    [House Hearing, 113 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                          AGRICULTURAL GUESTWORKER ACT

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                                SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                        IMMIGRATION AND BORDER SECURITY

                                     OF THE

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                       ON

                                   H.R. 1773

                                   __________

                                  MAY 16, 2013

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 113-12

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

          Available via the World Wide Web: http://judiciary.house.gov

                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    80-975                    WASHINGTON : 2013
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
    http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202�09512�091800, or 866�09512�091800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                       BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia, Chairman
    F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr.,         JOHN CONYERS, Jr., Michigan
        Wisconsin                        JERROLD NADLER, New York
    HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina         ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT,
    LAMAR SMITH, Texas                       Virginia
    STEVE CHABOT, Ohio                   MELVIN L. WATT, North Carolina
    SPENCER BACHUS, Alabama              ZOE LOFGREN, California
    DARRELL E. ISSA, California          SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
    J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia            STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
    STEVE KING, Iowa                     HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
    TRENT FRANKS, Arizona                  Georgia
    LOUIE GOHMERT, Texas                 PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico
    JIM JORDAN, Ohio                     JUDY CHU, California
    TED POE, Texas                       TED DEUTCH, Florida
    JASON CHAFFETZ, Utah                 LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois
    TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania             KAREN BASS, California
    TREY GOWDY, South Carolina           CEDRIC RICHMOND, Louisiana
    MARK AMODEI, Nevada                  SUZAN DelBENE, Washington
    RAUL LABRADOR, Idaho                 JOE GARCIA, Florida
    BLAKE FARENTHOLD, Texas              HAKEEM JEFFRIES, New York
    GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina
    DOUG COLLINS, Georgia
    RON DeSANTIS, Florida
    [Vacant]

               Shelley Husband, Chief of Staff & General Counsel
            Perry Apelbaum, Minority Staff Director & Chief Counsel
                                     ------

                Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security

                      TREY GOWDY, South Carolina, Chairman

                         TED POE, Texas, Vice-Chairman

    LAMAR SMITH, Texas                   ZOE LOFGREN, California
    STEVE KING, Iowa                     SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
    JIM JORDAN, Ohio                     LUIS V. GUTIERREZ, Illinois
    MARK AMODEI, Nevada                  JOE GARCIA, Florida
    RAUL LABRADOR, Idaho                 PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico
    GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina

                         George Fishman, Chief Counsel

                       David Shahoulian, Minority Counsel

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                                  MAY 16, 2013

                                                                       Page

                                    THE BILL

    H.R. 1773, the ``Agricultural Guestworker Act''..................     3

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

    The Honorable Trey Gowdy, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of South Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on
      Immigration and Border Security................................     1

    The Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
      Immigration and Border Security................................    56

    The Honorable Bob Goodlatte, a Representative in Congress from
      the State of Virginia, and Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary    57

                                   WITNESSES

    H. Lee Wicker, Deputy Director, North Carolina Growers
      Association
      Oral Testimony.................................................    60
      Prepared Statement.............................................   110

    Christopher Gaddis, Chief Human Resources Officer, JBS USA
      Holdings, Inc.
      Oral Testimony.................................................   114
      Prepared Statement.............................................   117

    John B. Graham, III, President, Graham and Rollins, Inc.,
      Hampton, VA
      Oral Testimony.................................................   122
      Prepared Statement.............................................   124

    Arturo S. Rodriguez, President, United Farm Workers of America
      Oral Testimony.................................................   130
      Prepared Statement.............................................   132

              LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING

    Material submitted by H. Lee Wicker, Deputy Director, North
      Carolina Growers Association...................................    62

    Material submitted by the Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a Representative
      in Congress from the State of California, and Ranking Member,
      Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security................   139

                                    APPENDIX
                   Material Submitted for the Hearing Record

    Prepared Statement of the Honorable Trey Gowdy, a Representative
      in Congress from the State of South Carolina, and Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security................   160

    Prepared Statement of the the Honorable Zoe Lofgren, a
      Representative in Congress from the State of California, and
      Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security   165

    Prepared Statement of the Honorable Bob Goodlatte, a
      Representative in Congress from the State of Virginia, and
      Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary...........................   169

    Prepared Statement of the Honorable Doc Hastings, a
      Representative in Congress from the State of Washington........   178

    Prepared Statement of the American Farm Bureau Federation........   181

                          AGRICULTURAL GUESTWORKER ACT

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 16, 2013

                            House of Representatives

                Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security

                           Committee on the Judiciary

                                Washington, DC.

        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 12:30 p.m., in
    room 2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Trey
    Gowdy (Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
        Present: Representatives Gowdy, Goodlatte, King, Holding,
    Lofgren, Jackson Lee, Gutierrez, and Garcia.
        Staff Present: (Majority) George Fishman, Chief Counsel;
    Stephanie Gadbois, Counsel; Graham Owens, Clerk; and (Minority)
    David Shahoulian, Minority Counsel.
        Mr. Gowdy. Good afternoon. I apologize to everyone in the
    audience and especially my colleagues for having another vote
    in another Committee. But we are here because the Subcommittee
    on Immigration and Border Security will have a hearing on H.R.
    1773, which is the ``Agricultural Guestworker Act.''
        And the Committee will come to order.
        Welcome, again, to all of our witnesses.
        I will recognize myself for an opening statement and then
    the Ranking Member, Ms. Lofgren.
        So we are now here to begin our consideration of this H.R.
    1773, the ``Agricultural Guestworker Act.'' This legislation
    will provide American farmers with what they have asked for,
    needed, and deserved for many years: a workable and fair
    guestworker program to help them grow and harvest our food. Of
    course, this benefits each of us.
        I congratulate Chairman Goodlatte for introducing this
    legislation. I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle
    who have informed and instructed my understanding of these
    issues. And I especially thank the farmers and others in the
    agricultural industry for helping me understand the challenges
    they face in meeting this issue of national significance.
        We would all do well to place ourselves in the shoes of
    farmers, because we sometimes lose track of what it takes for
    growers to actually put this bounty on the world's tables. We
    lose track of what it takes for them to give us the safest,
    most efficient, most reliable agricultural system in the world.
        For those crops that are labor-intensive, especially at
    harvest time, hard labor is critical. At our February hearing
    on agricultural guestworker programs, I asked why H-2A program
    was so underutilized. I noted that, in the eyes of many
    farmers, the program seems designed to fail. It is cumbersome
    and full of red tape. Growers have to pay wages far above the
    locally prevailing wage, putting them at a competitive
    disadvantage against growers who use unlawful labor.
        Growers are subject to onerous rules, such as the 50
    percent rule, which requires them to hire any domestic workers
    who show up even after they have unsuccessfully recruited for
    U.S. workers and their H-2A workers have started working. Under
    the H-2A program, growers can't get workers in time to meet
    needs dictated by the weather. And then the final indignity:
    Growers are constantly subjected to litigation by those who
    don't think the H-2A program should even exist.
        Growers need a fair, workable guestworker program that
    gives them access to the workers they need when they need them
    at a fair wage and with reasonable conditions. They need a
    partner in the Federal Government, not an adversary. Such a
    program will benefit not only farmers but also American
    farmworkers. If growers can't use a program because it is too
    cumbersome, none of its workers' protections will benefit any
    actual workers.
        H.R. 1773, the Agricultural Guestworker Act, jettisons the
    dysfunctional features of the H-2A program and creates a new H-
    2C agricultural guestworker program that successfully meets the
    needs laid out.
        This bill contains a streamlined petition process based on
    the H-1B program and allows growers to hire guestworkers at
    will once E-Verify has been made mandatory. The bill puts the
    Department of Agriculture in charge of H-2C. The bill requires
    growers pay guestworkers the local prevailing market-based
    wage. It does not require growers to additionally provide free
    housing or international travel reimbursements to guestworkers.
        In order to discourage vexatious, frivolous, and abusive
    litigation against growers, the bill allows growers and
    guestworkers to agree to binding arbitration and mediation of
    grievances. It also provides H-2C workers are not eligible for
    taxpayer-funded lawyers under the Legal Services Corporation
    Act.
        In order to prevent a labor force shock, the bill allows
    illegal immigrants to participate in the H-2C program, just as
    can any other foreign national, so long as they abide by the
    terms and conditions of the program.
        I look forward to hearing today's witnesses and learning
    how H.R. 1773 would benefit them.
        I now recognize the gentlelady from California, the Ranking
    Member, Ms. Lofgren.
        [The bill, H.R. 1773, follows:]

                                   __________
        Ms. Lofgren. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and also Chairman
    Goodlatte, for holding this hearing on Mr. Goodlatte's
    Agricultural Guestworker Act.
        As with the hearing we just had on Mr. Smith's Legal
    Workforce Act, I understand this hearing is another in a series
    of hearings meant to examine what is broken in our current
    immigration system.
        Nowhere is this evidence of brokenness more evident than in
    our agricultural sector. We know from the countless hearings we
    have held on this topic that as much as 75 percent of the on-
    the-farm workforce is undocumented, and that is an incredible
    figure. This situation is untenable for both farmers and
    farmworkers, who together provide an invaluable service to our
    citizens, our economy, our country. They deserve a system that
    works. We all do.
        That is why it is so significant that, just last month,
    farmers and agricultural trade associations from all over the
    country and in every sector of the agricultural industry, from
    apples, beekeeping, sheep herders, tobacco, citrus, Christmas
    trees, berries, blueberries, onions, peaches, potatoes,
    vegetables, eggs, the Wine Institute, and everybody in between,
    everybody agreed with the United Farm Workers to reach an
    historic agreement to reform our agricultural labor system.
        The agreement that everybody signed on to, which came after
    many months of negotiations, is designed to provide a system
    that works for both growers and farmworkers. In doing so, it
    will help to support the millions of jobs that depend upon the
    agricultural industry and will prevent us from becoming
    increasingly dependent on food produced overseas.
        The agreement includes both an earned legalization program
    for the current undocumented agricultural workforce and a new
    visa program to address future farm labor needs. It is a
    sensible solution, and I applaud all of the people who worked
    hard to make it a reality.
        Let me pause briefly to note that, for years, we talked
    about the former ag jobs compromise that our former and, I
    would say, beloved colleague, Howard Berman, played such a
    critical role in forging. After the ag jobs compromise fell
    apart, it was unclear how the parties would be able to come
    together once more to find a mutually agreeable solution.
    Significantly, the proposal that the parties recently reached
    has even more support than the ag jobs compromise.
        Today's agreement is supported by organizations
    representing large farming, small farmers, fruits and
    vegetables, dairy, sheep herders, beekeepers, landscaping, farm
    bureaus around the country. Over 70 different agricultural
    employer organizations support the agreement, including the
    American Farm Bureau, the National Council of Agricultural
    Employers, the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives, USA
    Farmers--which I understand Lee Wicker, our witness, is
    treasurer of that association--the Western Growers Association,
    the National Milk Producers Federation, the Western United
    Dairymen, farm bureaus across the country, including Georgia,
    Florida, and Louisiana, and even the Idaho Dairymen's
    Association.
        All of these organizations agree, the current immigration
    system is hurting our agricultural sector. That is an opinion I
    share, and it is an opinion that I know is shared by Chairman
    Goodlatte. His bill, I know, is a sincere effort to address the
    dysfunction. And I appreciate this hearing as a way of studying
    the proposal while considering ways to fix the broken system.
        As this Committee prepares to enter the national discussion
    about reforming our immigration system, we will need to fully
    understand each aspect of a top-to-bottom reform of our system
    just as much as we will need to understand how each aspect is
    interrelated.
        I must admit, however, that I hope this hearing will help
    convince the Chairman and other Members on his side of the
    aisle to accept and support the agreement that has been reached
    between the diverse coalition of grower interests and the UFW.
    Considering the support for that agreement all across the
    farming community, I am not sure why we would craft something
    completely new that is opposed by important members of that
    community.
        I must also note at least two elements of that deal that
    will prevent it from ever becoming law.
        First, 1773 provides an opportunity for undocumented
    farmworkers to apply for a new temporary worker visa created in
    the bill. But those visas would only allow workers to remain
    here for a period of 18 months even if they have been here for
    decades and have spouses and children in the United States. The
    reality is, this program, this proposal in this bill won't
    work. By asking such people to come out of the shadows,
    register, and obtain a temporary visa, we are essentially
    asking them to report to deport. People will not come out of
    the shadows, and farmers will not have access to the stable
    supply of authorized workers that they need going forward.
        Second, H.R. 1773 would dramatically reduce wages and other
    protection for farmworkers, who are already the least-paid and
    -protected workers in the United States. Indeed, H.R. 1773
    would create a program with lower wages and fewer protections
    than the Bracero Program that is widely recognized as a black
    eye in our Nation's history.
        The country needs us to find a solution to the agricultural
    labor problem, but I believe the superior solution is the
    landmark agreement between farmers and farmworkers. I am
    grateful the United Farm Workers, the American Farm Bureau, and
    all of the other agricultural employers and associations are
    putting us on what I believe will be the right track.
        And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Gowdy. I thank the gentlelady from California.
        The Chair will now recognize the gentleman from Virginia,
    the Chairman of the full Committee, for any opening statement
    he might think appropriate.
        Mr. Goodlatte. Well, thank you, Chairman Gowdy. And thank
    you and Ranking Member Lofgren for holding this doubleheader of
    hearings on our step-by-step approach to addressing all of the
    issues related to immigration reform that are so badly needed
    in our country.
        As we seek to reform our immigration system as a whole, we
    must take the time to look at each of the individual issues
    within this system to ensure that we get immigration reform
    right. For this reason, I thank the Subcommittee Chairman for
    holding this important hearing.
        H.R. 1773 is a bill that will replace our outdated and
    unworkable agricultural guestworker program and bring us one
    step closer to solving the larger immigration puzzle. As past
    hearings on the H-2A program have revealed, farmers avoid using
    the existing agricultural guestworker program because it
    burdens them with excessive regulations and exposes them to
    frivolous litigation.
        The new guestworker program created under the Ag Act, known
    as the H-2C program, remedies this problem by streamlining
    access to reliable workforce and protecting farmers from
    abusive lawsuits. It also allows dairy farms and food
    processors to participate in the program.
        The new H-2C program will be market-driven and adaptable.
    It will reduce bureaucratic red tape by adopting an
    attestation-based petition process and by allowing H-2C
    employers in good standing who agree to abide by additional
    terms and conditions the opportunity to be designated as
    registered agricultural employers, further expediting the
    hiring process. Moreover, subject to certain conditions, H-2C
    workers can be employed under contract or at will, making it
    easier for workers to move freely throughout the agricultural
    marketplace to meet demand.
        We must also learn from the mistakes of the past. As a
    result, the following pitfalls of the H-2A program will not be
    repeated in the new H-2C program: The Ag Act will not require
    growers to hire and train unneeded workers after the work
    period begins. The Ag Act will not require employers to provide
    free housing and transportation for their workers, and farmers
    will pay guestworkers the typical wage paid to agricultural
    employees in their locality, not an adverse-effect wage dreamed
    up by Labor Department bureaucrats.
        However, the new H-2C program will be at its core a
    guestworker program. Unlike the agricultural worker provisions
    in the Senate immigration bill, the Ag Act does not create any
    special pathway to citizenship for unlawful immigrants. The
    bill simply allows unlawful immigrants to participate in the
    new H-2C guestworker program, just as other foreign nationals
    can, provided a job is available. They are required to abide by
    the same exact conditions as foreign agricultural workers
    currently working legally in the United States, including the
    requirement to leave the U.S. periodically and the prohibition
    on family members accompanying the worker.
        Under the Ag Act, H-2C workers can be admitted for up to 18
    months to work in a job that is temporary or seasonal. For work
    that is not temporary, H-2C workers can be admitted initially
    for up to 36 months and up to 18 months on subsequent H-2C
    visas. At the end of the authorized work period, an H-2C worker
    must remain outside the United States for a continuous period
    that is equal to at least one-sixth of the duration of the
    worker's previous stay as an H-2C worker or 3 months, whichever
    is less. These requirements will be strictly enforced.
        To encourage guestworkers to abide by these rules, a small
    portion of guestworkers' wages will be held in escrow until
    they return home to collect the wages in their home countries.
    And if a guestworker abandons his or her job, an employer will
    be required to notify the Department of Homeland Security
    within 24 hours. Workers who do not leave the U.S. when
    required will be barred from re-entry into the U.S. for from 3
    to 10 years.
        As a general rule, the program will be limited to 500,000
    visas per year, although individuals working in the U.S.
    unlawfully who transition into the H-2C program will not count
    against this cap.
        Finally, the H-2C program is fiscally responsible. H-2C
    guestworkers will not be eligible for Obamacare subsidies or
    for other Federal public benefits. They are also not eligible
    for Federal refundable tax credits, the Earned Income Tax
    Credit, or the Child Tax Credit.
        It is essential that we examine solutions to our broken
    immigration system methodically, for if we fail do so, we risk
    repeating some of the same mistakes of the past.
        I am pleased to welcome all of our witnesses here today. I
    would say to them and to all the Members of this Committee and
    others in the Congress that we look forward to working with
    them on this issue. And this hearing on the specific
    legislative language of this bill is a good starting point to
    talk about the issues related to agricultural immigration
    reform, and we will benefit from the testimony of these
    witnesses today.
        I look forward to their valuable testimony, and I thank the
    Chairman.
        Mr. Gowdy. I thank Chairman Goodlatte.
        Without objection, other Members' opening statements will
    be made part of the record.
        On behalf of all of us, we welcome our distinguished panel
    of witnesses.
        I will begin by swearing you in, so if you would all please
    rise and lift your right hands.
        [Witnesses sworn.]
        Mr. Gowdy. May the record reflect all the witnesses
    answered in the affirmative.
        I will introduce you en bloc and then recognize you
    individually for your 5-minute opening statement.
        Just to be clear, your entire statement is already part of
    the record. So to the extent it may be more than 5 minutes, if
    we could get you to edit it. The lighting system means what it
    normally means: green, go; yellow, you have about a minute
    left; and red, go ahead and, if you can, wrap up that thought.
        I am pleased to first introduce Mr. Lee Wicker. He is the
    deputy director of the North Carolina Growers Association, the
    largest H-2A program user in the Nation. Prior to holding this
    position, he worked for the North Carolina Employment Security
    Commission as the technical supervisor for farm employment
    programs and the statewide administrator for the H-2A program.
    Mr. Wicker has been growing flue-cured tobacco with his family
    in Lee County, North Carolina, since 1978. He graduated from
    the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
        Mr. Christopher Gaddis is the head of human resources for
    JBS USA Holdings, Inc. With 140 production facilities
    worldwide, JBS is the largest animal protein processor in the
    world. Prior to his current role, he served as the general
    counsel for JBS, USA, where he oversaw litigation mergers,
    acquisitions, and corporate compliance. Mr. Gaddis received
    both his J.D. And B.A. In political science from the University
    of Colorado.
        Mr. John Graham III is the fourth-generation president and
    owner of Graham and Rollins in Hampton, Virginia, a crab-
    processing plant that has operated as a family-owned business
    since 1942. He also runs Hampton Seafood Market, which offers
    retail seafood and dining about a mile away from the plant. We
    would also like to welcome Mr. Graham's father, John Graham,
    Jr., who is in attendance and is the third-generation operator
    of Graham and Rollins. Mr. Graham attended Randolph-Macon
    College in Ashland, Virginia.
        And, lastly, we would like to welcome Mr. Arturo Rodriguez.
    He is the president of the United Farm Workers, which is a
    position he has held since 1993. He began serving full-time
    with UFW in 1973. And Mr. Rodriguez has more than 35 years'
    experience organizing farmworkers and negotiating UFW
    contracts. Mr. Rodriguez earned an M.A. In social work at the
    University of Michigan in 1971.
        Welcome, each and all of you.
        And, with that, we will start with you, Mr. Wicker, and
    recognize you for your 5-minute opening statement.

             TESTIMONY OF H. LEE WICKER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
                   NORTH CAROLINA GROWERS ASSOCIATION

        Mr. Wicker. Good afternoon, Chairman Gowdy, Ranking Member
    Lofgren, and the Committee Members. I am Lee Wicker, deputy
    director of the North Carolina Growers Association. I am also a
    member of USA Farmers, the Nation's largest ag guestworker
    employer group.
        NCGA and USA Farmers support Chairman Goodlatte in his
    effort to provide ag with a new program that provides reliable
    access to labor. Thank you for holding this hearing on a
    critical issue for labor-intensive agriculture.
        NCGA has been the largest H-2A user in the Nation for more
    than 15 years, and our 750 farmers will employ more than 7,500
    H-2A workers and thousands more U.S. Workers this season.
        In previous hearings, I have highlighted the chronic
    problems of H-2A. It is expensive, overly bureaucratic,
    unnecessarily litigious, and excludes some farms and
    activities. The measured reforms in H.R. 1773 solve most of the
    flaws with our current system, creating a new program that all
    ag producers can use. This proposal is evidence that the U.S.
    can have a workable farmworker program that treats workers well
    and carefully balances the critical elements of worker
    protections while promoting economic viability on our farms.
        This bill offers significant reforms to the prohibitive
    costs farmers currently face and makes improvements in other
    important areas. It provides for a market-based prevailing wage
    floor that surpasses the Federal minimum, authorizes piece-rate
    pay systems to promote higher earnings, and offers structured
    portability to enable worker movements from employer to
    employer.
        The bill makes farm and worker obligations clear and
    understandable and creates a streamlined legal dispute
    resolution system to solve farmworker complaints quickly and
    efficiently. These improvements will provide a viable
    alternative to employing illegal aliens.
        The bill maintains valuable employee benefits and critical
    worker protections for domestic and foreign workers, like
    continuation of the minimum hours worked guarantee, mandatory
    workman's comp insurance, a hiring preference for U.S. workers,
    and enables undocumented workers to come out of the shadows to
    work legally.
        The bill allows farms that currently provide housing to
    continue but doesn't prohibit farms without housing from
    participating.
        The proposal imposes a robust enforcement regime and a
    strong penalty structure for violations. All the economic
    benefits and worker protections in this bill will provide
    workers who accept these jobs assurance: They will enjoy a
    higher wage and benefit package, a safer work environment, and
    quicker resolution of their grievances than if they work on
    U.S. farms illegally.
        It is clear. There is bipartisan, bicameral consensus. Our
    Nation needs a modern and flexible future flow ag guestworker
    program. In fact, this bill encompasses many elements of the
    Senate Gang of Eight ag proposal, such as: a simplified
    application process under USDA; elimination of the unnecessary
    50 percent rule and worthless newspaper ads; savings on
    acquisition fees; open to all ag sectors, including some food
    processing; authorizes longer visas to respond to evolving farm
    production practices; enables undocumented workers to obtain
    legal status and keep working; provides at-will and contract
    employment to allow workers and growers flexibility to decide
    for themselves what works best; and provides portability so
    workers can seek additional and/or alternative opportunities in
    the farm marketplace.
        Although the 750 farmers of NCGA and others are strongly
    opposed to an arbitrary cap and a new program, we acknowledge
    the 500,000-per-year cap in the H-2C program is far more
    reasonable than the woefully inadequate annual cap in the
    Senate bill. Farmers need the program to be uncapped to avoid
    devastating economic losses that will force unprecedented farm
    bankruptcies when crops are lost because partisan, political
    systems and administrative processes will never react quickly
    enough as crops ripen, then rot. Market opportunities are lost,
    contracts with customers go unfilled and are lost, and
    consumers are forced to pay higher prices for a smaller supply
    of fresh fruits and vegetables.
        While not perfect, NCGA's board voted unanimously to
    support H.R. 1773 because it provides growers with a program
    that is substantially more predictable and user-friendly. It is
    a win for farmers, a win for farmworkers, and a win for
    America. It will create jobs and save jobs in the United
    States.
        And I would like to enter into the record a comprehensive
    study completed by economist Michael Clemens that has just been
    published by the Center for Global Development and the
    Partnership for a New American Economy that shows clearly and
    demonstrably that legal guestworkers save and create jobs for
    Americans on and off the farm.
        [The information referred to follows:]

                                   __________
        Mr. Wicker. It is critical to get this public policy right.
    Our U.S. Farmers cannot afford and many will not survive
    another policy failure like 1986.
        The H-2C program will provide a fair, predictable,
    efficient, and affordable process for employing workers in
    agricultural jobs. Farmers and farmworkers want to comply with
    labor and immigration laws. Congress should pass the
    Agricultural Guestworker Act so they can.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
        Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Mr. Wicker.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Wicker follows:]

                                   __________

        Mr. Gowdy. Mr. Gaddis?

    TESTIMONY OF CHRISTOPHER GADDIS, CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER,
                         JBS USA HOLDINGS, INC.

        Mr. Gaddis. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, thank
    you for this opportunity to testify on H.R. 1773.
        My name is Chris Gaddis, and I am the human resources chief
    officer for JBS USA. JBS, USA has approximately 60,000
    employees in the U.S., and I did a straw poll; I believe we
    have facilities in all but 5 of your States.
        My remarks today are on behalf of JBS USA, but they are
    also on behalf of the Food Manufacturers Immigration Coalition,
    a broad coalition of the leading meat and poultry processors
    and trade associations, including the North American Meat
    Association, the American Meat Institute, the National Chicken
    Council, the National Turkey Federation, the National
    Cattlemen's Beef Association, and the National Pork Producers
    Council.
        We thank the Chairman and his cosponsors for the
    introduction of H.R. 1773 and for its constructive attention to
    an essential component of immigration reform, addressing the
    labor needs of U.S. employers and also the sources of such
    labor. As we see it, for reform to be meaningful, we must
    reckon with the needs of U.S. employers for less-skilled labor
    to work jobs that, due to various circumstances, go unfilled by
    U.S. workers, and we must address document fraud and identity
    theft.
        To begin, we support the definition of, quote,
    ``agricultural labor or services,'' unquote, contained in this
    bill. We believe it important that the legislation recognizes
    that all activities required for the, quote, ``preparation,
    processing, or manufacturing of a product of agriculture for
    further distribution,'' unquote, are an essential ingredient in
    the agricultural labor equation. These activities, which
    include the preparation and processing of animal protein
    products for further distribution in the food chain, are a
    critical second step in the food supply chain by which our
    companies feed the United States and the world.
        We also support the bill's provision of 36 months of
    uninterrupted stay for H-2C workers who obtain positions in
    agricultural manufacturing. The positions we offer are
    permanent, full-time, nonseasonal jobs. After an initial
    probationary period, our employees receive full benefits,
    including 401(k). The 36-month stay period is the minimum
    necessary for our companies to invest in the training of a new
    employee and then to reap some benefit prior to the employee
    needing to leave the country.
        And we note that the legislation only provides for maximum
    subsequent periods of stay of 18 months and does not allow H-2C
    workers to bring spouses or minor children with them. We
    encourage the Committee to reconsider these restrictions when
    comes to agricultural manufacturing and look forward to working
    with the Committee further on this topic.
        Next, we commend the bill's sponsors for taking a practical
    approach to dealing with labor that is presently here in
    unauthorized status. By granting eligibility for H-2C work to
    any person physically present in the United States on the date
    of the bill's introduction, the bill recognizes the
    unlikelihood that this population will be removed
    involuntarily, it maximizes the pool of persons who would
    qualify for H-2C status, and it avoids encouraging unauthorized
    migration by people who may read the bill from afar.
        We also note that the bill contains various requirements
    that protect rights of U.S. workers vis-a-vis H-2C workers and
    the rights of H-2C workers vis-a-vis prospective employers.
    This was covered in greater detail by Mr. Wicker. The companies
    in our coalition want to be very clear: We do not want to be
    associated with a program that would facilitate or allow
    improper treatment of domestic or foreign workers, and we
    therefore commend your direct confrontation of those issues.
        Last, there is an essential ingredient to immigration
    reform--Julie Myers Wood was here earlier. I have often heard
    that politics makes for strange bedfellows. JBS USA, in 2007,
    acquired Swift and Company, which in December of 2006 was the
    subject of the then-largest worksite enforcement action in the
    history of the Department of Homeland Security. At that point
    in time, Julie Myers Wood was the director of ICE. Over the
    last 3 years, Ms. Wood has done an incredible job on behalf of
    JBS as a private consultant, bringing us from where we were
    into the IMAGE program. JBS has the benefit of the size and
    scope to bring someone like Ms. Wood in. So I commend this
    group's addressing not just E-Verify but also trying to get
    their arms around identity theft in greater detail.
        In conclusion, the Food Manufacturers Immigration Coalition
    thanks Chairman Goodlatte and this Committee for taking an
    important step forward in the immigration reform process in the
    introduction of H.R. 1773 and its consideration of Congressman
    Smith's employment verification legislation. We understand that
    the road to effective immigration is not a straight line, but
    we believe in and appreciate the important steps taken by this
    legislation.
        Thank you.
        Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Mr. Gaddis.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Gaddis follows:]

                                   ATTACHMENT

                                   __________
        Mr. Gowdy. Mr. Graham?

             TESTIMONY OF JOHN B. GRAHAM, III, PRESIDENT,
                 GRAHAM AND ROLLINS, INC., HAMPTON, VA

        Mr. Graham. Good afternoon, Chairman Goodlatte and
    Committee Members. Thank you for inviting me----
        Mr. Gowdy. Would you make sure your microphone is on or
    pull it closer to you?
        Mr. Graham. Okay?
        Mr. Gowdy. That is perfect.
        Mr. Graham. Thank you for inviting me to testify here
    today.
        Not only am I the president of Graham and Rollins, but I am
    also a member of the Coalition to Save America's Seafood
    Industry, which fights to keep us free to compete in the global
    marketplace.
        America's $31 billion seafood industry supports more than 1
    million U.S. jobs, including almost 184,000 in seafood
    preparation and packaging and many others within our supplier
    and customer networks.
        America's seafood processing industry has struggled over
    the last 20 years as the local labor force has moved on to less
    strenuous full-time jobs and we are forced to find alternative
    labor. We currently use the H-2B program for essential work and
    to augment our full-time American workforce. A most recent
    survey conveyed an average of 2.1 American jobs was created
    from a single H-2B worker within the seafood industry.
        Most coalition members have used the H-2B program for over
    a decade, but it is a constant struggle to make the program
    work. Instead of focusing on growing my small business, I spent
    an inordinate amount of time on H-2B issues. These include the
    Labor Department's tedious paperwork requirements that are
    inconsistent year after year. We have to continually worry
    about not getting visas because the national cap hasn't been
    met or, more recently, worrying that new and more complex DOL
    rules will put me out of business.
        In addition to these requirements, most seafood processes
    are dependent upon a resource that is supplied by Mother
    Nature. We have no control over the availability of blue crabs.
    We also have harvest restrictions as to how many, where, and
    when our seafood may be harvested. Our members are deeply
    frustrated that DOL does not understand the unique nature of
    the seafood industry, from foreign competition to Mother
    Nature, and yet they continue to put regulatory pressures on
    us.
        For example, most seafood processors are in remote coastal
    communities. Our local workforce is tiny and shrinking. Yet DOL
    falsely insists that we simply choose to use the H-2B program
    rather than hire locally. Year after year, we have to prove at
    our expense through advertising and training programs that
    ultimately are unsuccessful that Americans do not want these
    jobs.
        The current rules reflect this misunderstanding, making the
    H-2B program very difficult. And so it is vital that Congress
    take a broad look at the H-2B program and its regulation by any
    government agency as part of this immigration reform effort.
        Chairman Goodlatte, I applaud your creative thinking with
    the H-2C program and inclusion of seafood in this agricultural
    workforce bill.
        First and foremost, I am glad that you have included our
    seafood industry alongside the agricultural industry. These two
    industries are alike in many fashions. Both are production-
    oriented, whereas workers' wages are calculated not by just the
    amount of time in fields or within the processing plants but
    also based on individual performance in the form of piece
    wages. We are alike in that we are not providing a service, we
    are providing and manufacturing products from nature's
    resources.
        Secondly, because we are at the mercy of Mother Nature, our
    industry is faced with frequent weather events which can
    abruptly change production schedules. It is for this reason I
    am supportive of the provision of guaranteed employment for 50
    percent of the work hours promised. This is much more flexible
    than DOL's proposed 75 percent guarantee presented in 2011.
        Lastly, I understand the motive behind establishing a trust
    fund, thus creating an incentive for the workers to return
    home. I believe that it was very creative and one which I think
    will prove to be worthwhile and beneficial to the H-2C program.
        I understand the House and Senate are considering several
    sets of guestworker programs. As you work through the process,
    I think I can speak for the entire industry in saying we are
    looking for a program that is dependable and consistent and one
    that allows us to stay in business and keep Americans working.
        H-2C offers a workable solution to obtain a reliable
    temporary workforce without the current problems we face within
    the H-2B program. Our need is that simple and that basic to our
    survival. Unfortunately, we are at a critical point where a
    change has to be made now or another American industry and
    American jobs will be lost.
        I thank you for this opportunity and look forward to
    answering any questions you may have.
        Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Mr. Graham.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Graham follows:]

                                   __________
        Mr. Gowdy. Mr. Rodriguez?

             TESTIMONY OF ARTURO S. RODRIGUEZ, PRESIDENT,
                     UNITED FARM WORKERS OF AMERICA

        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much, Chairman Gowdy, Ranking
    Member Lofgren, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for
    the opportunity to testify today. My name is Arturo Rodriguez,
    president of the United Farm Workers, and I have the honor of
    serving farmworkers in our Nation. We very much appreciate the
    chance to speak today on behalf of farmworkers throughout the
    United States.
        Our broken immigration system threatens our Nation's food
    supply. Today, we have farmworkers forced to work in the
    shadows of society in difficult working conditions, and farms
    around the country have great challenges hiring a legal
    workforce. We are in a unique moment in our Nation's history, a
    moment in which members of both political parties are coming
    together to confront the question of how to fix our broken
    immigration system. The urgency of the moment requires a
    straightforward analysis of the options before us.
        In that vein, H.R. 1773 falls far short of the challenge
    that faces American agriculture and our Nation's food supply.
    In fact, H.R. 1773 bears a much closer resemblance to the
    horrific Bracero Program of the 1940's-1960's than it does to
    the immigration reform changes we need for the 21st century.
        H.R. 1773 would replace the existing H-2A agriculture
    temporary worker program with the new H-2C program. The H-2C
    program would deprive U.S. farmworkers of jobs by minimizing
    the recruitment obligations of employers, slashing wages, and
    withholding 10 percent of a worker's wage. It would also
    minimize the government oversight, limit workers' access to
    judicial relief and legal assistance, and reduce temporary
    workers' minimum work guarantee.
        Further, it would eliminate the requirement that employers
    provide housing for temporary workers and U.S. workers who
    travel to the worksite and eliminate travel expense
    reimbursement for temporary workers. As a result, H.R. 1773
    would have the practical effect of dramatically cutting wages
    for the hundreds of thousands of farmworkers who are U.S.
    citizens and permanent legal residents.
        All of these changes reverse 50 years of agriculture labor
    law precedent established in response from both political
    parties to the terrible abuses of the Bracero Program of the
    '40's through the '60's.
        In addition, the H.R. 1773 proposal would not provide a
    roadmap to citizenship for the current farmworker labor force
    and would only allow them to apply for temporary worker visas.
        Those of us who work in agriculture know the policies we
    need. We can elevate farmworkers by making changes to
    immigration policy that do the following:
        One, retain as much of the existing workforce in
    agriculture. We can keep people in agriculture by honoring
    farmworkers with the ability to earn permanent legal status. We
    need to have the ability for the existing farmworkers to earn
    permanent legal status to encourage people to stay in
    agriculture and to honor our American values.
        Two, include basic worker protections that ensure that U.S.
    worker wages do not decrease and that stabilize the
    agricultural workforce. The agreement we came to with the
    Nation's agricultural employers does not include many of the
    wage and labor protections we wanted. Our agreement with grower
    associations is a compromise. But the agreement does have the
    basic wage and working protections we need to ensure that
    farmworker wages that are already low do not decrease further.
        We appreciate the Chairman's view on immigration comes from
    a place of his own study of the issue and a desire to address
    the labor needs of agriculture, but we respectfully suggest
    there is a better approach. We want to elevate farm work so
    that neither farmworkers without legal status nor guestworkers
    are the norm in American agriculture.
        We ask this Subcommittee to support a new comprehensive
    immigration process that grants current farmworkers and their
    family members a reasonable and prompt opportunity to earn
    legal immigration status and citizenship and ensures that
    future workers are brought here in a manner that elevates farm
    work in our Nation. By having such a system, we can ensure that
    we continue to have an agricultural industry that is the envy
    of the world and honor all of the women and men who have built
    such an exceptional domestic food supply.
        Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to
    your questions.
        Mr. Gowdy. Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Rodriguez follows:]

                                   __________
        Mr. Gowdy. The Chair would now recognize the gentleman from
    Virginia, the Chairman of the full Committee, Mr. Goodlatte.
        Mr. Goodlatte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you
    and the Ranking Member's forbearance on letting me ask
    questions first. I do have to get somewhere else soon.
        But I was pleased to be able to hear the testimony of all
    four of you. You are all making a great contribution to our
    effort to solve this problem of having an agricultural
    guestworker program that works for America and that contributes
    to avoiding a problem that occurred after the 1986 law went
    into effect.
        So, Mr. Rodriguez, let me direct my first question to you,
    along those lines. In your testimony, you state that, ``We need
    to have the ability for the existing farmworkers to earn
    permanent legal status to encourage people to stay in
    agriculture.'' However, your statement is at complete odds with
    the lessons learned from the legalization of illegal immigrant
    farmworkers in 1986. Once they received permanent residence,
    many left the fields for jobs in the cities.
        In fact, Philip Martin, professor of agricultural economics
    at the University of California-Davis, found that by 1997-'98,
    less than 12 years later, the percentage of crop workers who
    had been granted permanent residence through the 1986 act had
    fallen to only 16 percent.
        Isn't it the case that if Congress were to again grant a
    special pathway to citizenship to illegal immigrant
    farmworkers, that growers would soon be left without a labor
    force? Or, if you looked at it differently, if we were to have
    a legal status as a part of the overall solution to immigration
    reform, that we would then have a new demand for workers?
    Because, like 1986, many, when they can work anywhere they want
    to, will go and work elsewhere, creating a shortfall in
    agriculture that we need to replace with a workable guestworker
    program, which is where I think my legislation is headed.
        And when we do that, we are not going to be able to have a
    steady flow of people filling what is a very large demand--some
    people estimate half a million to a million people short--a
    steady demand of people if we constantly grant them lawful
    permanent resident status after they have been a guestworker
    for X number of years.
        Mr. Rodriguez. You know, my understanding is--and I know a
    lot of farmworkers that came through the 1986 program and still
    are working in agriculture today. The estimate today is about
    15 percent, from my understanding, 20-something years later.
        The realities are that, first of all, the legislation that
    we currently have proposed calls for both, taking into account
    folks that have spent a lot of time and demonstrated their
    skills, their professional capacities to work in agriculture,
    that they would be provided legal status and a path toward
    permanent residency and eventually a path toward citizenship.
    We are saying that that 800,000 to 1.1 million, whatever that
    number is, that they have that opportunity to do so.
        But, simultaneously, the agricultural industry, the
    agricultural employers, they have fought very hard and
    debated--we debated a lot about the need for the future flow,
    and there were two new visa programs that were designed for
    that particular purpose.
        So I am very confident that there is going to be an
    opportunity and then, when the need arises within the ag
    industry for future workers, that there will be that
    opportunity to get some.
        And the other reality is, sir, is that, you know, I have
    been doing this, as well, for several decades, and the actual
    wages and benefits in this particular industry hasn't really
    escalated to the point where it is an attractive industry for
    people to want to stay, to have a career, to build their--to
    raise their families, and to gain the opportunities----
        Mr. Goodlatte. But part of that may be because such a large
    percentage of those folks who are not here lawfully are not
    able to use the kind of leverage they would have if they had a
    legal status. And, therefore, it seems to me that when you
    legalize this and you look at a real market-based wage, that
    that market-based wage is likely to rise, whereas the current
    bureaucratic government-sets-the-wage approach is likely to
    miss the target, miss the right amount, and encourages, rather
    than discourages, the use of unlawful immigrant labor.
        So I think we can solve this problem. I think we agree with
    some of what you are saying. We are just saying that, in the
    future, we are not going to be able to have a steady flow of
    800,000 to 1.1 million people flowing through the system, able
    to get a green card, able to leave the workforce, as has
    happened when they were legalized in the past. And we have to
    have a real guestworker program that is just that, a
    guestworker program.
        Let me ask you one more question. You say in your testimony
    that the H-2C program will deprive U.S. farmworkers of jobs by
    minimizing the recruiting requirements. Is it your opinion that
    farmers face a shortage of farmworkers because they don't do
    enough recruiting?
        Mr. Rodriguez. The requirements that I was making reference
    to are in regards to the protections for farmworkers when they
    are being recruited here in the United States, sir.
        Mr. Goodlatte. Thank you.
        My time has expired, Mr. Chairman, and I do have some other
    questions. Perhaps they could be submitted in writing or you
    may ask them.
        Mr. Gowdy. Or I would be thrilled to yield my time to you,
    Mr. Chairman, if you would like it.
        Mr. Goodlatte. No, I think it is fine.
        Mr. Gowdy. Okay. I thank the gentleman from Virginia.
        I would at this point recognize the gentlelady from
    California, the Ranking Member, Ms. Lofgren.
        Ms. Lofgren. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Before asking my questions, I would like to ask unanimous
    consent to include in the record of this hearing the list of
    the 71 farm organizations that have signed off on the agreement
    with the farmworkers' union on the agricultural program that I
    referenced earlier.
        And I would also like to ask unanimous consent to include
    in the record a letter or a statement from the Agriculture
    Workforce Coalition that is not in support of H.R. 1773.
        And if I could get unanimous consent for those two
    inclusions.
        Mr. Gowdy. Without objection.
        [The information referred to follows:]

       Members of the Agricultural Workforce Coalition that Brokered an
                     Agreement with the United Farm Workers

     1. American Farm Bureau Federation
     2. American Nursery & Landscape Association
     3. Florida Fruit & Vegetable Association
     4. National Council of Agricultural Employers
     5. National Council of Farmer Cooperatives
     6. National Milk Producers Federation
     7. USA Farmers
     8. U.S. Apple Association
     9. United Fresh Produce Association
    10. Western Growers Association
    11. Western United Dairymen
    12. Agriculture Coalition for Immigration Reform
    13. Agricultural Council of California
    14. American AgriWomen
    15. American Beekeeping Federation(ABF)
    16. American Frozen Food Institute
    17. American Mushroom Institute
    18. American Sheep Industry Association
    19. California Association of Winegrape Growers
    20. California Avocado Commission
    21. California Citrus Mutual
    22. California Giant Berry Farms
    23. California Grape and Tree Fruit League
    24. California Women for Agriculture
    25. Certified Greenhouse Farmers
    26. Colorado Nursery & Greenhouse Association
    27. CoBank
    28. Cooperative Network
    29. Council for Burley Tobacco
    30. Farm Credit East
    31. Florida Citrus Mutual
    32. Florida Farm Bureau
    33. Florida Nursery, Growers & Landscape Association (FNGLA)
    34. Georgia Farm Bureau Federation
    35. Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Growers Association
    36. Georgia Green Industry Association
    37. Hispanic American Growers Association
    38. Idaho Dairymen's Association
    39. Illinois Farm Bureau
    40. Louisiana Farm Bureau Federation
    41. MBG Marketing/The Blueberry People
    42. National Christmas Tree Association
    43. National Farmers Union
    44. National Grange
    45. National Onion Association
    46. National Peach Council
    47. National Potato Council
    48. Northeast States Association for Agricultural Stewardship (NAAS)
    49. Northwest Farm Credit Services
    50. OFA, An Association of Horticulture Professionals
    51. Oregon Association of Nurseries
    52. Produce Marketing Association
    53. Red Gold, Inc
    54. Society of American Florists
    55. South East Dairy Farmers Association
    56. Southeast Milk, Inc.
    57. State Agriculture and Rural Leaders (SARL)
    58. Sweet Potato Council of California
    59. Texas Citrus Mutual
    60. Texas International Produce Association
    61. Texas Vegetable Association
    62. U.S. Custom Harvesters, Inc.
    63. United Ag
    64. United Dairymen of Arizona
    65. Utah Dairy Producers
    66. United Egg Producers
    67. Village Farms International, Inc.
    68. Wine America
    69. Wine Institute
    70. Yankee Farm Credit
    71. Yuma Fresh Vegetable Association

                                   __________

                                   __________

        Ms. Lofgren. You know, I just want to take two statements
    out of this Ag Workforce Coalition, which is signed by
    practically every agricultural employer group in the United
    States. It says, ``The AWC has consistently advocated for a
    separate legal status for experienced agricultural workers that
    are currently working in the U.S. and have been for a period of
    time. We do not believe the bill's approach of funneling them
    into temporary H-2C nonimmigrant programs adequately addresses
    the needs of the industry.'' They further say, as to the at-
    will program that the program, as included in the bill, is
    structurally unacceptable.
        I certainly believe that the author of the bill, Chairman
    Goodlatte, has every intent to make a workable program. I do
    not at all disbelieve his good intentions. But I do not think
    this is a workable plan.
        Listening to you, Mr. Graham, about the H-2B program, I
    have heard those complaints about the Department of Labor from
    my own constituents. I think there are issues relative to the
    administration of the program. But I would note that the bill
    has 500,000 visas, a cap. Within that cap would have to be the
    entire current unauthorized workforce, estimated at somewhere
    like 1.8 million people, plus all the new people--there
    wouldn't be any room for new, additional workers--plus the H-2B
    people that are not currently in that program. So if you are
    worried about the cap on H-2B now, you wouldn't get a single
    visa out of this bill because of that cap.
        I do think that the--you know, I am not suggesting that the
    W visa program that was the result of the business community
    and the labor community's negotiations is a perfect plan, but
    it does have huge numbers of visas, certainly considerably more
    than are included in the bill that we are considering today.
        So I think that is worth thinking about as we move forward,
    because we want to make sure that we have adequate protections
    in place so that American workers are not disadvantaged by
    prospective future workers.
        At the same time, we know--I mean, I was thinking,
    listening to Mr. Goodlatte about people who left agriculture,
    and I think some people did. I mean, it is a hard job. On the
    other hand, you know, 1986 was 31 years ago. I mean, if you
    were 40 years old in 1986, you would be 71 years old today. I
    mean, you are not going to be out in the fields. It is an aging
    workforce.
        So we have a need for immigrants in some parts of our
    economy to meet our needs. And I think to have those needs met
    in a legal way and in an orderly way with an adequate number of
    visas available is very advantageous for the United States and
    certainly fair, also, to American workers as well as immigrants
    who would be coming in. Because we are not the kind of country
    that really thinks it is right or fair to mistreat people who
    are coming to our country to work. That is not what America is
    all about, and I know that is not what any one of you are
    about.
        I would just ask, you know, Mr. Rodriguez, the--well, let
    me ask you, Mr. Graham. How many workers do you need in your--
    in terms of immigrant workers, how many H-2B workers do you
    have, and how many would you need to have if you didn't have
    all the rigmarole and caps that you deal with?
        Mr. Graham. I would estimate our needs for the seafood
    industry are probably less than 15,000.
        Ms. Lofgren. Okay. And when you get into the meatpacking--
    and, as you know, there is a special allocation in the Senate
    bill for meatpacking--what do you think, and can you speak for
    the whole industry, what the need is for immigrant labor in
    meat and chicken?
        Mr. Gaddis. I can't speak with specificity about the
    industry. I can tell you, we hire somewhere between 100 and 300
    a week.
        Ms. Lofgren. Okay. So, clearly, a 500,000 cap for all
    existing farmworkers, all additional farmworkers, plus new
    industries that are not currently in the program would be eaten
    up just in a snap.
        I see my time has expired. I will yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Gowdy. I thank the gentlelady from California.
        I am going to recognize myself and then recognize the
    gentleman from North Carolina and the gentleman from Illinois.
        Mr. Graham, to those who think that you would be able to
    find more domestic workers if only you recruited harder and
    more, what do you say?
        Mr. Graham. Can you repeat that question again, please?
        Mr. Gowdy. To those who think that you would be able to
    hire more domestic workers if only you recruited more or
    harder, what do you say?
        Mr. Graham. Well, being in the program now for 14 years and
    having to go through the rigmarole of the recruitment process
    and offer 2-week training and having numerous people come and
    apply, to walk out 2 or 3 days into the whole process, you
    know, there is not much more that I can offer for training and
    recruitment. We have done our due diligence, and we are just
    not finding the people out there.
        Mr. Gowdy. Your testimony is eerily reminiscent of what we
    have heard from--what I hear from peach farmers in my own
    district. The effort is there, the recruitment is there. And
    even if domestic workers come, they may not stay past lunch.
        So, Mr. Gaddis, do you have similar experiences or
    different experiences with respect to recruiting domestic
    workers?
        Mr. Gaddis. Very similar. The scale is a bit different.
        But, in 2007, at a beef plant in Greeley, we decided to
    start a second shift, and we strategized as a company as to how
    best to do that and literally barnstormed the country to areas
    where individuals with meatpacking expertise or experience or a
    propensity to even accept a job meatpacking were located. And I
    can tell you, after 3 months of virtually door-to-door
    recruitment efforts and some more sophisticated efforts, we
    didn't have enough people. And we turned to, at the time,
    refugee labor.
        So I think it is a very--in a healthy industry like ours
    and like Mr. Graham's, it is a reality, regardless of the
    circumstance, that there just are not enough U.S. workers to
    fill the jobs.
        Mr. Gowdy. All right.
        Staying with you, how will having the Secretary of
    Agriculture involved in the administration of the H-2C program
    be beneficial, if it will be beneficial, to your industry?
        Mr. Gaddis. Could you repeat the question? I am sorry.
        Mr. Gowdy. How would having the Secretary of Agriculture be
    involved in the new H-2C program be beneficial, if it would be
    beneficial, to your industry?
        Mr. Gaddis. I go back and forth on that. As somebody who
    administers human resources for our company, we do not rely
    on--or we would not rely on H-2C workers as a primary source of
    labor. But I would tell you, to have access to someone or to a
    department that is sympathetic to our plight, our situation,
    outlined by Mr. Graham and I, that is always helpful.
        Mr. Gowdy. Mr. Wicker, you, I believe, are able to speak to
    the litigious nature of some with respect to the current visa
    program. In fact, I think you noted that the North Carolina
    Growers Association has been sued over 30 times and paid over
    $5 million in attorneys' fees.
        Can you speak to the litigation reforms in Chairman
    Goodlatte's bill?
        Mr. Wicker. Yeah. What we should strive for is to try to
    solve farmworkers' problems, legal problems, grievances, et
    cetera, quickly and efficiently. And the best way to do that is
    not with attorneys and lawsuits that are very expensive.
        And so North Carolina Growers Association started in 1990.
    We signed a collective bargaining agreement with the Farm Labor
    Organizing Committee--it is an affiliate of the AFL-CIO--in
    2004. So we have a grievance procedure in place on all of our
    farms with our workers now.
        And so it can work. You can provide a system so that
    farmworkers and farmers can solve their problems without having
    to go to court.
        Mr. Gowdy. Sticking with you, why should you be required to
    provide housing and transportation when other industries do
    not?
        Mr. Wicker. Well, you know, that is a great question. The
    farmers that I work for have been providing housing for a long
    time. It is a magnet. It is a benefit that draws workers to our
    farms and has them be--creates the desire for them to want to
    stay there. So even though this proposal doesn't mandate that
    housing be provided, I suspect that going forward our farmers
    would continue to provide housing.
        But it is a burden, especially in Representative Lofgren's
    home State of California. I have friends in California that
    farm, and housing is a huge issue. And so it is something that
    has to be fixed.
        Mr. Gowdy. Thank you.
        I will now recognize the gentleman from Illinois, Mr.
    Gutierrez.
        Mr. Gutierrez. Thank you very much.
        First of all, I want to thank Chairman Gowdy for calling
    this hearing.
        I want to join the Ranking Member, Zoe Lofgren, in
    expressing our desire to work with the other side of the aisle
    in a bipartisan manner. One of the things that immigration has
    been able to do here in Washington, D.C., is kind of--here is
    Benghazi and the A.P. And, you know, everything else that is
    going on in Washington, D.C. And we are going to vote to repeal
    Obamacare one more time today. I think it will be the 36th,
    37th time. And so Democrats defend it and Republicans attack
    it. But we have not allowed any of that to come down and to
    poison the well in our immigration discussions with Republicans
    and Democrats. We have kept that all outside. And I think that
    that speaks, I believe, to the desire of the American people
    and for us to be responsive to the desire of the American
    people.
        I wanted to say--so I wanted to thank all of you for your
    testimony and for your work and for everything that you do,
    because I think it is important that we hear from all quarters.
        But I also want to echo something that Congresswoman Zoe
    Lofgren mentioned. It seems to me that, if out here--that is,
    the private sector, the business community--has reached an
    agreement with those that represent the labor community, that
    we shouldn't meddle. I mean, it seems to me that there is no
    reason, when there is an agreement that has already been
    reached between those who represent the farmworkers and those
    that represent so many other diverse industries. Why we don't
    simply accept that men and women of good faith have bargained
    and reached an agreement and why we can't embrace that is
    something I think we need to ask ourselves as we move forward.
        I would like to say that, for me, this is a very important
    part of what will be comprehensive immigration reform, a
    somewhat unique part of what will be comprehensive immigration
    reform, because of the relationship that the farm-work
    community has to a movement for justice, for a movement
    embodied in Cesar Chavez, for a movement embodied in what I
    believe is making America a better, greater place for social
    justice and what that spirit entails.
        And it really is in the support that across America
    farmworkers have, that special place that we not only have for
    farmworkers every night when we sit down for dinner to eat the
    crops that they have harvested for us, to do that backbreaking,
    dirty, filthy work--which we all know we have trouble, let's
    face it.
        We have had testimony here before because Chairman Gowdy
    has brought people here who have taught us that we are going to
    have to fundamentally make a decision: Are we going to eat food
    that is grown in foreign countries by foreign hands, or are we
    going to have food that is grown here protected by us, by
    foreign hands? Because let's face it, nobody here on this panel
    is sending their kids to school to become a farmworker. And the
    population doesn't exist out on your farm or rural areas
    because that population isn't there. We are going to need
    people to continue to come to America to do that work.
        And I just want to say, if it is backbreaking work, when we
    discuss here comprehensive immigration reform, I think we have
    to get away from this notion and we have to stand up for
    farmworkers, we have to stand up for those who provide us our
    food, because, you know, that is an essential ingredient to our
    safety. Watch the future. Food is going to become a condition
    of your survival as a Nation, and who picks that food is going
    to become a condition.
        I would like to ask Arturo: Arturo, the issue of
    citizenship has been brought up. Tell me from your perspective,
    why is it important that farmworkers become citizens of the
    United States--be allowed the opportunity to become citizens of
    the United States?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much, Congressman Gutierrez.
        I mean, first of all, farmworkers have been here now for,
    in some cases, since 1986, since the last immigration bill,
    working in agriculture. They have demonstrated here to our
    Nation, as has been mentioned by many of the Members already,
    it is difficult work, it is hard work, but it requires a lot of
    skills and profession.
        And I think the farmworkers that are here today have come
    here because they want to make a contribution to America. They
    want to make a contribution to our economy. And they are
    willing to do what many have chosen not to do any longer here
    in this Nation.
        And so it is a way of honoring those individuals, and it is
    a way of ensuring that they do stay in the agricultural
    industry to continue to meet further requirements that are
    necessary in order to gain a path to legal permanent residency
    and eventually to citizenship.
        So that I believe, in terms of ensuring that we are going
    have a secure labor force, that we take the estimated 800,000
    to 1.1 million unauthorized farmworkers currently working in
    agriculture today, we give them that opportunity to work and to
    gain the legal permanent residency, to earn that, as everyone
    else would, under comprehensive immigration reform and to
    eventually be on that path to citizenship so that they can
    enjoy the fruits of America just like anyone else can here in
    this Nation.
        So we welcome that opportunity, and we hope that as we
    continue the process that that becomes the decision that is
    made by Members of Congress as well as in the Senate to move
    forward.
        Mr. Gutierrez. I just want to end by saying I thank the
    Chairman for his indulgence in allowing Mr. Rodriguez to finish
    his answer.
        And I just want--as we move forward, you will see the bill.
    And when it comes to the STEM industry, the high-tech industry,
    I assure you, they are going to say bring tens of thousands of
    workers to America, but they are going to give them green cards
    and they are going to allow them to bring their families. I am
    just saying, fight for your own people in your own industry the
    same way Google and Apple and others fight for high-tech.
    Somebody has to do the backbreaking work.
        Thank you so much. And I appreciate the Chairman's
    indulgence.
        Mr. Holding. [presiding.] Thank you.
        I am going to recognize Mr. Garcia from Florida, and then I
    will recognize myself and be the final questioner.
        Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        You know, the other day, someone who doesn't agree with
    immigration reform said to me, ``You know, Joe, if somebody
    walked into your house and you didn't invite them, just walked
    around and then left, you would want them prosecuted.'' And my
    response was, if somebody walked into my house, filled my
    refrigerator with fresh fruit, painted my walls, cleaned my
    house, put my grandmother to bed, then went outside and mowed
    the lawn, I think I would owe them money, not want to prosecute
    them.
        The folks that come to this country come for the very best
    that our Nation has to offer, which is opportunity and freedom.
    And, clearly, they pay a grave price for it.
        I want to talk about something that, Artie, you have been
    working on for a very long time, which is, for years, the
    negotiated agreement between your folks and the Chamber of
    Commerce--which, in truth, is what we should be talking about
    here, right? An agreement that you in good faith negotiated. I
    think Mr. Wicker was part of the group who singed off on that
    agreement.
        I want to you tell me about the time you put into that. And
    did you think you were just negotiating with the Chamber or did
    you think you were negotiating in good faith to put a bill
    together that would be accepted by Members of the other side?
        Mr. Rodriguez. We actually became engaged--thank you very
    much, Congressman Garcia.
        We became engaged initially in this process to bring about
    immigration reform for the agricultural workers and the
    industry as a whole with agricultural employers dating back to
    the year 2000, about 13 years ago. And, you know, at that
    particular time, we met with the heads, the CEOs, the
    presidents of a number of different agriculture associations
    throughout the United States. And we initially fashioned
    AgJOBS, which was a legislation that was being utilized and
    being discussed and debated for many, many years now.
        About 6 months ago, we were approached by many of the same
    agriculture employers and different associations to look at and
    discuss a new immigration reform package for the agricultural
    industry that would impact both on the employers as well as on
    farmworkers. And we began that particular process and, as a
    result of that, fashioned an agreement that we felt was a
    compromise but yet something that all the parties could agree
    to.
        And we met with 12 different associations that ranged from
    the American Farm Bureau to the Western Growers Association to
    nurserymen, sheep herders, dairies, apples, all the various
    citrus associations from Florida. All the various major
    agricultural associations throughout the United States came to
    the table, and our voices are all heard and debated and
    discussed. And we finally reached an agreement the day that the
    comprehensive bill on the Senate side was being submitted.
        Mr. Garcia. Thank you for your work, and hopefully it won't
    be ignored over here.
        Mr. Wicker, I believe you were part of the group that
    signed off on this. Am I correct?
        Mr. Wicker. I am here today to testify for North Carolina
    Growers, and I am treasurer of the USA Farmers Group. And USA
    Farmers was part of--is part of the agricultural workforce
    coalition that negotiated the compromise that resulted in the
    Senate bill.
        Mr. Garcia. How did you feel about that compromise?
        Mr. Wicker. I think it is fine; I don't think it will pass
    the House. So we need to get a bill that will pass the House
    and go to conference and get something to the President's desk.
        Mr. Garcia. Well, you let us take care of the politics of
    it, but----
        Mr. Wicker. Sure.
        Mr. Garcia [continuing]. You--I want to get an
    understanding. I mean, Mr. Rodriguez described his working
    through it. Could you give me your sense as someone who was on
    the other side working through this bill, the compromise
    required, the struggle? Maybe give us a sense from your
    perspective.
        Mr. Wicker. I was not directly involved in the
    negotiations.
        Mr. Garcia. I am sure they were checking off with you
    through it, right?
        Mr. Wicker. Pardon?
        Mr. Garcia. That you were part of discussions as the
    negotiations were going on.
        Mr. Wicker. Sure. And we think at USA Farmers that they got
    as good a bill as they could possibly get----
        Mr. Garcia. Good.
        Mr. Wicker [continuing]. Out of the Senate compromise.
        Mr. Garcia. Thank you.
        You know, Mr. Rodriguez, you have been in the fields, and
    you know how hard it is to work. Today someone from the other
    side alleged that these are jobs that American workers are
    willing to do and anxious to do. In your years and with all
    your folks out there, do you find that to be true, that, you
    know, U.S. Workers are willing to do the work that the American
    farmworkers are doing today, and, in particular, those without
    documentation?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Well, actually, yes, Mr. Garcia, we estimate
    there are approximately 600,000 U.S. farmworkers, U.S. either
    citizens or legal permanent residents that are currently
    working in agriculture today. And we very much believe that
    that number would grow significantly when this legislation
    passes and gets implemented and gives farmworkers a right to
    gain legal status in working in the agricultural industry.
        So there is a sizable number of folks that continue to work
    in agriculture, and we hope that, through this process, as
    well, we continue to elevate farm work as an honorable work, as
    a career that all of us can pursue here in the United States.
        Mr. Garcia. Thank you.
        I want to thank all the witnesses.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you. And I yield back the balance of my
    time.
        Mr. Holding. Thank you, Mr. Garcia.
        I will recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        I want to thank all of our witnesses here today. I want to
    particularly thank Mr. Wicker, who has been an informed,
    intelligent, and reliable voice on these issues in North
    Carolina for a long time. And I have known him beyond this
    capacity in this job but even when I was a staffer here on
    Capitol Hill.
        And so, welcome.
        I want to turn specifically to North Carolina. Mr. Wicker,
    you were talking about the 500,000-worker cap on this bill and
    how it really should be uncapped. I want to talk about
    specifically what is happening in North Carolina now. How many
    guestworkers are we using in North Carolina at the moment?
        Mr. Wicker. NCGA is not the only user of guestworkers in
    North Carolina. This year, it will be 10,000 maybe, out of a
    national total of 70,000 possibly.
        Mr. Holding. Well, those 10,000 workers, what percentage
    does that represent of the total amount of workers that we need
    in North Carolina to handle these agricultural jobs?
        Mr. Wicker. I think that represents in the range of 10 to
    15 percent.
        Mr. Holding. Wow. And the folks who are making up the
    difference, the workers who are making up the difference, where
    are they coming from? What are they composed of?
        Mr. Wicker. I think that group is largely composed of
    undocumented workers. I mean, everybody is in agreement across
    the board that the overwhelming majority, somewhere between 50
    and 70 percent, of migrant seasonal agricultural workers are
    undocumented workers.
        Mr. Holding. So if the program is capped at 500,000, we in
    North Carolina would need--you are saying 100,000 of those
    would have to come to North Carolina?
        Mr. Wicker. I think that is correct.
        Mr. Holding. And the rest of the States would just have to
    divvy up what is left, right?
        Mr. Wicker. Yes.
        Mr. Holding. Okay.
        A few other questions for you, Mr. Wicker. The concept of
    at-will temporary guestworkers enjoys broad support. What would
    be some of the advantages of hiring at-will guestworkers?
        Mr. Wicker. I think at-will, the concept here is largely
    borne out of west coast agriculture. And so the at-will
    provisions contemplate having a workforce that can move more
    freely from short-term agricultural job to short-term
    agricultural job.
        In North Carolina, we have an extremely diverse ag
    portfolio, and so we have been able to string a lot of
    different short-term jobs together, like tobacco, cucumbers,
    sweet potatoes. So our growers overwhelmingly prefer the
    contract provisions, because the margins are so tight on the
    farm, we want to know if we are going to the bank to borrow a
    million dollars in operating money and push our equity into the
    center of the table and plant these crops, that we want to know
    that we have workers who want to stay until the end of the
    harvest season.
        Mr. Holding. And you bring up a valid point, in that you
    might bring in a guestworker to work on a tobacco crop, but
    then that merges over into a sweet potato crop, and then before
    too long they have been here for a period of time that takes
    them out of the classification of being a seasonal worker,
    because they are working multiple crops.
        what are some of the complications there?
        Mr. Wicker. Well, the current program is capped at--in
    statute at a year, but in reg 10 months. Our growers have
    figured out a way to live inside the parameters of this
    program, so the longest workers that we have in North Carolina
    are 10 months.
        But agriculture is changing; it is consolidating. We are
    moving to year-round productions, especially in the Sun Belt
    States. And so we are going to have to move to a longer-term
    visa in the future.
        Mr. Holding. Are there any problems--I think under
    Obamacare seasonal workers are exempted from being covered by
    Obamacare, correct?
        Mr. Wicker. I was hoping you weren't going to ask me a
    technical question about Obamacare. But, yes, as I understand,
    the two tests that you have to complete to decide if have you
    coverage, you have to have more than 50 permanent employees.
    So, you know, when you get into that longer visa----
        Mr. Holding. They may very well be covered by it.
        Mr. Wicker [continuing]. They very well could be covered.
        Mr. Holding. That would add a significant cost to our
    farmers per worker.
        Mr. Wicker. That is absolutely true.
        Mr. Holding. Well, I see my time is expiring. I am going to
    confer with my distinguished Ranking Member--ah.
        I will recognize the distinguished lady from Texas, Ms.
    Jackson Lee.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. I want to thank the members for their
    patience, that we were on the floor debating on a matter that
    caused me to have to run from the floor. And thank you for your
    courtesies.
        And I did not want to miss the opportunity, first of all,
    to thank the witnesses for being here, to acknowledge the
    legislation that is before us.
        I think, over the years, we have had, Mr. Chair,
    Congressman Lofgren work tirelessly on this with one of our
    former Members, Mr. Berman. And I think my good friend, Mr.
    Rodriguez, knows that we have been on a long journey.
        I cannot start any line of questioning without saying that
    the real commitment to the Nation is comprehensive immigration
    reform. And what I remember in terms of our work, with the
    years gone past, we worked on issues such as poor housing for
    farmworkers, poor health conditions, poor working conditions.
    We were just at the bare minimum of trying to create a decent
    way of life.
        And I am also reminded of the friendship of Cesar Chavez
    and Martin Luther King. It has been a long, long journey.
        And I, frankly, believe that if we look at this issue and
    do not provide a component that deals with the rights of
    workers, then we may be going in the same cycle again.
        So I just want to ask, Mr. Rodriguez--and I may have time
    for someone else--to be able to share with me your thoughts
    about whether there is a framework of protecting workers.
        And I want to ask sort of a pointed question, that
    farmworkers are everybody. If 500 American workers wanted to
    come and do that work, everybody is embraced as a farmworker.
    Is that not right, Mr. Rodriguez?
        If we fill up the whole needs of farmworkers with people
    who here in the United States--no one is making a decision to
    weed them out or not let them come or not let the farming
    industry recruit them. So let's put that on the line, that the
    farm industry--we started as farmers. Obviously, people have
    moved to cities and moved into different capacities. But I
    don't want it to be said that we either couldn't find or we
    wouldn't recruit individuals who are here in the United States.
        And so you might want to comment on that, but then the
    framework of the underlying legislation in terms of protecting
    workers.
        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you very much, Congresswoman Jackson
    Lee.
        You know, one of the reasons why we don't feel that H.R.
    1773 really is the type of legislation that we are looking for
    here and why we have spent so much time sitting down with
    employer associations over the course of the last few years and
    months was to really design a program that ensured that the
    jobs of U.S. workers were protected, first of all, that it was
    very important to maintain their jobs, that they have an
    opportunity to maintain their jobs and the wage levels that
    they had, and that we would not utilize and bring in
    guestworkers for the purpose of lowering those wages or
    deteriorating those working conditions.
        And what we find with H.R. 1773, that they take away a lot
    of those protections. My understanding is, via the legislation,
    there would be no paid transportation, inbound transportation,
    for workers that are brought in from a country to work here in
    the crops. And, as a result, it is very difficult for them to
    pay that money up front. They come from countries and from,
    more than likely, situations where they haven't been working
    prior to that in terms of coming here.
        Somebody talked about housing a little bit earlier. It is
    important. I mean, here are the lowest-paid workers in our
    country, and where are they going to get money to pay rent, to
    find housing, especially in rural communities that already have
    a difficult time in terms of achieving that? So that without
    providing some type of housing or housing allowance, there is
    not going to be the opportunity for people to--we are going to
    go back to the camps that we found during the Bracero days and
    those types of things and reverting back forward.
        The enforcement mechanism is an issue of real importance to
    us, to make sure that there is someone that is going to be
    watching and observing and ensuring that all the parties are
    doing what they should be doing in relationship to that.
        And the wages is of utmost importance and ensuring that,
    again, we have a wage level that is set that is going to,
    again, provide those workers with what they deserve, what they
    should be paid to be able to work here, and that they are not
    utilized in a way to undercut what U.S. workers and what
    American workers are making at the particular farm where they
    are at.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. Just to follow up with one quick question,
    Mr. Gaddis. I am sorry I had a coughing spell here. I didn't
    want to be unfair to the growers. And just this quick question.
        One of the things--I think what Mr. Rodriguez has indicated
    are issues that we need to work on together. One of things that
    will help you, of course, if our colleagues will allow the
    Affordable Care Act to stay in place, you will have some form
    of health insurance, depending on how we formulate the
    comprehensive immigration reform.
        But the question is--we respect the industry. It is an
    important industry for both the United States, the food
    industry, growers, farmers, and the world. Would you welcome
    some of the fixes that Mr. Rodriguez has talked about, housing
    and certain rights, so that you have a healthy and committed
    and dedicated workforce that is there for you when you need
    them?
        Mr. Gaddis?
        Mr. Gaddis. There are some distinctions to be drawn between
    the workforce that Mr. Rodriguez is involved with and ours in
    the meatpacking industry. I can tell you that ours are good
    jobs, good-paying jobs that provide employees without a lot of
    education to become upwardly mobile. That is why meatpacking
    has historically been a first-generation job.
        We are, first of all, supportive of the initial 36-month
    length of stay. For us in the meatpacking industry and the
    coalition, the critical issue on that front relates to the
    subsequent stays of 18 months. It takes us somewhere between 4
    and 8 months to teach someone a trade, teach someone a
    meaningful trade. And so, in order to get a return on that
    investment, we would need them to stay longer.
        And then the other thing that we would ask for is
    unification of family, spouse's dependents, the opportunity for
    unification of spouse's dependents.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. But you wouldn't mind if--all of the
    witnesses wouldn't mind if we improve this legislation or in
    comprehensive immigration reform put in some of the features
    that Mr. Rodriguez has spoken of.
        Mr. Wicker. I am sorry. I didn't hear your question.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. That you wouldn't mind fixing the
    legislation to put in some of the features that Mr. Rodriguez
    is speaking of to make it more palatable for the worker.
        Mr. Wicker. Let's get together and talk about it. It is all
    about a balanced package. We have to take care of the workers.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. Mr. Graham, before I am gaveled down?
        Mr. Holding. The gentlelady's time has expired.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. But Mr. Graham can say yes or no?
        Mr. Graham. Coming from the H-2B program, some of the
    things that we are talking about we were doing. So we have no
    problem with some of those provisions.
        Ms. Jackson Lee. I thank the Chair and Ranking Member for
    their indulgence. My time has expired.
        Mr. Holding. I thank the gentlelady from Texas.
        This concludes today's hearing. Thanks to all of our
    witnesses for attending.
        And, without objection, all Members will have 5 legislative
    days to submit additional written questions for the witnesses
    or additional materials for the record.
        This hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 1:51 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

                                  ----------

                   Material Submitted for the Hearing Record