Policy Brief- September 15

Summary:

Senate Agriculture Committee to vote again on the Farm Bill– Senate Ag Chair John Boozman (R-AR) announced the committee will reconvene this week to vote again after a 11-11 deadlocked vote failed to push the legislation out of Committee in August due to absence of committee member Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY). While Sen. McConnell is expected to vote this week, the legislation does not have a clear path forward in the Senate.

USDA Extends Comment Period for the Roadless Rule Rescission – The new deadline for comments is Oct. 6. The Roadless Rule prohibits most road construction and timber harvesting in almost 60 million acres of National Forest System Land. USDA is proposing to rescind the Roadless Rule, with potential significant impacts on Tribal Nations. Check out IFAI’s analysis of the impacts of rescission on Tribes HERE!

Research Grant Reorg– The USDA is proposing to shift agricultural research funding away from formula-based grants (such as Hatch Act and Smith-Lever funding for land-grant universities) and toward competitive grants that the agency has more direct control over. Universities and research groups oppose the change, arguing that formula grants provide stable, long-term funding that underpins agricultural research and extension programs. They also worry that proposed federal grant review changes would give political appointees greater influence over funding decisions based on presidential priorities rather than scientific merit. Congress has so far resisted many of these proposed cuts.

The House and Senate are in session this week.

Upcoming Committee Activity

House Natural Resources – Sept. 15 at 10:15 a.m. ET, on pending legislation including H.R. 7954 (Rep. Hurd), “Don Young Doug LaMalfa Indian Buffalo Management Act”.

Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee – Sept. 16 at 3:30 p.m. ET on the Senate Farm Bill, the Agriculture Act of 2026

Summary: The Rural Business Cooperative Service is accepting applications for the Agriculture Innovation Center Demonstration Program. This program helps agricultural producers develop, market, and sell value-added agricultural products by supporting centers that provide technical assistance and business services. Approximately $2.5 million is available for grants. The program anticipates making approximately three awards ranging from $600,000 to $1 million. Matching Funds are required for at least one-third of the project cost.

Indian Country Impact: The program may support Tribal efforts related to food sovereignty, value-added agriculture, local food systems, processing, marketing, and agricultural entrepreneurship by providing technical assistance and infrastructure rather than direct producer payments.

Plain language summary: This Executive Order is intended to help livestock producers, ranchers, and smaller meat processors compete with large meatpacking companies and access more markets. USDA is directed to strengthen competition in livestock markets, support small and regional meat processors, expand access to interstate meat markets, and increase enforcement against unfair practices by large market participants.

Indian country Impact: The EO could help Tribal ranchers and tribally owned meat-processing businesses by increasing processing capacity, expanding financing opportunities, and improving access to broader markets. The biggest uncertainty is that the Order does not specifically address Tribal governments or Tribal inspection systems.

Plain language summary:    This Executive Order states that ranchers are essential to the nation’s food supply and argues that additional federal action is needed to improve the financial viability of the U.S. ranching industry.

Indian Country Impact: Native cattle producers could benefit from efforts to improve market access and increase demand for U.S.-raised beef through country-of-origin labeling. Tribal ranching operations may also benefit if federal regulatory reviews lower costs or reduce barriers to livestock production.  Wolf delisting and predator-control provisions could affect Tribes in different ways, depending on their cultural, treaty, wildlife-management, and natural-resource interests. As agencies carry out these provisions, questions may arise about Tribal participation and consultation in wildlife and agricultural policy decisions.