For much of September, lawmakers have been attempting to forge an agreement to ensure the continued functioning of the federal government once the new fiscal year begins on Sunday.

The agricultural community also has its eyes on Washington, D.C., as the farm bill likewise expires this weekend. The bill must be extended before Jan. 1 to avoid reverting to permanent law – a scenario that would mean returning to Depression-era policies.

This would include the government determining prices for commodity crops popular 50 years ago, such as dairy, oats and cotton, but not crops grown today, like soybeans, fruits and vegetables.

Most current farm bill programs will continue through the rest of this year or into next year without much impact. This window of opportunity gives policymakers a chance to cut wasteful farm spending by fashioning a fiscally responsible, stable and predictable farm safety net that helps family farmers thrive.

This means only paying for what we need.

Recent nonpartisan federal reports have identified numerous farm bill reforms that could save tens of billions of tax dollars, yielding beneficial impacts. An example is curbing unlimited crop insurance subsidies for millionaires, billionaires and non-farmers.

Reining in market-distorting, government-enforced minimum price supports (“reference prices”) for a select few crops should also be a top priority.

Absent reform, over the next decade, the taxpayer cost for these types of federal handouts is projected to reach $150 billion or more.

Certain large agribusinesses have exploited federal subsidies to squeeze out family and beginning farmers, contributing to farm consolidation and rising land prices.

Well-heeled agribusinesses hardly need federal support with agriculture coming off a record year of farm income. Nonetheless, federal policymakers have layered on additional subsidies in recent years through disaster aid and COVID-19 income payments.

Additional taxpayer dollars have been funneled through the Commodity Credit Corporation. The CCC has devolved into an expensive slush fund, enabling the Agriculture Department to allocate tens of billions of dollars for special-interest projects without gaining congressional approval. One example is the $23 billion spent to soften the economic blow of then-President Donald Trump’s trade war.

Congress must do its job. If CCC programs are genuinely important, Congress should finance increased spending either by raising revenue or by trimming less-critical programs.

Senators Charles Grassley, R-Iowa; Roger Marshall, R-Kansas; and Mike Braun, R-Indiana; deserve credit for introducing a bill to rein in CCC spending. Considering the current 2018 farm bill is projected to cost taxpayers a record $1.4 trillion, their legislation represents an important step toward controlling federal spending instead of expanding it.

Other opportunities also exist to build resilience, instead of perpetuating certain agricultural producers’ dependence on taxpayer subsidies.

One approach is to incorporate risk-reducing practices into federal crop insurance premiums, analogous to a good driver’s discount for auto insurance.

This would encourage American farmers to invest in agricultural practices that improve soil, water and land, building resilience to increasingly costly droughts, wildfires, floods and other climate disasters.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 provided nearly $20 billion for related agricultural conservation programs. If targeted properly, these funds could deliver substantial benefits for taxpayers, farmers and the environment.

Some lawmakers, however, propose redirecting this spending to the farm bill for non-climate priorities. Popular conservation funding should not be squandered on unnecessary subsidies for large, affluent agribusinesses.

As the nation watches Congress struggle with the fundamental task of funding the government, the timing could not be better to craft a fiscally responsible farm bill.

With common-sense approaches, we can, and must, rein in wasteful spending while supporting the farmers who need the most help building long-term economic and climate resilience.