"It’s not a fatal blow, it’s just a reorganize,” said Freedom Caucus leader Mark Meadows. "I think at this point we just really need to deal with immigration in an effective way.” | Alex Wong/Getty Images Farm bill goes down as Freedom Caucus votes against it The conservative lawmakers want a vote on immigration first.

The House Freedom Caucus on Friday sank a partisan farm bill over an immigration dispute with GOP leadership, delaying a bill that included President Donald Trump's push to impose stricter work requirements on food stamp recipients.

The bill went down, 198-213, after leaders feverishly tried to flip conservative votes on the floor, even leaving the vote open for a time to try to change opponents' minds. It is a huge setback to the farm lobby and House Speaker Paul Ryan's welfare reform agenda.


The vote came after a 48-hour standoff between GOP leadership and members of the Freedom Caucus. The bloc of conservatives held the bill hostage, demanding that the House first vote on controversial immigration legislation in exchange for their support for the sweeping agriculture and nutrition legislation.

"It’s not a fatal blow, it’s just a reorganize,” said Freedom Caucus leader Mark Meadows. "I think at this point we just really need to deal with immigration in an effective way.”

Ryan’s team and Freedom Caucus leaders met late into Thursday to try and reach a deal. Earlier that day, the Freedom Caucus rejected the promise of an immigration vote in June, fearing leaders would break that agreement as they have in the past.

GOP leaders said they would delay a motion to reconsider the bill until a later date. It is unclear if they intend to try to pass the partisan bill again — or move to a bipartisan document that could easily clear the Senate.

“We’re not done with this,” Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) told reporters. “We’re going to continue until we get it done.”

Sign up here for POLITICO Huddle A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Rejection of the legislation is reminiscent of the last farm bill cycle in 2013, when the House also voted down a conservative version of the legislation, delaying the process for months. Ultimately, the sweeping bill was bailed out by Democrats the following year.

While the farm bill is historically bipartisan legislation, Ryan has backed a Republican-only version this cycle as a way to notch a win on his welfare plan before he retires at the end of the year. House GOP leadership also pitched the bill as a positive messaging tool for the midterms.

"There could not be a better time to take action to help more people join our workforce," Ryan said at a press conference Thursday, where he lauded the bill as a critical part of the Republican agenda.

The insistence on overhauling the $70 billion a year Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, however, left GOP leadership at the mercy of the Freedom Caucus because Democrats refused to support the stricter work requirements.

Trump also endorsed the legislation on Twitter on Thursday, which was seen as way to pressure the Freedom Caucus to fall in line. He didn’t sway the holdouts.

On Friday, the White House said the president was “disappointed” with the votes and “hopes the House can resolve any remaining issues in order to achieve strong work requirements and support our nation’s agricultural community.“

Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.), who was visibly peeved coming off the House floor after the vote, accused the Freedom Caucus of working with Democrats to tank the bill.

"This is a big victory for [Minority Leader] Nancy Pelosi and her allies,” he told reporters.

Leadership and House Agriculture Chairman Mike Conaway were unable to pull together factions of a divided Republican conference to pass the sweeping legislation. The farm bill reauthorization typically lasts five years and sets aside money for farm subsidies, rural development, environmental conservation programs, though nearly 80 percent is spent on food stamps and other nutrition assistance.

GOP farm-state lawmakers are hoping that the farm bill can provide some relief for agricultural producers dealing with a multiyear drop in crop prices and an uncertain trade environment.

The House farm bill would impose stricter work requirements on between 5 million and 7 million participants in SNAP, still known to many as food stamps, and largely keeps farm policy — like commodity supports and crop insurance — status quo.

Stricter work requirements, however, are seen as having no chance at passage in the Senate.

Senate Agriculture Chairman Pat Roberts has repeatedly said the upper chamber will not be making big changes to SNAP, in part because they need 60 votes to get a farm bill through the Senate, which means the bill must be bipartisan. He and ranking member Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) could unveil their version of the farm bill as soon as this month.

A partisan farm bill is a departure from past tradition, when a coalition of moderate lawmakers from rural and urban America came together to support the agricultural economy and some 40 million people who now get help buying groceries.

Negotiations between Conaway and ranking member Collin Peterson broke down in March, largely due to Republicans’ plan to tighten eligibility for SNAP, require that able-bodied adults without dependents work at least 20 hours or week or enroll in a state education and training program, and pour billions into such programs.

Critics have questioned this approach because there’s no evidence that the training programs help lift people out of poverty.

Conaway is pursuing restrictions on SNAP recipients while at the same time including provisions that allow farms to collect billions more subsidies.

The juxtaposition has been excoriated by conservative think tanks, taxpayer watchdog groups and environmentalists that have long pushed for reining in payouts to farmers, even in times of downturns.

“Not only is it terrible optics for Republicans, it’s also morally indefensible,” Caroline Kitchens, federal affairs manager and a policy analyst with the R Street Institute, said.

Commodity subsidies — which total between $5 billion to $8 billion each year — are primarily sent to growers when commodity prices or average revenue drops.

The House proposal would make it easier for some farm operations to break through existing subsidy limits, including by making additional family members eligible for up to $125,000 in payments each year.

Conaway has defended these changes as recognizing that many are “cross-generational.”

Also under the bill, conservation programs would be cut by nearly $800 million over a decade, angering environmental groups.

The farm bill, which dates back to the 1930s, was last reauthorized in 2014 and is set to expire Sept. 30. Congress has the option of extending that legislation.

