President Barack Obama told Iowa farmers to pressure Republicans — including the newly minted Republican vice presidential candidate, U.S. Rep. Paul Ryan — to pass a new farm bill. That’s the best way to help farmers hard hit by drought, the president argued.

“The best way to help these states is for leaders in Congress to pass a farm bill that not only helps farmers and ranchers respond to natural disasters but also makes necessary reforms and gives them some long-term certainty,” Obama said.

We’re not sure what legislation Obama has in mind.”

Congress should help farmers in need. And it should pass a new farm bill, the five-year blueprint for federal farm policy that funds everything from crop insurance to food stamps.

But the president should urge lawmakers to pass a bill that actually reforms the bloated, outdated system of farm supports. Neither bill under consideration does so.

The Senate passed a version in June that cuts farm spending by $23 billion over 10 years. The House Agriculture Committee agreed on an approach that would cut $35 billion, but House Republicans were unable to round up enough support to bring it to the floor.

Instead, the House passed a short-term measure aimed at drought relief, which the Senate didn’t take up.

With only a few working days in September before heading home to campaign, it’s looking less likely that a farm bill can be passed before the lame-duck session after the presidential election.

Both bills are flawed. While they end the wasteful practice of making direct payments to farmers whether they need them or not, the bills leave untouched large swaths of the farm-subsidy system. They also expand crop insurance programs that guarantee farmers’ profits and line the pockets of insurance companies instead of simply insuring against losses. Both bills cut too much from conservation programs, which help farmers prepare for future natural disasters.

But a key difference between the bills is how food stamps are treated. The Senate bill cuts $4.5 billion from the program; the House bill cuts $16.5 billion. We think all government programs should be scrutinized, but we question big cuts to a program so essential to the social safety net at a time when so many people remain out of work.

Congress should provide short-term, targeted relief for farmers who need it. But lawmakers should plow under some of their work on these bills and get tougher on farm subsidies while preserving a reasonable allowance in the bill for food stamps and conservation programs.