Friday, February 26th 1:00-3:00pm Wilson, NC 
Wilson Agricultural Center 1806 SW Goldsboro St.
http://wilson.ces.ncsu.edu/index.php?page=contact directions

Tuesday, March 2 11-12 pm Pinehurst, NC
Moore Co. Agricultural Center, 707 Pinehurst Ave. Carthage, NC 910-947-3188;
 http://moore.ces.ncsu.edu/index.php?page=contactHYPERLINK “http://click.icptrack.com/icp/relay.php?r=34222176&msgid=358430&act=LYD6&c=524530&destination=http%3A%2F%2Fmaps.yahoo.com%2Fmap”

 Monday, March 15 1-3 pm Wilmington, NC
New Hanover Arboretum Auditorium, New Hanover Co. Extension
6202 Oleander Dr. Wilmington, NC 28403
http://newhanover.ces.ncsu.edu/index.php?page=contact directions

Thursday, March 18 6:30-8:30 pm
Bo Thomas Auditorium - Blue Ridge Community College
180 West Campus Dr. Flat Rock, NC
http://www.blueridge.edu/about_brcc/map2campus.php directions

Blue Ridge Community College is a tobacco free campus

________________________________________
February 12, 2010

New Guest-Worker Rules Seek to Increase Wages
By JULIA PRESTON

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis announced new rules on Thursday for the temporary immigrant farm workers program, saying they would raise wages and strengthen labor protections for foreign and American workers.
Under the new rules, growers will no longer be able to attest that they tried to find American workers to fill jobs given to migrants, but will have to prove they conducted job searches. The Labor Department will establish a national electronic registry of farm jobs to assist the effort.
American farm worker organizations hailed the changes, but growers’ groups said they would be costly and could be prohibitively cumbersome for many farmers, particularly smaller producers.
Growers “are just beside themselves that these rules keep changing; it just makes it impossible,” said Craig Regelbrugge, a spokesman for the American Nursery and Landscape Association.

Many of the new measures restore previous procedures for the program, known as H-2A for the type of visa that foreign workers receive, after the rules were changed in the last days of the Bush administration. Farm worker organizations strongly objected to those changes, arguing they had rapidly lowered wages for American agricultural laborers.
Labor officials said Thursday that the method of calculating wages for temporary foreign workers introduced by the Bush administration had reduced farm workers’ wages by an average of a dollar an hour in the year they were in effect. The new rules, which take effect on March 15, revert to the prior method for setting wages.
“The major change is that we are asking employers to prioritize those American workers that might be available,” Ms. Solis said. “And we are trying to make it realistic in terms of wages that can be earned by the farm workers that are currently out in the fields.”
The rules restore the role of state workforce agencies in carrying out inspections of farms seeking temporary foreign workers, including mandatory inspection of the housing that employers are required to provide.
“We are very grateful to Secretary Solis for her willingness to spend the time and resources to ensure that the most vulnerable workers are protected,” said Bruce Goldstein, executive director of Farmworker Justice, an advocacy group in Washington.
In California, growers said that new restrictions on the jobs guest workers in the program could perform were too inflexible for the rapidly changing conditions of agriculture. “I am not optimistic that any significant numbers of growers are going to be able to use this program,” said Bryan Little, Director of Labor Affairs for the California Farm Bureau Federation.
The new rules require growers to provide contracts to foreign guest workers before they leave their home countries, to protect against abuse by recruiters.

While the Department of Homeland Security runs the program, the Labor Department approves growers’ requests for foreign workers. In 2009, labor officials said, the department approved 94 percent of the applications growers submitted for H-2A workers, bringing 86,014 foreign migrants to the United States.
The program supplies only a fraction of the about one million farm workers in the United States. At least half of those workers are illegal immigrants, labor officials have estimated, with many farm employers hiring those immigrants instead of dealing with the slow-moving guest worker process.
While sharply divided over the new rules, growers and farm workers agreed that the Obama administration should press Congress to pass legislation overhauling the immigration system. Most versions of that legislation include a bill that creates a new guest worker program that all sides in agriculture have long supported.

To view this guide, click on the link: http://www.nclm.org/documents/droughtlegilsationguide08.19.09.pdf

To see entire paper, click this link: anla_h2a-regs_10-09.pdf

DHS Issues Final Rule Rescinding
Controversial ‘No-Match’ Regulation

Posted October 6, 2009, 1:01 P.M. ET The Department of Homeland Security is rescinding its controversial “no-match” regulation targeting employers with undocumented workers, according to a final rule slated for publication in the Oct. 7 Federal Register. Under the no-match rule—also called the safe harbor rule—the Social Security Administration would have been required to include with no-match letters, sent to employers when employees’ Social Security numbers do not match government records, information telling the employers that they would be required to resolve discrepancies or face liability. The Bush administration originally issued the no-match rule in 2007, but it was challenged in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which blocked it before it had gone into effect. Reflecting the change in presidential administrations, DHS announced its intention to rescind the rule in July 2009. DHS issued a proposed rule rescinding the no-match regulation Aug. 19, and in the final rule said it intended to adopt the proposed rule without changes. “After further review, DHS has determined to focus its enforcement efforts relating to the employment of aliens not authorized to work in the United States on increased compliance through improved verification, including participation in E-Verify, ICE Mutual Agreement Between Government and Employers (IMAGE), and other programs,” the department said.  

Here are some points and comments from our executive board regarding the new law for separate irrigation meters.

No green industry org.s’ opposed this legislation, including municipalities and here are some reasons why:

 1.       Many municipalities across NC have been requiring or recommending separate meters for years others have not. Granted, impact fees, meter installation fees and backflow requirements have continued to rise in price but what hasn’t. As far as the legislation was concerned, the state and municipalities must know where the water is being used. There is no other factual way to know other than to meter. Remember that in the past outdoor water use has been grossly overstated by municipalities and the state. This wasn’t a quick light switch approach. The debate over water issues carried on for nearly a year from mid 2007 through 2008, all of this 2009 legislative session and in fact it still continues to this day and will continue for several more years until the state is satisfied that our water policies and practices are in balance with our supply. 

2.       Investment in an irrigation system must include an analysis of return on investment regardless of where you live and what the fees are. We have to sell the benefit and value of investing in irrigation, the efficient use of water to establish and preserve landscaping and the resulting appreciation in property value. 

3.       How can we as the GIC possibly address what each individual municipality charges as a water impact/meter fee? This is a local political issue. What is the local community willing to accept? 

4.       As far as a rallying cry for membership to support opposing or trying to overturn this rule…we have tried to engage green industry businesses across the state and John Deere was on the team at the time and still is. There is no going back, what is the alternative? I hope this offers a few other points to consider. We see this more about the municipalities fees than the law itself. It will be up to local communities challenging how they will be priced.

A delegation from NC attended the July 2009 Legislative Conference in DC. GIC board members attending were: Cyndy Allison, Doug Chapman, Mark Clark, Pat Gaskin, Buddy Murrow, Dennis Niemeyer and Mark Peters. Also GIC past president Doug Torn. Photos  below:

NCFB National Legislative Update: Jake Parker, National Legislative Director
Friday, July 24, 2009 For a week when no major legislation that would affect agriculture came to the Floor in either the U.S. House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate, this was a busy week.  Key congressional committees continued to work on important issues including health care reform and climate change.  Here’s a brief update. On health care, the House Energy and Commerce Committee deadlocked on its version of the bill because a group of seven conservative Democrats on the Committee who are members of a group known (affectionately or otherwise depending on your party affiliation) on Capitol Hill as the Blue Dogs refused to allow the bill to advance.  As of press time (late once again), negotiations between E&C Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and the Blue Dogs had fired back up after falling apart earlier in the day.  All of this is important because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) wants to move the bill out of the House at the end of next week.  If Waxman is unsuccessful in bringing the Blue Dog members of his committee along, the bill will not likely get a vote until some time in the fall.  In the Senate, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced earlier in the week that the Senate would not take up health care reform legislation after its summer State Work Period.   

On climate change, there was a big hearing in the Senate Agriculture Committee this week during which USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack and EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said the House climate change bill could actually benefit U.S. agriculture.  This conclusion contradicts several studies of the bill including one by American Farm Bureau’s economists.  I’m not going to bore you with specifics about the hearing, but here is a link to the Omaha World-Herald, which discusses the USDA report and what must have been a fascinating exchange (for a political dork like me) between former Bush Administration USDA Secretary Mike Johanns, now Senator from Nebraska and the current Secretary Vilsack:  http://www.omaha.com/article/20090723/MONEY/707239948. 

Next week will be very busy, especially in various congressional committees.  At some point, The House is expected to take up H.R. 2479, the Food Safety Enhancement Act of 2009.  As you know, this bill has some serious flaws as far as agriculture is concerned, but there are apparently more than enough votes to pass it if it is brought to the House Floor.  At the end of the week, the House will head home for their month long August District/State Work Period, unless a deal breaks on health care reform. Meanwhile, the Senate is scheduled to leave for the August break one week later on Friday, August 7 Have a great weekend everyone. 

Jake

NCFB National Legislative Update

Jake Parker, National Legislative Director

Friday, July 10, 2009 

Summertime on Capitol Hill is a time for appropriations bill and grunt work in committee on major pieces of legislation.  This NCFB National Legislative Update touches on four issues.  Let’s get started.

 1.  House Passes FY2010 Agriculture Appropriations Bill; Senate Bill Adopted By Appropriations Committee

On Thursday afternoon, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 2997, the Fiscal Year 2010 Agriculture Appropriations bill by a 266-160 vote.  The measure would allocate $123.8 billion for U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration and other agencies for the next fiscal year.  Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee adopted its own version of the agriculture spending bill on Tuesday.  That measure would fund USDA, FDA and related agencies at $124.5 billion.  It is not clear when the Senate will actually consider this version of the bill.   There are some important differences in the two bills.  First, the House bill would ban the importation of Chinese processed chicken products.  In contrast, the Senate version would allow these products to be imported so long as USDA audits of the Chinese inspection system show that Chinese food processors meet U.S. importation standards.  This issue is complicated and controversial because it involves food safety and trade concerns.  It is very likely to be an issue for the House-Senate conference committee to resolve.  Second, the House bill eliminated funding for the National Animal Identification System (NAIS) while the Senate bill keeps the funding in place.  House appropriators feel USDA has misused the funds it has already received for the program, which has been difficult to implement.  Like the chicken import issue, NAIS funding will be an issue for the conference committee.  Finally, the House bill contained a number of North Carolina specific agriculture projects, including funding for the NC Beaver Management Assistance Program and various agriculture research initiatives at North Carolina State University.  Unfortunately, the Senate bill does not include these provisions.  This is a problem that NCFB will work to correct as these measures move to conference.

 2.  Senate FY2010 Homeland Security Appropriations: Anti-Immigration Reform Senators Win a Few Battles; Will They Win the War?The full Senate spent the bulk of its time working on the FY2010 Homeland Security Appropriations bill.  During debate, a group of staunch anti-immigration Senators turned the bill into a debate on U.S. immigration enforcement policy.  They offered several amendments to the bill that would give congressional approval to some Bush Administration immigration enforcement measures.  Two of the amendments were adopted and both present problems for North Carolina agriculture.  Both amendments were offered on the fly during Senate debate, which is often the case in the Senate.  If enacted, they will have serious consequences for the business community.  Unfortunately, we are still trying to determine exactly what these amendments will do.   The first amendment was offered by Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions (R), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.  The Sessions amendment would permanently extend the federal E-verify program, a voluntary online system that allows businesses to check the work authorization status of their employees.  The program is scheduled to expire in 2009 and Sessions has been pushing to make the program permanent.  The Sessions amendment would also immediately implement the Bush Administration’s federal contracting E-verify rule.  This rule was developed during the Bush Administration to require any entity that enters into a contract with the federal government to use E-verify.  However, this part of the amendment appeared to be moot because the Obama Administration recently announced that it would implement the Bush federal contracting E-verify rule on September 8, 2009 after taking several months to review the regulation.   The second amendment was put forward by Louisiana Senator David Vitter (R).  The Vitter amendment would force the Obama Administration to implement without changes the Social Security No-Match Rule.  This regulation would require employers who receive Social Security Administration no-match letters to work through several “safe harbor” provisions to avoid a determination that they had knowingly hired an unauthorized worker.  Vitter offered his amendment in response to the Obama Administration’s decision – made about an hour earlier – to revoke the Rule.  NCFB strongly opposed the No-Match Rule and the Vitter Amendment because the No-Match Rule was not designed to accommodate the unique needs of U.S. agriculture, especially agriculture employers who hire workers for only weeks or months at a time.  Unfortunately, the Vitter amendment was adopted by a voice vote after several modifications were made.  Sources on Capitol Hill tell me that supporters of the amendment had enough votes to pass it and the Democratic Leadership felt it would be better not to take a formal vote on the measure.   In sum, two immigration enforcement amendments were adopted this week in the U.S. Senate.  Although they are far from becoming law, they serve as a reminder for the long term that enacting comprehensive immigration reform this year will be a difficult task.  In the short term, NCFB will work with American Farm Bureau Federation and other agriculture organizations to ensure these measures are stripped from the final version of the Homeland Security provisions during conference negotiations. 

3.  Health Care Debate Continues in Senate Committees; Hagan to Offer NCFB Supported Farmworker Exception Amendment

Two key Senate Committees, the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and Finance Committees, spent the majority of their legislative weeks working on health care reform legislation.  In short, the Committee discussions have been detailed and at times frustrating.  In fact, the HELP Committee has been meeting for 10 straight legislative days on the issue.  At this point, it is not clear when these panels will complete their work and move a bill to the Senate Floor for consideration.  Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he would like to pass a bill through the Senate before the August State Work Period, which is scheduled to begin the second week of August.   North Carolina has a strong presence in the HELP Committee discussion on the bill.  Senators Richard Burr (R-Winston Salem) and Kay Hagan (D-Greensboro) both sit on the Committee.  Hagan is working on an amendment to the bill that would exempt temporary and seasonal farmworkers from the bill’s employer mandate provision.  If adopted, the amendment would not require farmers to provide temporary and seasonal farmworkers with health care coverage.  NCFB strongly supports this bill as does American Farm Bureau Federation.  Hagan has not yet had an opportunity to offer her amendment, but will do so if the time is right.  I’ll be sure to keep you up to date about this issue as the issue develops. 

4.  Senate Timeline on Climate Change Delayed Until Early Fall

Finally, a brief note on climate change legislation.  Earlier this week, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) announced that she would not press ahead with a Senate version of climate change legislation until the end of September.  Boxer’s original plan, which was blessed by Leader Reid, was to move a bill at the beginning of September soon after the August State Work Period.  However, slow progress on the Senate health care bill and the upcoming debate on the nomination of U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Sonja Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court are crowding out the bill in terms of time on the legislative calendar.  As you know, Farm Bureau strongly opposed the climate change bill recently passed by the House.  We will continue to work with our Senators on the issue.  There will be more information as things develop. That’s all for this week.  Enjoy your weekends.
Jake