Democratic farm-state wins put agriculture policy in play

By Nathan Brooks

A Democrat won the U.S. Senate seat in Texas for the first time since 1988; Democrats also won Senate races in Iowa and Kansas, two traditional Republican strongholds, as Republican margins in rural counties fell significantly nationwide.

The result did not mean farm country had turned Democratic. It did, however, put control of the House and Senate agendas in Democratic hands for the next two years. The new majority inherits a farm bill that has not passed, a push for additional farmer assistance and leadership changes on both agriculture committees.

What drove the rural vote?

Multiple exit polls linked the rural outcome to high costs and opposition to Trump administration policies, including high tariffs and the Iran war. The poll findings provide no sample sizes, field dates or margins of error, so they do not show how many votes changed because of any one issue.

No commodity prices, input costs, basis data or farm-income figures accompany the election result, so the available evidence cannot size the margin squeeze Maxwell described or isolate tariff effects on farm margins.

Joe Maxwell, a Missouri hog farmer and former lieutenant governor who presides over the nonpartisan Farm Action Fund, said the results do not mean farmers shifted left. He said farmers instead pushed back against a system in which they get paid less while still being forced to pay more. Maxwell also said farmers played a larger role in the outcome than the numbers might suggest.

Maxwell said: “Control of the Senate ran through farm country tonight — Iowa first. Those seats weren't supposed to be competitive, and the reason they were is the farm economy.” He connected that squeeze to prices at the checkout and gas pump and to cattle sales, arguing the pressure reached the ballot box.

Bob Stallman, a Texas farmer, had been semiretired, tending business ventures, working his property and keeping up with 12 grandchildren. The Texas Farm Bureau's endorsement of Texas Attorney General and Republican Senate candidate Ken Paxton over Democrat James Talarico compelled him to return to the public square, where he wrote an editorial condemning the choice.

Stallman presided over the American Farm Bureau Federation for 16 years and led the Texas Farm Bureau for six. He estimates he voted for a Republican candidate 80% to 90% of the time throughout his life. Even so, he said, his jaw dropped when he learned of the Paxton endorsement.

Stallman said of Paxton: “He does not have the moral fitness to serve as the United States senator. Everybody in this state knows that.”

Stallman said farmers and ranchers simply need Congress to do its job: members of both parties should work out their differences and pass budgets and the farm bill on time.

Who will lead the agriculture committees?

In January, Democrats will hold majorities on both House and Senate agriculture committees, and new leaders will take over. The succession includes several contests and one waiver request:

• Senate: Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., the top committee Democrat, is leaving the chamber after winning Minnesota's governor race. Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., is the presumptive favorite to succeed her, though others could enter the race.
• House: Angie Craig, D-Minn., the top committee Democrat, is leaving Congress at year's end after losing the Democratic primary for Klobuchar's Senate seat earlier this year. Reps. Shontel Brown, D-Ohio, and Jim Costa, D-Calif., are expected to vie for the seat.
• House Republican: Rep. Glenn “GT” Thompson, R-Pa., indicated before the election that he wants to continue as the top Republican. Republican congressional leaders need to grant him a waiver because GOP House caucus rules prevent more than three consecutive terms as a committee chair or ranking member.

Can Congress finish the farm bill?

The current lame-duck Congress has less than two months to deliver a farm bill and other agricultural priorities, including additional farmer assistance. Committee leaders have said they want to pass a bill this year, but the prospects remain bleak.

Democrats will set the agenda in both chambers for the next two years, yet they lack enough votes to overcome a presidential veto without some Republican support. Whether that produces more bipartisan cooperation or continued gridlock remains unsettled.

What does this change for farmers?

For farmers, the change is who controls the congressional agenda, not an assured improvement in farm margins. The payment-versus-cost squeeze Maxwell described remains, while presidential vetoes require Republican votes to overcome. Democrats can set priorities for two years; farmers still need timely budgets, a farm bill and additional assistance.

January's committee choices will set the new leadership, while the lame-duck farm-bill effort will test whether farm-country dissatisfaction produces bipartisan action or more gridlock. The next test comes with the lame-duck deadline; not long ago, the prospect of Kansas or Texas electing Democratic senators seemed just as impossible.