Protecting Our Produce Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Bishop, Sanford D. [D-GA-2]
- Committees
- Agriculture Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Apr 3, 2026
Bottom line
This bill creates a new federal pilot program to financially support U.S. producers of certain seasonal and perishable crops against price drops caused by foreign imports, aiming to enhance their competitiveness and economic stability.
What it actually does
This bill establishes a five-year pilot program, starting in marketing year 2025, to provide annual crop loss payments to U.S. producers of specific seasonal and perishable crops (asparagus, bell pepper, blueberry, cucumber, and squash). Payments are triggered when the national average market price for an eligible crop falls below a calculated historical reference price, and this price decline is determined to be caused by imports. Eligibility is restricted to producers with an average adjusted gross income below $5,000,000 and who derive at least 75% of their income from farming.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue this pilot program is crucial for protecting domestic specialty crop producers who face unfair competition from low-priced imports, ensuring the viability of American agriculture, and stabilizing the supply of fresh produce for consumers. They contend it provides a necessary safety net for a vulnerable sector that is often overlooked by broader agricultural support programs.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that such a program could distort market signals, potentially encouraging overproduction or leading to trade disputes by effectively subsidizing domestic producers against imports. They may also raise concerns about the administrative burden of accurately attributing price declines solely to imports, the potential for fraud, and whether the defined crops and eligibility criteria are equitable or sufficiently targeted.
The bill is concise and can be read quickly, allowing for a thorough understanding of its provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2, adding new Title V, Section 501(b) to the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004.
Seasonal and Perishable Crop Loss Pilot Program Establishment
This provision mandates the Secretary of Agriculture to create a 5-year pilot program, beginning with marketing year 2025, to provide financial payments to producers of specific seasonal and perishable crops. Payments are triggered if the crop's national average market price (effective price) falls below a calculated 5-year historical average (reference price) and this price drop is determined by the Secretary to be caused by imports of that crop.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this directly addresses a critical vulnerability for specialty crop farmers, providing a necessary mechanism to offset the negative impacts of import surges and price suppression, thereby ensuring their economic survival and maintaining domestic food production capacity.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that directly linking payments to import-caused price drops could be difficult to prove definitively and might invite retaliatory trade measures from other countries, potentially harming other U.S. agricultural exports.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the desire to protect domestic producers from foreign competition with potential international trade implications and the inherent challenge of accurately attributing market price declines solely to imports.
Section 2, adding new Title V, Section 501(a) and (c) to the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004.
Definitions and Eligibility Criteria for Crops and Producers
This section defines 'seasonal and perishable crop' to specifically include asparagus, bell pepper, blueberry, cucumber, and squash that are marketed raw and normally harvested within 4 weeks. It also outlines how 'effective price' (current market price) and 'reference price' (a 5-year average excluding the highest and lowest years) are calculated. Crucially, it limits eligibility for payments to producers with an average adjusted gross income below $5,000,000 for the three preceding tax years and who derive at least 75% of their adjusted gross income from farming, ranching, or forestry.
Section 2, adding new Title V, Section 501(d), (e), and (g) to the Specialty Crops Competitiveness Act of 2004.
Payment Calculation, Amount, and Program Funding
The payment rate for an eligible crop is determined by the difference between its reference price and its effective price. A producer's total payment amount is calculated by multiplying this payment rate by their average production over the most recent five marketing years (excluding the highest and lowest production years). The bill authorizes $200,000,000 for each fiscal year that the pilot program is active, starting after the date of enactment and concluding with the program's sunset date.
When calculating the 'reference price' (historical average market price) and a producer's 'average production' for payment determination, the highest and lowest years from the most recent 5-year period are explicitly excluded.
Section 2, adding new Title V, Section 501(a)(2) (Reference Price) and 501(d)(2) (Average Production).
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for defining calculation methodologies, aiming for precision and robustness by removing statistical outliers. It is not necessarily evasive but is a technical detail.
Case for: Supporters would argue this method creates a more stable and representative baseline for both prices and production, preventing unusually good or bad years from skewing the averages and leading to inaccurate payment triggers or amounts. This ensures a more consistent and fair application of the program.
Case against: Critics might argue that excluding these years could either understate or overstate the true historical context, depending on the specific market conditions, and might not fully capture the volatility producers actually face. This could lead to payments that don't fully reflect real-world challenges.
Estimated impact: This methodological detail directly influences whether payments are triggered and their magnitude, potentially shifting millions of dollars in payments over the program's life by altering the baseline for price comparisons and production averages.