Referred to the Subcommittee on Commodity Markets, Digital Assets, and Rural Development.
This bill repeals Title IX of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8101 et seq.). Title IX contains the Department of Agriculture’s bioenergy and related energy subsidy programs, so repeal would eliminate those USDA energy subsidy authorities.
Left highlights climate and rural clean-energy losses; right highlights ending government subsidies.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, narrowly drafted substantive repeal that is clear about what statutory text is being removed but provides little accompanying legislative scaffolding (rationale, implementation guidance, fiscal implications, or safeguards).
This bill repeals Title IX of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8101 et seq.).
Title IX contains the Department of Agriculture’s bioenergy and related energy subsidy programs, so repeal would eliminate those USDA energy subsidy authorities.
Substantive repeal of long-standing agricultural/energy subsidies without compromise is unlikely to clear both chambers; opposition from affected stakeholders is a key barrier.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, narrowly drafted substantive repeal that is clear about what statutory text is being removed but provides little accompanying legislative scaffolding (rationale, implementation guidance, fiscal implications, or safeguards).
Left highlights climate and rural clean-energy losses; right highlights ending government subsidies.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left highlights climate and rural clean-energy losses; right highlights ending government subsidies.
Likely opposed.
Removing Title IX would eliminate federal support for bioenergy and rural clean-energy programs that advance emissions reductions and rural development.
Concern will focus on climate goals, renewable fuels, and potential job losses in rural areas.
Mixed reaction.
The bill advances fiscal restraint by eliminating subsidies, but raises concerns about rural economic impacts and environmental consequences.
Support would depend on offsets, a transition plan, and program-by-program impact analysis.
Generally supportive.
Repealing these USDA energy subsidy authorities fits a small-government, free-market approach and removes what many conservatives view as corporate welfare.
Some caution about short-term rural impacts is expected.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantive repeal of long-standing agricultural/energy subsidies without compromise is unlikely to clear both chambers; opposition from affected stakeholders is a key barrier.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left highlights climate and rural clean-energy losses; right highlights ending government subsidies.
Substantive repeal of long-standing agricultural/energy subsidies without compromise is unlikely to clear both chambers; opposition from af…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, narrowly drafted substantive repeal that is clear about what statutory text is being removed but provides little accompanying legislative scaffo…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.