The Heritage Foundation late Tuesday posted an issue brief comparing the House and Senate versions of the farm bill and calling for food stamps and the farm program to be separated and for cuts to both programs.

“To achieve any substantive reform, agriculture policy and food stamps must be separated into different bills now and in the future,” wrote Daren Bakst and Rachel Sheffield, two scholars associated with Heritage.

In their specific recommendations, Bakst and Sheffield said:

• The House proposal to update permanent law should be rejected
• Total crop insurance premium subsidies should be capped at $40,000
• Crop insurance should not be tied to conservation compliance
• Neither shallow loss nor reference price programs should be added to the farm bill
• The sugar and dairy programs should be repealed
• The unimplemented catfish inspection program at the Agriculture Department should be repealed
• The Food Safety Modernization Act should be delayed

The Obama administration’s stay on the proposed Christmas tree checkoff program should not be repealed because “checkoff programs are simply a means to strong arm parties to fund something they do not support.”

On food stamps, categorical eligibility should be ended, the “heat and eat” provision that allows people who receive heat and energy assistance should be ended, states should be required to impose work requirements and to test for drugs.

• The Heritage Foundation — A Comparison of the House and Senate Farm Bills