventually pass something, a conference committee gets to referee Bacon, SNAP, and hemp.