WASHINGTON — After eight years without a new farm bill — and more than a decade when whole milk was prohibited in school meals — the 2026 farm bill that was passed April 30 by the U.S. House of Representatives brings much needed farm policy to rural communities while also fixing a glitch to ensure whole milk may be served across all school meals, uniformly, not just lunch.

While it’s not something we’ll read in mainline ag publications, the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026 extends the application of the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act that was signed into law in January to align the school breakfast program with school lunch, to codify the policy in statute for both programs.

That step resolves a newer point of confusion that emerged after whole milk was restored to school lunches earlier this year. Guidance from USDA Food Nutrition Services to states and schools stated that whole milk could be served at lunch, and explained the saturated fat exemption, but it stopped short of including breakfast.

Without a USDA memo to that effect, many schools that had looked forward to offering whole milk faced uncertainty about whether the authority applied to breakfast, despite longstanding interpretations that breakfast nutrition standards were intended to follow lunch.

The school breakfast program resides in the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, whereas the lunch program resides in the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act of 1946, the latter being the “senior” of the two meal programs. School foodservice directors and superintendents have reported the confused signals are a major deterrent when beverage service for the day is typically set up in the morning.

By explicitly writing the provision into law for both programs, the House-passed 2026 farm bill removes the issue by statute, eliminating the need for further agency interpretation.

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn ‘GT’ Thompson (R-Pa.) said the inclusion of this language was intentional. He understood the issue and made sure it got done by statutory means.

“This was not an amendment. We put it right in the base farm bill because this is a high priority,” Thompson said in a phone interview after the Farm, Food and Security Act passed the House late last week.

The broader legislation, which reauthorizes key USDA programs through 2031, reflects input gathered at more than 160 listening sessions in 43 states and one U.S. territory.

“This farm bill was not written in Washington. It was written in barnyards and pastures and machine sheds across America,” Thompson said. “We heard directly from farmers across the country, and this bill reflects this, and it’s what we delivered.”

What’s in the Bill

With updates to strengthen the farm safety net, the House-passed farm bill raises crop reference prices. (The Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) updates were already done last summer under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act).

It also expands credit access with higher loan limits. Enhancements are included for crop insurance programs, agricultural trade promotion funding, and conservation programs, minus the focus on methane under the previous Climate Smart funding, so that funds would be in programs farmers use like EQIP and state and local conservation districts can decide their conservation priorities. The package also invests in rural broadband and infrastructure.

On the nutrition side, which represents the majority of total farm bill spending, the House-passed package broadens nutrition program flexibility, creating additional opportunities for dairy products such as cheese and yogurt, in addition to fluid milk.

Several adopted amendments were passed to address broader structural issues in agriculture. One will require USDA to publicly post audit and financial information on federally mandated commodity checkoff programs.

Language in the bill also addresses interstate commerce issues when state-level production mandates, such as livestock housing requirements in California’s Proposition 12, are extended to farms shipping products that are consumed in the state, not just produced in the state, raising concerns about a patchwork of state-level mandates affecting interstate commerce.

The package includes provisions related to foreign farmland ownership, and provisions based on the PRIME Act to improve supply chain resilience with support for small and mid-sized processors of meat and other products.

The bill also includes language related to pesticide labeling and liability that has drawn significant attention. The provision clarifies that labels approved by the Environmental Protection Agency govern product warnings at the federal level. Supporters say this ensures consistency and prevents state-by-state requirements, while critics argue it could limit certain state-level legal challenges and liability claims. The issue is expected to be a point of debate as the bill moves to the Senate.

A proposal to allow year-round E15 was not included in the final House bill. Thompson said the issue falls outside the Agriculture Committee’s jurisdiction.

“That comes under Energy and Commerce,” Thompson explained, indicating separate legislative action is expected later this month.

Also excluded was the effort to repeal USDA’s electronic identification (EID) requirement for livestock traceability. An amendment to overturn the mandate failed on the House floor, leaving the current policy timeline in place.

Another dairy provision in the bill is the authorization for the biennial mandatory dairy processor cost survey, which was funded last summer in the OBBBA. This survey is tied to Federal Milk Marketing Order formulas and the ongoing debates around “make allowances” and how processing costs are reflected in milk prices.

The mandatory, audited survey is meant to replace reliance on voluntary surveys when USDA considers adjusting make allowances through rulemaking. How that survey will be conducted is at the start of a USDA rulemaking process with an initial comment period that ended March 30.

Next step is the Senate

The Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2026 (aka farm bill) now moves to the Senate, where some of the House floor amendments could come up again for debate as the Senate under Ag Chairman John Boozman (R-Ark.) shapes the final product. Thompson is expected to chair the conference committee that will be tasked with aligning any House and Senate differences.

“I’m pleased we were able to move this forward with bipartisan support after years of delay,” Thompson said, noting the House passage was bipartisan, including both Republicans and Democrats, and it’s a milestone in moving the essential and delayed farm policy package forward while also resolving a recent implementation gap for whole milk in schools.