MORE USDA Grants Act

Bill Number: S. 2618
Origin Chamber: Senate
Congress: 119th Congress, Session 1
Policy Area: Agriculture and Food
Status: Introduced
Latest Action: 2025-07-31: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Last Updated: 2025-09-05T17:10:03Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The MORE USDA Grants Act (S. 2618) aims to make it easier for rural counties with significant federal land ownership—where over half the land is owned or managed by the U.S. government—to access grants from the Department of Agriculture (USDA). It targets support for local governments and Tribal governments in these areas to boost rural economies through reduced barriers to funding for business development, infrastructure, broadband, and other rural needs.

Key Provisions

Definitions:
High-Density Public Land County: A county (or similar area) with a population of 100,000 or fewer, where more than 50% of the land is federally owned or managed.
Qualifying Grant Program: Includes specific USDA programs like Rural Business Development Grants, Community Facilities Grants, Economic Impact Initiative Grants, Telemedicine and Distance Learning Grants, Community Connect Broadband Grants, and the ReConnect broadband program. It also covers any other USDA discretionary grants for rural development or energy awarded to counties, local governments, or Tribal governments.
Tribal Government: The official governing body of federally recognized Indian or Alaska Native tribes, as listed in federal law.
Reduction in Matching Funds: Local matching fund requirements (the portion of project costs that applicants must cover themselves) for qualifying grants are cut in half for High-Density Public Land Counties and any local or Tribal governments within them.
Technical Assistance: USDA must provide extra help—such as guidance on applications—upon request from these counties or entities, both before and during the yearly application windows.
Priority for Funding:
Applications from these areas get priority if the applicant hasn't received funding from the same program in the past 10 years.
Tribal governments in these counties receive priority for technical assistance and other support.
Additional Flexibility: USDA can offer tailored support, including easing rules that hinder applications, such as:
Scoring systems that favor larger projects (e.g., based on jobs created or people served), which disadvantage small, remote communities.
Requirements to partner with outside groups like colleges, which may not exist locally.
Financial readiness rules that these areas can't meet due to limited resources from federal land (not just general poverty).
Overly complex or technical application processes that discourage applications.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

Introduces a 50% reduction in local matching funds specifically for these counties, overriding prior requirements in the listed USDA programs.
Mandates priority consideration for first-time applicants in the last decade and extra technical aid, which were not standard before.
Allows USDA discretion to waive or adjust barriers in grant rules, promoting fairness for areas limited by federal land ownership (e.g., reduced local tax revenue from untaxable federal lands). This builds on existing rural grant laws like the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act but adds targeted relief.

Potential Impacts

On Government Agencies: USDA will need to adjust grant administration, including providing more technical support and reviewing applications with new priorities, potentially increasing workload but streamlining approvals for underserved areas.
On Citizens: Residents in rural, federally dominated counties (e.g., in Western states like Nevada or Idaho) gain better access to funds for jobs, healthcare facilities, broadband, and utilities, potentially improving quality of life and economic opportunities in isolated communities.
On International Relations: No direct impact, as the bill focuses on domestic rural U.S. development.

Main Stakeholders Affected

High-Density Public Land Counties: Primarily rural areas in states with large federal holdings (e.g., Western U.S.), facing revenue challenges from limited taxable land.
Local Governments and Tribal Governments: Cities, towns, or Tribal nations within these counties, which can now apply with fewer hurdles for community projects.
USDA Agencies: Rural Business-Cooperative Service, Rural Housing Service, Rural Utilities Service, and others administering the grants, required to implement changes.
Rural Businesses and Residents: Indirect beneficiaries through enhanced local infrastructure and economic programs.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

Legal: Overrides specific matching fund rules in existing statutes without broad repeal, ensuring compatibility with current USDA frameworks. Emphasizes equity for federal land impacts, aligning with laws like the Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILT) program that address similar fiscal strains.
Constitutional: No apparent conflicts; supports equal protection by aiding disadvantaged local entities without infringing on federal land management rights.
Political: Bipartisan sponsorship (e.g., from Sens. Cortez Masto, Daines, and others) highlights rural development as a cross-party issue, potentially influencing future appropriations for Western and Tribal communities. It addresses long-standing concerns about federal land burdens on local budgets, fostering goodwill in rural-heavy congressional districts.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Sen. Cortez Masto, Catherine [D-NV]

Cosponsors (4)

Sen. Daines, Steve [R-MT], Sen. Schiff, Adam B. [D-CA], Sen. Crapo, Mike [R-ID], Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]

Recent Actions

2025-07-31: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
2025-07-31: Introduced in Senate

Bill Versions

More Opportunities for Rural Economies from USDA Grants Act — issued 2025-07-31 — PDF (7 pages)