Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Get started.

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: Alright. We're all set. Welcome.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. For the record, my name is Katie Van Haste, state director for senator Sanders. Thank you all for having us here today. It's always nice to see you. Sorry, I couldn't be here in person today, but I just also wanna start by really commending this committee. You are always very good at communicating with the delegation and it helps us and it helps us help you hopefully. So I look forward to a conversation. I'm gonna keep my comments pretty brief to leave plenty of time for questions. Obviously, also, we are fortunate to have senator Welch sit on the agriculture committee. So I wanna give most of my time, to Miles to, speak from that perspective because he's gonna have the most level of detail. I would say big picture, think everyone is tracking that while we are facing a new government shutdown potential for Friday night, that will it is a partial government shutdown, because certain agencies within the federal government have already been funded, including the U. S. Department of Agriculture. So the last, during the last shutdown and then the bill that passed that opened the government up, was a combination of a full year omnibus appropriations bill for the Department of Agriculture and then a partial, continuing resolution for most of the agencies, the federal government, legislative branch and military and VA construction were also, fully appropriated. So just to level set with that, we do have a funded USDA, which is hopefully helpful to, this committee, Vermont farmers and all of those in need of the nutrition assistance programs, that are provided through USDA. So for anyone who is concerned or thinking about this, we do know that, the supplement nutrition led or funding through SNAP is, full year funded. There will be no break in SNAP benefits for constituents at this time as we hit Friday's deadline if we do move into a shutdown. Know, a few things since we've talked last, we've been talking about tariffs, I think, every time this committee has met. We continue to be, I think, in a bit of a uncertain time with tariffs. Things continue to fluctuate in how the federal administration is dealing with those, but we continue to hear from Vermonters, Vermont businesses, about their concerns and about what they're experiencing. We also have certainly heard about the impact on Canadian businesses that we often partner with and provide goods and services to Vermonters. Also just mention a couple of things that are on Senator Sanders' mind and that we are working with the State of Vermont on. One is we are continuing to track that USDA has still failed to send out the $20.25 cost share reimbursement for organic farmers in Vermont. We know that for organic farmers, this funding stream is, a really important part of meeting their bottom line. And when the federal government takes a long time to get that money out the door, it has real impacts for our organic farmers in Vermont, particularly as we, you know, it doesn't feel like it today, but begin to think about a planting season, and the impact that that has. So we are aware of that, we're tracking that, and we're continuing to try to push USDA to get that money out the door. Similarly, we are tracking the $220,000,000 of small state block grant from the 2024 budget deal that was intended for states for flood recovery. That was met the threshold for that funding to get out to states to help with flood recovery for their farmers and agriculture community. That money has not come to Vermont or any other state. So we are working with other New England states to try to get that money shaken loose and out the door. And we're working with, the state of Vermont as well to push in that effect. But those are a couple of the things that I thought this committee might be particularly interested in. So I'm gonna pause there, turn it back to you, and then I'm happy to

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: take your questions. Before we have you come up, you're welcome to take a seat. Before we switch over, just want to see if there's any questions for Katie, representative Burtt. Thank you, Larry.

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Katie. I'm just wondering why has that money not gone out yet? What's what's the process there? Why why is it taking this long?

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: That's an excellent question. So the language that was in the legislation that passed was explicitly clear. There is nothing that should need to be done except that USDA needs to get the money out the door and they simply haven't done that. So it's not as though we need to submit something that we haven't submitted, or there's some sort of factual reason why that funding isn't out. It simply isn't out the door. So I unfortunately, I can't give you a good answer, but that's the honest answer I've got.

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Understood. Is that and so what's the process look like to try to shake money out of this? And if farmers

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: that are,

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: we have quite a few folks in the working lands that have endured quite a bit. Obviously I'm not necessarily on anyone in particular shoulders. I'm just curious, what does it look like to try and shake that out? That's all. To be able

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: to Yeah, tell my

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: I mean, I think the, it really depends on a partnership in many ways between the congressional delegation, the state of Vermont and, the federal agency. And if we don't have, sort of a willing functional partner at the federal agency, it becomes difficult. And so we are asking, we are making it clear that this is what's expected. We are asking if they need anything from us that hasn't been provided. You know, we have I wanna make sure that I'm also clear that regardless of sort of the political landscape, we have very good relationships with staff at all of the federal agencies and we continue to work with them in a very functional way to the maximum extent possible. But there is a point at which if they don't write the check, they don't write the check. And so it's, frankly, it's a lot of, conversations, questions, offering help, asking what the holdup is, but it needs to be a two way conversation for us to make progress.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: I think that the you mentioned two things, Katie, that were being held up and this 31 I don't know if you just said it was 31, or if I just remember that you've mentioned it was $2.20 in total, then I think we heard 31 was Our share. Likely to come to Vermont. But then you also mentioned organic farmers and the cost share. How long has when would when would that have been expected? And I I wanna compare that to it was a year ago that we've the secretary came in, sat down on make our first day and said, we are gonna be getting a significant amount of money to help our farmers. And now a year later, we and I've been telling my constituents this too, those who might be eligible. How long has this other program been sort of in also delayed?

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: So the organics money is much less delayed. It's more delayed than normal, but that's an annual cost share reimbursement. And so we're still waiting for the 2025 funds. I honestly don't have the date at which that's normally in the hands of our farmers, but I do know this is something that NOFA Vermont has identified as worse this year than normal. It's not as bad, I guess, as the small state block grant.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Go ahead, Nelson. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: Tiffany, this is a question to all of you.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: I find it I find it real helpful when I want something to go through Vermont legislature that I have constituents sending emails to the parties that help make the decisions. Perhaps if you got us some email address of secretary Rollins and others, we I can hey, it's no secret. The farmers in this state are struggling with real bad right now. Milk's at 19 ninety's pricing with $20.25 expenses. We are bleeding equity every day, and any dollar will help, and that goes, and I'm a conventional farmer, but that's the same for our, my organic brothers out there as well. We had a drought this summer, and they're having to ship hay in from Colorado, and I would love to see some influence placed upon the national organic standards, but maybe relax the rules a little bit, so they could buy a portion of their feed from conventional farms locally, that would help them bridge this time to pasture in the spring.

[Rep. John O'Brien]: That's my rant, and I'll stop there.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: And I thank you for all you do, and I know that you you you all care deeply about us, and it just if I had an email, could send out to the various dairy groups out there. I'm sure their messages would be forthcoming in the secretary of Orleans and maybe a reminder of where certain people got support when they were running for campaigns nationally. That's all I'll say.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Well, I can share in response to that that I I hear your frustration. I, agree with your frustration and certainly can say that Senator Sanders always prefers to raise up the voices of the people who are actually experiencing the hardship and making sure that those in Washington don't lose sight of the fact that their decisions hurt real human beings. And so, what we can do if you'd like is, if you want to collect some of those stories, we would be more than happy to then pass those along to the secretary's office for you. That is something we absolutely can do and would be more than happy to share those real world examples with them.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Do you think that would be more effective than just having individual farmers email the USDA, even at the secretary level? I

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: think we're at a point of all avenues are worth exploring. So I think worst we can do is double dip. So I think, whatever is best, for the farmer, to be honest, however we can help lift that load for them, but either either option and frankly, both options, think is absolutely appropriate.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Before we turn it over, representative Lipsky had a question too or comment.

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: Hey. Thank you for being here on Zoom. My question, I'm expanding from our role in ag and forestry and food resiliency to FEMA relief funds from '23 and '24. I was recently at a select board's meeting. They still the the local municipal general funds have been depleted, making repairs for public infrastructure, roads, culverts, bridges, you know, reinforcing ditches, you know, armoring them to the tune of millions that they've been waiting. So are FEMA reimbursements that are now going on two and a half years delay, are they coming from the USDA as well, or is that I know there's been a movement to cut staffing for FEMA, for instance. Where can I tell my constituents and my community when we might expect those FEMA funds? Thank you very much, Kate.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Yeah. No. I mean, that's an excellent question and a very real, situation. We're seeing this in towns across the state. I I think the one of the things that is specific and somewhat unique about FEMA is the way that it operates as a reimbursement model. And I think probably everyone in this room has heard from their constituents that a lot of times the town's contact at FEMA changes pretty frequently based on the amount of time they're allowed to be in that position. And oftentimes when a new FEMA point of contact comes in, it almost starts the clock over again with the paperwork they're asking for and the information they're asking for. And so because of this reimbursement model coupled with the continuous sort of wheel of staff changes, that is a lot of the delays on the FEMA front. We're happy to reach out to FEMA about the status of particular applications from particular towns, that might be more fruitful than sort of just doing a blanket ask to FEMA. So if you have specific reimbursements that you're tracking for your communities, we would be more than happy to, ask FEMA for specifics about that, ask them what the delay is, ask them what paperwork is missing and try to move the ball forward on that. But I I it's an extremely bureaucratic and frustrating process that is just, like, riddled with red tape and is, I think, again, there's some misunderstanding about how difficult this is for our towns and communities. And we've done everything we can to explain to FEMA that these are tiny municipalities that don't just have millions and millions of dollars laying around, that they can be without.

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: Thank you.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Might be a good place actually to switch over to Miles, and if you can answer that question, or if you want to hold off and give us an intro, what would you like to approach?

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah, so for the record, Miles McGurman was Senator Peter Welch's office. I'm an outreach representative. I cover housing, FEMA and first responders and now have started to pick up agriculture alongside labor. So bear with me, I am not as up to speed on ag as Ryan McLaren was after his years and years and years of that. But regarding FEMA, it's something that all three of our offices have been dealing with constantly over the last several years now. But kind of any one of these issues, depending on what it looks like, our offices have resources to help with. So for example, I do casework working individually with folks who have been flood impacted. You know, these are the people in the buyout program, which has been tremendously delayed. But we also work with municipal leadership. We in our office have been working closely with Plainfield, for example, on an issue they were having with both FEMA and the Federal Highway Administration. So these pots just get really, really deep and really complicated quite quickly. So reaching out to the delegation and connecting us with whoever it is you're hearing from, it doesn't matter if it's just a constituent with a problem. Were, Senator Welch was in the building last week, and we heard about an issue with a specific buyout case that immediately got passed to our casework team, and we're trying to see what we can do. But I think there is kind of a connection here between the FEMA pots of money that we see that have been frozen for quite a while, alongside kind of the agriculture disaster relief funds. Without being too political about it, it just seems like anything in the disaster sphere has been moving a lot slower than other federal funds. I also do housing work, and we don't see these types of problems with HUD in the same way that we do with FEMA or the USDA disaster funds. I would also just say that Secretary Tebbetts would be the best person to talk to about what that relationship looks like with the federal agency on these federal ag disaster dollars. Specifically, once that block grant is released, it'll be up to the state to distribute that out. And so, I think our office and all the delegation have been supportive of the state and all of their applications for those. But ultimately, they're gonna have the best kind of answers on the disaster recovery stuff. So bad on that question. But I also have some notes prepared, just kind of running through the questions that you all asked. So the first one was just about the shutdown. I think Katie covered that quite well. Sorry,

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: I'm gonna Milo, just to that I was the one who if wondering, committee is wondering, I don't remember asking that question. But I can just, I can

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: say, yeah, yeah. So there's kind of some broader talking point That's what

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: I thought people would want to hear about, but may have missed some things too.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: And I'm glad we have time for that as well. And again, I will just say new to the issue area. So if you've got specific questions, I'm happy to take it back to our policy team and get you answers, but I'm not gonna know everything that you guys know sitting in this room and hearing it constantly. So the first one was just the likelihood and potential impacts on Vermont agriculture of another government shutdown. So as Katie covered, the ag appropriation went through when the government reopened, so we won't see impacts to programs like SNAP. The other thing that I would just kind of highlight there is when the government reopened, that is also when they did a Farm Bill extension for one year, so that extension would end 09/30/2026. So that is just carrying along the 2018 Farm Bill. This is the second time it's been extended for a year. And so going into the Farm Bill, the next point here was just the status of the Farm Bill. Where does that stand? I'm sure Thomas can speak to what that looks like on the House side. On the Senate side, right now, there really isn't too much conversation about what's gonna be in the next Farm Bill. There hasn't been that much committee work on it yet, and it's something that Senator Welch is rearing and ready to go on, frankly. I mean, it's been several years now of just kicking the can down the road, and it's time that we kind of get something that actually delivers for Vermont farmers. But anyway, so that is extended to 09/30/2026. I think on the House side, they're starting to kind of do negotiations there. So hopefully Senate side will follow that same pattern and get the conversation going. The other part on here, there was a point asking kind of about on farm slaughter was one of the things that he brought up. And so, as I think Ryan probably has spoken about, Senator Welch last year introduced the Local Foods Act as a bipartisan bill that would allow for on farm slaughter in certain cases. That piece of legislation is introduced, but it's just kind of sitting at the committee level. Talking to our policy team about that, it's the type of thing that would probably get wrapped up into a larger Farm Bill down the road. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to get as much momentum around an individual bill for that topic, but it's definitely something on our radar and something that the Senator has been working on in the Agriculture Committee. The next one on here was asking a question about how much, if any, Vermont farmers are likely to receive of the 12,000,000,000 in federal bridge funds for agriculture. So this is Trump administration's $12,000,000,000 Most of that is focused on commodity crops, which really benefits Midwestern and Southern farmers. There is some eligibility for row crops that we have here in Vermont, like corn being kind of the big one that stood out to me. And I honestly can't speak to what the impact would be on Vermont farmers there. I'd be more than happy to take feedback, though. Ultimately, what I'd say and what Senator Welch has been saying is, this is a short one time thing. It's 12,000,000,000, that's a lot, but also the impact of tariffs and the trade wars and just the uncertainty around trade the whole reason that we have to do this at all. I mean, it is very clear that the decisions the White House is making around trade are impacting farmers in Vermont and across the whole country. And so 12,000,000,000 now is I'm sure very helpful for some farmers, but the impacts are going to keep growing and growing and growing the longer that things are uncertain. That's kind of the perspective that Senator Welch has brought is ultimately we need to figure out the tariff conversation. And as we start to hopefully not impose tariffs on our neighbors or biggest trade partners or allies, then maybe we'll open up space to begin trading again and lessen the impacts on farmers.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: A couple of questions, I think. Yeah.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: First of all, please thank the senator again for the whole milk. Hopefully that'll gain traction and we'll get some rid of some of our cream that's in going in storage in the form of butter through whole milk. Yeah. Thank you. I sent him a text message thanking him for that. Immigration reform. Any appetite in all in Washington to deal with that, or they all too busy throwing mud at it every day?

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah. I mean, I'm happy to open that up too, but I think right now, the number one topic of conversation on immigration is just ICE enforcement generally. And I think that that is where, if there is going to be any bipartisan agreement, is on kind of defining what ICE's role is. Senate Democrats, obviously, as hopefully you've seen, are advocating for a package of kind of reforms to ICE. With the government shutdown coming up, that government shutdown is due to DHS funding, which would well, ICE will be funded regardless, frankly, but ICE is in that DHS funding. This package is an opportunity for Democrats to make their point very clear on things like we need body cams and to actually follow warrants. So those are the kind of topics that I've seen brought up. I'll also kick it over to Katie, who I'm sure can speak for Senator Sanders.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Sure. I mean, obviously, you raised an issue that's on the minds of nearly everyone in this country right now. You know, Senator Sanders on the on through the ICE enforcement aspect of this issued a statement yesterday, but has continued to issue a number of statements and comments on the current issue in the, current environment and certainly has been under the long standing belief that we need comprehensive immigration reform. And one of the reasons that we're in this place right now, though obviously not the only one, is that Congress has failed to engage in real meaningful discussion around immigration for far too long. There have been fits and starts and attempts at this in the past, but we are not where we need to be in that discussion. And the last thing,

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: as senator Sanders, if he gets invited to the grand opening of the ballroom, if

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: I could be considered as his guest. Plus one?

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: No. Maybe. He and his significant other, and I would go down. This is a long running joke that he and I have.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: I'll pass that right along.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: Please do. Thank you.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: I'll get a kick out

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: of it. There, Nelson takes every opportunity to try and get himself an invite to the ballroom grand opening. Representative Berg, did you have a question?

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Come back to me. Got my Okay. You got me way off.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Representative, thoughts on that?

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: Yeah, I know Senator Welch was championing the issue of whole milk for a long time, which is like a niche issue and relevant to this committee, and that one got passed. So I'm wondering how he feels about ultra processed foods and looking at a national movement to try and move towards healthier food in school lunches in the way that California did.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: It's a great question that I am happy to take back and get an answer Okay, for

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: so the person on the agriculture committee, he could be a leader And on we've been talking about that a little bit. We've got potentially a bill coming on the statewide level about that issue here. But there's a lot of kids eating a lot of crud. And if they could eat whole foods instead of processed foods, it would be good for farmers and also good for our kids.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah. What is the California bill specifically focused on?

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: It has a few it's It's a long phase in to getting rid of the most processed foods by looking at, first, it defines chemicals that should not be in food. And so then it's like, I think it has about a three year phase in before any kind of changes are gonna happen in the food. And then after three years, you have to make an inventory of what are you currently purchasing that isn't gonna work. And then they have another three years to transition those out. And the hope, as I understand it, is that it's gonna pressure producers to be selling healthier products to the schools so that they can continue to sell food. But instead of having it with so many preservatives and chemicals, they can be doing something that's closer to a farm fresh product.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah, yeah. No, that totally makes sense to me.

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: So those are the two issues, like identifying what is an ultra processed food and then how do you get it out of food?

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Yeah.

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: And so it could also include elements. I mean, I've talked to people here in Vermont about including incentivizing scratch cooking in kitchens within within our schools. And a lot of a lot of the schools are doing that.

[Rep. John O'Brien]: Yeah,

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: but they need more staff if they're going do more of it.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah. And I mean, I can speak to at least, Senator Welch has been incredibly supportive of farm to school programs and all sorts of other initiatives to get organic vegetables. And so, I mean, all of that definitely makes sense to me and is a thing that he's champion in the past, but happy to pass that feedback along now that we've had a

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: win on. Michelle, I think you mean providers, not producers. I probably do. Yeah, the providers, the producers supply the whole foods, raw foods.

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: Right, I mean, you're making a black bean burger, are you a producer or a provider? Don't know, you're probably both.

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: I do remember my question.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Okay, go ahead and then we'll go ahead.

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Yeah, you mentioned the $12,000,000,000 in funding for farms. Is dairy by any chance included in that? No, Yeah. It's

[Rep. John O'Brien]: What about apple syrup, maple syrup? No, no.

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: Not commodities? No.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: So I guess the other part to keep in mind, so it's 12,000,000,000 total, 11,000,000,000 is for kind of the more generic commodity crops that you think of soybeans, seed oils, those types of things. And then 1,000,000,000 is for kind of an undefined pot that is still undefined, at least to my knowledge. So that potentially could open up a path for some products like apples potentially. But hasn't put out what that $1,000,000,000 is for. But the $11,000,000,000 definitely is going to kind of the things you would think of.

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Could Peter have been awarded for

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: all dairy farmers in Vermont on that one? Yeah, that is definitely a note I take back. Representative

[Rep. John O'Brien]: O'Brien? Yeah, any delegations want to jump in here. I just wondered how your offices track certain tariffs. We don't have enough staff here, really. You just wake up and you're like, what tariffs are right now? If the president gets a ban of what are next week? It must be just very hard for you to figure out until you hear maybe from constituents like, oh my God, they didn't realize this. And I'm just thinking, you also track this sort of economic detriment to Vermont if Richard mentioned, say, I'm getting organic hay from Colorado, but I could have got it from Quebec, but there's a tariff. Forest economy is being hit very hard by this. Even things like recreation, which we do somewhat in this committee too. So JPEG or even like food is like Bartholomew can't send any of its alcohol now to lot of provinces again because it's illegal. Yeah.

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Yeah. I mean, unfortunately,

[Rep. John O'Brien]: you've kind of hit the nail on

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: the head is that You're welcome. Yeah.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Was gonna say she's

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: come up. Introduce yourself. How are you?

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Tom Tom is running with congresswoman Becker Ballon's office. We had been asking of the administration when the tariffs are coming out. You know, they they were very adamant that tariffs were going to happen. So what our ask was, let us know what those tariffs are going to be so that we know who is going to be impacted. And it's kind of something that the administration still has not done. So, you know, they might say there's a terror a 10% tariff on Norway. It's not everything that comes from Norway. It's not spread evenly from everything from Norway. Some things are excluded. So it makes it really hard for us as well to track what is actually being tariffed. And, unfortunately, we are finding out mostly from constituents when they reach out. And then we can reach out to the impact agency or to the administration, and there have been sometimes where we've been able to get waivers or at least allow that shipment that was ready to be shipped out to actually go, and then they can't ship anything else. But we have had a difficult time tracking that. You know, I I don't know if the the senate has been able to come up with a a better way to do it. But my guess is, unfortunately, with with many things with this administration and it's even republican members as well. So it's not a democrat republican thing. They're just there's there's not a ton of information that anybody is getting. So it's not an answer I'd like to give you, but, unfortunately, that is the answer that we're dealing with right now. Yeah.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Charles, was there anything else you wanted to cover before we turn it over?

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: No, I mean, I think whole milk for healthy kids bill was definitely the largest victory that we've had in a while. And so glad we had to talk about it. That was the one other thing that I wanted to bring up. The impact, as we've already kind of talked about, it just opens up another market for Vermont dairies to be able to sell milk. Being able to bring those products into school, whole milk and then reduced fat as well. It kind of covers the gambit, but it's just Senator is very excited that that legislation is going into law.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: Who's the chair of Senate Ag? That's a I should know. Chad Brassley from Nebraska.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Brassley was in charge. I don't

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: if he's still. It is definitely an answer to a question I should know.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: And, you know, pretty sure that's a pretty big Framer and state.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: I can jump in here.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Apologies. Please.

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Please. The

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: current chair is John Bowman Boseman. Bose. Boseman. Boseman from Arkansas.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Yeah. Arkansas. Yeah.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: Yeah. So rice will be in that $11,000,000,000. Yeah.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Yeah.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: But, yeah, that's that's what I got. Alright. Good. Thank you.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Thomas, if you you can swing your chair around. I was gonna say, you

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: wanna go back over there, Miles? Or We'll we'll just Sure. Switch. Easier. Alright. So a lot a lot of items covered, so I'll just kind of add to to what my senate colleagues have said. In terms of that $220,000,000, we it was really interesting. It was something that came out of the house to start, which is rare in this current time. But Rep DeLauro, who is the Democratic vice chair of appropriations, that money was supposed to come pretty clean so that farmers could essentially take that 220,000,000 divided between the the impacted states and use it for whatever they needed, essentially, because, you know, the USDA money that did come during the the floods was pretty narrowed in what you could actually use it for. So the house, the senate appropriated that $220,000,000, and then USDA started tacking on all of these requirements. So that's been part of the delay is that rep Dolores office actually pulled it back so that we could stop them from adding on these these asks and requirements to that money. We want it to be Clean. Clean. Exactly. We want it to be what it was supposed to be for. It was you know, obviously, you had to provide receipts. Right? But that was the kind of, like, the basic ask that we had. So we're still working on that, and and the senate is working on that. I'm putting the pressure back on USDA to say, that's not what this was for. Give it to you know? Thank you. We're we're glad we've appropriated the money. We've given it to you to give it to us in a certain way. So we're hoping we can still get there. You know, I think we'll we're we're gonna see that money eventually. It's just how much control is USDA gonna have over that. I have in the past, when I've come to you all, I've I've told you how long it's been since the house ag committee met, and they have not met since September. So I was surprised to hear that the senate was not doing any work on the farm bill and that we had started it because we haven't even met yet. But we are starting next month. They are supposed to start an ag committee working on on the farm bill, which is is desperately needed as we all know. Then you you mentioned earlier dealing with 2025, 2026 prices. Same thing with the farm bill. Right? It came out. The last one has been out for a while and supports farmers for 2018, not for 2025. One of the key things that the congresswoman's gonna be focusing on is is SNAP in that bill. A lot of things, but, you know, SNAP was fully funded, not to the levels that I think we were all hoping that it would be funded to. So she's gonna be pushing really hard on that to not just bring it back up to the levels that it was at, but to increase those levels and try to tie in some works or it's actually benefiting our farmers more than it will kind of those ultra processed foods that you were mentioning earlier.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Ruth Hardy and O'Brien has a question.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Oh, yeah.

[Rep. John O'Brien]: I just wondered on the 220,000,000. You get the sense in the legislative branch that you appropriate money, and then it's policy to some extent, you know, the executive branch just, like, either try to, you know, make this difficult, claw it back.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Yeah. It's just You know, mean, the way

[Rep. John O'Brien]: I mean, it it's interesting.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: The way it worked before, right, is I mean, you all know you you appropriate money. Congress makes the money. They usually put some rules around how that money is supposed to be used. And sometimes the agencies have to figure out what does the application look like, things like that. Unfortunately, what we're seeing now, particularly on the House side, is the leadership in the House doesn't have any interest in continuing that oversight. They're giving the money to the agency and saying, Whatever the admin wants to do with it, that's up to them to do with it. We just gave them the money. We're trying to remind people that's not how that goes, where it's appropriate, it's the money and controls how it is used.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah, mean, to go a little further than that too, I mean, this is something that Senator Welch has been harping on quite a bit. Congress has given up their authority in a lot of ways by allowing the executive branch just to decide not to appropriate funds, and it's unconstitutional. It is very much the role of Congress.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Yeah. To that point, and one of my items is, I'm sure you've heard about OMB looking at 14 states. That's something we're monitoring, and I know that the senate offices are monitoring as well right now. Again, that was money that was supposed to come to us. The administration, we believe legally, doesn't have the ability to say money that is supposed to go to states can't go to states because whatever reason they're they're coming up with, I don't wanna get political. But, it's it's something that we're gonna keep tracking, because we know that's very important as you're doing all of your work and you're trying to account for budgets and even the limited amount that you're expecting to see, from the federal government. We want to make sure that what you're supposed to see, you are going to see. So we're trying to track that. And we'll give updates when necessary. Yeah.

[Rep. John O'Brien]: To follow-up on that too, that sort of doge cuts to NRCS, same type of thing. It just makes it that much more difficult for farmers.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Yeah, no, I mean, exactly. That's the thing. You know, I've been talking with USDA locally a lot about just the community project funding, congressionally directed spending. You know, USDA's staff has been slashed by a decent amount of folks. So, you know, they're gonna have the money and they know what to do with it, but it's gonna be difficult for them to get that money out because they've got less people to physically do it, less people to speak with, the people on the ground that they need to be talking with. So, you know, we're seeing all these repercussions in so many different areas, and it's something all of our bosses are trying to make sure, you know, even if you've got a limited staff, we feel for you, but you need to be doing that work as best you can. And I will say, and I know they can attest, the folks here in Vermont who are working at USDA, they are doing a lot of work and they're doing as much as they can. And they're working under the conditions that they're working under, but they're all dedicated to our state and and and try to trying to keep things rolling. So it's so that's that's good.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Representative Lipsky? Yes.

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: Thank you, Thomas. And my first comment is really gonna be a comment of thanks. Congresswoman Ballant has been to multiple meetings around the state that she's reached out Johnson and Stowe and senator Sanders up in Morrisville's big treat. And and Peter has been all over. Senator Sanders as well. As a state and as Vermonters, we are very grateful for their engagement all over the state.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: And

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: but representative O'Brien brought up the issue of tariffs. Mhmm. And when congresswoman Ballant was in Stowe and and in Johnson, she talked about the impact. We have so many small businesses, whether they're brewers or distillers or outdoor recreation manufacturers, products, or

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Yeah.

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: That have been hurt, you know, and those of us who get repair parts for our logging or or farming equipment or So much of the crops from Canada. Been catastrophic. So I know everyone tries to be polite and say, well, we don't wanna be political. But to self administer gunshot wound on soybeans alone, which you're saying is gonna take the lion's share of $10,000,000,000 Yeah. Because Argentina decided to fill the gap with China. This in this body and in this committee, when we make a mistake on policy, we may spend the next year trying to repair or amend for, I don't wanna say unanticipated, but impacts that we didn't anticipate. It really hurt world for monarchs or for monarchs. So you just need to know we're grateful, but this tariffs has been an economic disaster across all blanket segments, and and we don't see it going away. My you're completely correct.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: I'm just gonna say

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: that's not. That's a reality. And

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: I mean, I think that's at the end of the day, it's bad accounting. Right? Like, you know, we created this hole where we've hurt farmers. We've hurt a lot of people, but we've particularly hurt farmers. And now we're gonna use tax dollars to then try to make these farmers whole. And and as Miles was saying, are we gonna do that again next year and the year after that and the year after that? It's not it's not sustainable. And, you know, I I was tracking, but then I I lost track of it. And in the supreme court, there was they're supposed to be giving and if you two know if they've already given that reading, the tariffs, if they rule against the tariffs, that money will have to be paid back to small business owners. So, like I said, I was tracking it, but I don't cover business. So I'd have to check with my business liaison. I don't think they've they've ruled yet. But if they do rule in favor of the small business owners, they get that money back. Again, the there's there's hurt that already happened there.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: So Yeah. To jump in, the supreme court hasn't Okay. This much.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Representative Berger?

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: Yeah, I don't know if I asked this question now to see if we can get to last topic, but immigration as it relates, and ICE, as relates to agricultural workers. What kind of information can you give us about what's happening? Senator Sanders and Welch and Representative Ballard are hoping to see happen in the coming months, year, and what can we bring back to our communities to address them with. I know you're probably getting secondhand information too. I'd love as

[Rep. Jed Lipsky (Clerk)]: much first hand information as I can get so

[Rep. Greg Burtt]: I can have an informed way of communicating. I was in a legislative breakfast yesterday, and it's supposed to be, it's the Chamber of Commerce in St. Johnsbury, it's supposed to be elections addressed to commerce and economics, it was all about ICE and immigration, and I want to have answers too, so I can't, I don't know where to go, you know, and I would love to have as much as I can coming from our federal government as possible, and if you can help at all.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Yeah, I mean, think, you you said it's supposed to be about commerce, but that kind of is about commerce, right? You know, if those are the people who are working the farms, helping put the milk out, helping put the veggies out, and if they're living in fear or if they're taken, then all of a sudden you know, I've done enough farm tours in this job to know that farmers appreciate, care for, and depend on the labor of of folks who aren't from this country. That's I think you probably see that as as you talk with farmers and and and go about the the state. You know, the president said at one point that ICE wasn't detaining farm workers. We know that that's not necessarily true. We're we're hoping that he can put some more pressure on his department to to make that fully true. You know, these are people who are working hard and, in many cases, paying taxes and and being good members of society. You know, as far as the congresswoman is concerned, they didn't come here legally. They're they're members of our Vermont community, and they are trying to take the steps that are necessary to to be a full member of this community. She'd like them to stay here and to stay working. As Miles said, there's not really a lot of talk about immigration reform in in the senate, as he was mentioning in the house, kind of even less so. It's it's a it's a big difficult topic that I think every member almost knows that they need they need to be talking about it and should be working on it. But, again, not to be too political, the administration doesn't want that. So there are members who are gonna follow that conversation. There are you know, the the congresswoman I'll I'll say this. There are gonna be calls to impeach Christine Noem for the actions that they're doing, which also touches on FEMA. The congressman was just downstairs doing a press conference. The FEMA lack of response is also on Christine Ohm's hands. So there's a variety of reasons why the congressman woman will be joining her many house members and calling for her impeachment. We know that we need reform and and immigration. We know that there are businesses, Vermont businesses that are going to be and are already impacted by by what ICE is doing. So the congresswoman, I'm sure the senators are gonna keep talking about those impacts and how they are impacting every essentially every raunch at the end of the day. Right? If we can't get our food, we're we're all gonna

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: know about that. Katie, I see you've got a hand up too.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Thanks very much. I just wanted to dovetail off of what Thomas was just sharing to add that one theme you may be hearing from the three offices is that we are not getting the type of proactive communication from the federal administration the way we used to. I've worked for a member of Congress for twenty years, and I have never seen a lack of just basic communication between an administration and members of congress the way we're seeing it now. And I I say that not as an excuse, but as a request, which is that we aren't always hearing what you think we might be hearing. We first found out about the, farm worker raid that took place in Franklin County because of constituents calling us who had seen it. We know that ICE is in Maine right now. We expect they will likely be coming to Vermont soon. I hope that is not what happens. But we can only act when we hear from people about what's going on. So I just ask that for the members of this committee in particular, but anyone else who may be watching this testimony to please continue to communicate with us. Don't assume that we're getting a heads up as to what's going on. I can assure you we are not. And so we need help from everyone in Vermont to make sure that we know what's going on so we can help as best we can.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Great information. Representative Nelson.

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: Thank

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: you. The Dairy Innovation Board, the grants that we received, I'm assuming from USDA, It's the last year, I believe they're funded right now, and that is then a great influx of money throughout the whole Northeast run by, you know, right here in Montpelier by our our agency agriculture. And I just hope that miles in if if they ever decide to take up a farm bill again and put shirts in their duties Yeah. That they don't forget about Yep. Those those types of things because they you know, the farm bill, 15% goes into the dirt, you know, food. 85% goes to rural development and and feeding people. It all all all good things. All all good things. And I've had conversations with constituents in the broader sense, you know, my agricultural constituents throughout New England. And they say, why do we have to feed the people through the Farm Bill? It's only 15% of the money people say, the farm bill is so big and farmers get so much money. We we get 15%. And I said, it's a way of getting the the urban areas to vote for it with the rural areas. It's a bipartisan bill that comes together to take care of people. And and I and I know I'm speaking to the choir. But you're right.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: You're right.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Yeah. But I mean, the Farm Bill is one of the greatest accomplishments congress does when they do it.

[Rep. John O'Brien]: And they do it. It's a hypnotist.

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: Yeah. It reaches so many people.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: Exactly. Representative O'Brien.

[Rep. John O'Brien]: Yeah. Just to follow-up on representative Burtt's questioning about immigration and immigration. Representative Burtt uses H2A workers. Has there been a discussion, especially it could be bipartisan, would think, about can we tweak that program to help farm labor bottlenecks? Because it seems to work pretty well. And I don't know, maybe even because there's sort of fear of immigration now, maybe around the country anyway, I don't know about Vermont, but I can see places like Jamaica saying, like, I don't even wanna go to The

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: United States.

[Rep. John O'Brien]: I don't if you're hearing that too.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: On the house side, we we've had those conversations. We've moved items through. The congresswoman was just with her name just slips me, but the representative from Maine who's on the ag committee, Shelly Pingree. And, unfortunately, our our republican friends kill that conversation every time when we try to get it to a voting place. I don't know what it looks like in the senate.

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah. I mean, the senate, it's similar, which is senator Welch is having those conversations, and even, you know, there are Republicans that he speaks to that totally understand the scale of that problem, but at the end of the day, the majority is focused on following what the administration has set forth as policy. So until we start to see changes from the White House on their policy here and opening up the space for members to actually have that conversation, I think that if Senate Republicans were given a free hand, there would be more opportunity there. But it's definitely something that Senator Welch and I was pretty quiet at the first part of this conversation. But I think the two things that Senator Welch consistently talks about is he fully understands that we need reforms to the immigration system. And one of the great examples is we have these visa programs that work incredibly well and do things that are very important for The US economy and provide opportunity to people to come to this country. More of that is definitely something that we just need to see.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: We're running out of time here. We have all the time in the world, but not that sure that you do. And I don't know whether you had anything else to to go over, Thomas.

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: You know, I was just gonna say because we've talked about it a lot, the the upcoming appropriations. AG is safe, but I just thought you may want to know the the bills that aren't funded yet that could end up getting shut down if there is a government shutdown. So we're looking at, DOD, FSGG, which is financial services, DHS, LHHS, a lot of acronyms coming at you. SFOPS, which is all of our foreign financing, so embassies and things like that. And then T. H. D. Is transportation. So that's those are the bills that have not have not been passed. Yes. And and with all of those things, there's always you know, for example, if DOD isn't funded, it takes a while for soldiers not to get paid. If T Hut isn't funded, it takes a while before airports would have to really start to think about considerations. But I just did want you to know what what the the agencies are that

[Miles McGurman (Office of Sen. Peter Welch)]: Yeah. So I mean, there will be impacts to sorry to Yeah. No. To, like, TSA, right, you know, the folks who work at the airport. And I think one thing to keep in mind is with us having not too long ago just come out of the longest shutdown, people did cap their savings pretty heavily there. The impact on federal employees was really, really rough, and so another shutdown would probably have pain points a bit earlier just as a result of that.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: And that's everything I have so brief. One

[Rep. Richard Nelson (Ranking Member)]: quick one. Yellow bit in the room, the last shutdown was over healthcare. My healthcare went for $300 a month, which was probably too low. I'll admit that to $19.76 dollars a month, and I can't afford it. And I'm soon to be a member of the uninsured and hope I stay healthy. What's any movement at all? It's affected my whole, the agricultural community, we're employed.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: Katie, do you wanna take that?

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Sure. Happy to. Yeah. So as I

[Rep. John O'Brien]: think The senator's

[Thomas (Staff, Office of Rep. Becca Balint)]: on the health committee.

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: Senator senator is a former chairman and ranking member of the health committee, and I'm his former health policy director. So I'm happy to take this one. I won't keep you here till 02:30. Obviously it goes without saying Senator Sanders believes in a Medicare for all single payer system. So he would not say that $300 a month is too much or too low. He would say it's too much. But that being said,

[Rep. Michelle Bos-Lun]: he

[Katie Van Haste (State Director for Sen. Bernie Sanders)]: has spent and our staff has spent over two years negotiating the healthcare package that is currently part of this current continuing resolution appropriations bill. It's still not enough from his perspective. We need to be permanently extending the Affordable Care Act subsidies. We need to eliminate the Medicaid cuts that, are being used to fund ICE right now. And we also need to make major investments in our healthcare workforce, because I'm guessing even when you pay over $1,900 a month in your healthcare premiums, that does not then guarantee that you can see a doctor when you need one because we don't have enough doctors, nurses, hygienists, dentists, mental health professionals, you name it. So from Bernie's perspective, while Medicare for all is always the goal, one of the things that he's been working on over these past number of years, is a healthcare package that would expand access to primary care, through our community health centers. Right now we have 11 community health centers with 93 sites across Vermont. We want to expand those. We've been working to do that through increased, mandatory federal funding. So not at the discretion of the agencies, but mandated from the federal government, as well as funding for the National Health Service Corps, which provides scholarships and loan reimbursement for providers, who work in rural areas and also through the Teaching Health Center Program, which specifically I think a lot of folks know in an academic medical center like the University of Vermont, there are trainee doctors who provide a lot of the care that a lot of us get, in a hospital setting. But that same training occurs much less frequently at, smaller rural So this funding would help get trainee, doctors, residents into the primary care setting, into local small community hospitals, and make a big difference into improving access. So we're, So I'll be honest, this is not fun for Senator Sanders because this legislation is sort of right now coupled together, but we're very hopeful that there is a path forward, towards some changes. The text of the healthcare, there's some really good pieces of the healthcare, aspects of this bill right now that would go a long way in reducing healthcare costs and improving access. But it's tied up with a lot of really awful pieces of policy. But that's where we are right now and I can absolutely guarantee this committee with full certainty that Senator Sanders is continuing to do everything he can to lower costs for health care and improve access and also make sure that our health care workers and people who want to go into health care don't have to go into massive amounts of debt in order to do it and that we can find ways to incent that health care workforce to come work in rural areas and serve all of us.

[Rep. Larry Satcowitz (Chair)]: I wanna thank you. Thank you, Katie. And I I just wanna sneak into last points before we close here. I'd heard that there was some discussion about possibly restoring to the SNAP administration budget, the 25% that at the moment states are now gonna be taking on in addition to the 50% that there was some possibility of moving back to the former status quo. If that's the case, we understand that it's 6 plus million dollars in next year's budget and then 8 plus moving forward annually that the state's being asked to pick up. So it would be great if actually there is that conversation. And then just to say, I really appreciate the fact that we we found a lot to talk about here, not just ICE and immigration, but that's the thing that is on the minds, obviously, today of Vermonters and and all of us in this room, and not losing sight of the fact that we have a significant number of farm workers across the state who are the very people that ICE is after. And they support our economy, they support our tax base, they provide us with dairy products, and they do other things as well. Obviously, it's not all agricultural workers. I feel like we collectively haven't been comfortable talking about this out loud for obvious reasons. And that if we're being put now, forced into a situation where we need to be explicit about it, that these are the people that we're talking about, that we should be not afraid to have conversations. Thank you very much for your time this afternoon and for answering all those questions. If you have other questions, we'll make sure that we know how to get a hold of you and that we know how to put our constituents in touch too. Thank you. We Thank you. Can take a break.