[Senate Hearing 118-39]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-39
FROM FARM TO TABLE:
IMMIGRANT WORKERS GET THE JOB DONE
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 31, 2023
__________
Serial No. J-118-18
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
52-708 PDF WASHINGTON : 2024
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois, Chair
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina,
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island Ranking Member
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JOHN CORNYN, Texas
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii TED CRUZ, Texas
CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri
ALEX PADILLA, California TOM COTTON, Arkansas
JON OSSOFF, Georgia JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
PETER WELCH, Vermont THOM TILLIS, North Carolina
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
Joseph Zogby, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
Katherine Nikas, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
MAY 31, 2023, 10:01 A.M.
STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Page
Durbin, Hon. Richard J., a U.S. Senator from the State of
Illinois....................................................... 1
Graham, Hon. Lindsey O., a U.S. Senator from the State of South
Carolina....................................................... 3
WITNESSES
Witness List..................................................... 41
Carr, Chalmers R., III, owner and chief executive officer, Titan
Farms, Ridge Spring, South Carolina............................ 10
prepared statement........................................... 42
Costa, Daniel, director, Immigration Law and Policy Research,
Economic Policy Institute, Washington, DC...................... 12
prepared statement........................................... 61
Lytch, Adam, operations manager, L&M Farms, East Palatka, Florida 8
prepared statement........................................... 140
Sequeira, Hon. Leon, former Assistant Secretary of Labor for
Policy, Prospect, Kentucky..................................... 7
prepared statement........................................... 143
Torres, Diana Tellefson, chief executive officer, United Farm
Workers Foundation, Bakersfield, California.................... 5
prepared statement........................................... 151
QUESTIONS
Questions submitted to Daniel Costa by Senator Hirono............ 163
Questions submitted to Adam Lytch by Senator Klobuchar........... 165
Questions submitted to Diana Tellefson Torres by:
Senator Hirono............................................... 166
Senator Tillis............................................... 167
ANSWERS
Responses of Daniel Costa to questions submitted by Senator
Hirono......................................................... 168
Responses of Adam Lytch to questions submitted by Senator
Klobuchar...................................................... 175
Responses of Diana Tellefson Torres to questions submitted by:
Senator Hirono............................................... 177
Senator Tillis............................................... 179
MISCELLANEOUS SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Submitted by Chair Durbin:
AFL-CIO, statement, May 31, 2023............................. 183
Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, Inc., statement, May 31, 2023 192
FROM FARM TO TABLE:
IMMIGRANT WORKERS GET THE JOB DONE
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 2023
United States Senate,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice at 10:01 a.m., in
Room 216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard J. Durbin,
Chair of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Durbin [presiding], Whitehouse,
Klobuchar, Coons, Blumenthal, Hirono, Padilla, Ossoff, Welch,
Graham, Grassley, Cornyn, Hawley, Kennedy, and Blackburn.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Chair Durbin. This meeting of the Senate Judiciary
Committee will come to order. Last week, the Members of the
Committee traveled back home for Memorial Day. It was an
opportunity to meet with constituents and learn more about
their concerns. For my part, I met with constituents across the
State of Illinois, and everywhere traveled I heard the same
thing over, and over, and over. I'm sure other Members of the
Committee did as well. Our Nation is in dire need of legal
workers.
We have roughly 10 million unfilled jobs in this country,
and too few workers to fill them. This shortage is hurting
every community and every industry, from healthcare to
hospitality. I visited Decatur, Illinois, a town in the central
part of our State that I have represented in Congress--in the
House and in the Senate for decades. I have never heard this
before. They have too many job vacancies. They are desperate
for workers in Decatur, Illinois. I don't think I've ever heard
that in the 40 years that I've been representing that
community.
One sector where worker shortages is especially dire is
agriculture. An industry that relies heavily upon the labor of
immigrants. Today, our Nation's broken immigration system makes
it difficult for Americans' farms and factories to recruit and
retain the workers they need to create stability and
affordability of our food supply. Go to the grocery store if
you haven't recently. Go with your parents if you're a young
person. Let them tell you the story of what things used to cost
just a few months ago and what they cost today.
Part of the problem is the supply chain itself and the
people who are an integral part of it. So we're going to start
this morning's hearing by looking at a video on the essential,
dangerous, and often invisible work that farmworkers perform
every day, and how our immigration system is failing. It's
failing them, as well as our Nation's farmers, and ultimately,
the American people. Let's show the video.
[Video is shown.]
Chair Durbin. For more than three decades, Congress has
failed to modernize our Nation's immigration system. As a
result, our Nation's farms, factories, and food processing
facilities have struggled to secure a steady, stable supply of
workers. I work with my friend, the Ranking Member Senator
Graham, and others on both sides of the aisle to advance
bipartisan legislation to reform farmworker immigration. But
we've never secured enough votes to support the enactment of
the law.
And that's not just bad for our Nation's economy. It's a
national security risk. Our shortage of farm and food workers
has forced us to rely on other countries to meet our food
needs. In fact, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has
projected that America--believe this or not--will soon become a
net importer of agricultural products.
When it comes to securing our Nation's food supply chain,
immigration reform is a top priority. And though strengthening
our Nation's borders is a crucial component, it's only one part
of the equation. We need to approach this issue as an economic
imperative because the fact is, immigration reform is the most
immediate and meaningful step we could take today to resolve
our shortage of workers. We need to recognize these issues are
fundamentally interconnected.
Many immigrants who cross the border end up working in the
fields because of unmet demand for farmworkers. Immigration
reform would help reduce unauthorized immigration by legalizing
this labor migration. But it seems that some, in States like
Arkansas, would prefer to address this shortage by rolling back
child labor laws. This is not a solution. This is a shame.
Immigrants already account for more than 60 percent of all
farmworkers in our country. Most of them are undocumented.
Let's put the facts on the table. What would happen to
America's farmer, farm operations if we deported these workers?
Well, let me tell you about a farmer named Shay Myers,
testified before our Committee 2 years ago during our last
hearing on the importance of immigrant farmworkers. Shay shared
with us that his asparagus farm lost an entire season's worth
of profit because 36--36 H-2A workers were delayed at the
border, and they couldn't find domestic workers to replace
them.
He noted, and I quote, ``It's not safe because if we can't
get workers, we can't harvest our crops. If we can't harvest
our crops, we can't feed you.'' Shay is one of the millions of
American farmers and business owners who understand our economy
depends on the labor of immigrants.
Reducing the wages of legal immigrant farmworkers or
forcing undocumented farmworkers out of the workforce, as some
have proposed, is not a solution. Instead, lawmakers must enact
new laws to protect the rights of these workers while also
providing them with a path to permanent legal status. These
reforms will ensure that farmworkers can continue contributing
to our Nation.
I'd like to thank Senators Ossoff and Tillis who requested
this hearing on a bipartisan basis. They have both seen the
critical role that immigrants play in the agricultural industry
in their home States of Georgia and North Carolina. Now, I want
to introduce my noteworthy colleague who has become notorious
in one country, but he's safely returned to ours. We are glad
to have him back. Senator Graham.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LINDSEY O. GRAHAM,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, it's been an
interesting couple of days. Glad to be home. That's for darn
sure. I want to thank Senator Blumenthal for being willing to
represent me in Russia. It'll be a test of your legal skills.
Senator Blumenthal. You have the right to remain silent.
Senator Graham. Thank you. I think I have a right to stay
out. I intend to do that. So anyway, about my trip. This
Committee has been bipartisan in many ways, and to my
Democratic colleagues, and Republican colleagues, you've been
great on Ukraine. You've been terrific. Senator Durbin, you've
been absolutely terrific. People on our side, I feel the same
way about.
In the coming days, maybe hours, there'll be a massive
counteroffensive that will begin to liberate parts of Ukraine
from the Russian invaders. All the money and effort we've made
to help the Ukrainian military and people is about to pay
dividends. So I'll talk in more detail about that.
So back to matters here at home. Chalmers Carr is a
constituent of mine. He's in the farming business. Senators
Cornyn, Grassley, myself, Durbin, all of us have been seeking a
solution to a vexing problem for years. So let's start with the
idea that it is a problem. I'm surprised that only 60 percent
of the people working in agriculture are immigrants. I thought
that it would actually be more.
So what we have is a dilemma. Nobody on this Committee
wants to deny an American worker a job in any area off the
economy. You can't get an H-2A visa until you try to hire an
American to do the job in question. And legal immigration, as
you well know Mr. Chairman, is designed to help American
companies who fall short in hiring here at home. So they can
have a robust workforce added to the native-born workforce or
the U.S.-citizen workforce to keep the company in America so
they don't have to leave.
And, you know, the visa programs supplement the American
citizen workforce to give the employer a chance to stay in
business here at home. So it's a win-win. The problem is,
you've identified, is it's very difficult for employers right
now to find workers in certain areas of our economy. I am here
to tell you that H-2A, H-2B, we're not denying an American
worker a job. We're creating an opportunity for an American
employer to stay in business in America.
The problem we have, Mr. Chairman, is if we legalize the
agricultural workforce, give legal status without securing our
border, and changing our asylum laws first, you will have a run
on this country that you've never seen. It will be pouring
gasoline on a fire. That's the dilemma.
I am not antagonistic to trying to find a solution to the
agricultural dilemma of creating a more robust legal system so
you can access legal workers. And some can stay because it
would add value to our country. But if we legalize everybody
here in the agricultural sector without first securing our
border, and changing the magnets that are drawing 6 million
people in the last couple of years into our country, then we'll
have made the problem worse.
So I just would end on this note. Very sympathetic to the
dilemma faced by the immigrant workforce and by the employers,
but the solution of legalizing millions of people in the
agricultural community without first dealing with the broken
border and a broken asylum system, I mean, I think, is ill-
conceived. Thank you.
Chair Durbin. Senator Graham, I don't disagree with you.
But I think there's an orderly way to do this in the bills that
have been prepared by Senator Bennet, for one, our friend who
is on the Gang of Eight, really put a time requirement in this
so that the workers had to be here for, I think, it was 20
years, under one of our proposals. So this is not going to be a
run on the border in any respect. You have to have shown that
you're a reliable worker, number one, and a trustworthy future
American over a long period of time to qualify.
And I would also say, I'm all for an orderly process at the
border. I think we all agree on that. If we establish an H-2B
process or something like it that has specific numbers coming
in who are monitored while they're here in the United States, I
think it's going to avoid the calamitous outcome that you think
may happen. I hope I'm right. Let's see if the witnesses can
add anything to that.
We have five witnesses today. I'll introduce the Majority
witnesses and turn to the Ranking Member for the Minority.
Our first witness is Diana Tellefson Torres. Welcome.
Serves as the chief executive officer of the United Farm
Workers Foundation. The nonprofit arm of the United Farm
Workers of America Union.
We are also joined by Adam Lytch--did I pronounce that
correctly? Thank you. Adam Lytch is the operations manager at
L&M Companies.
The final Majority witness is Daniel Costa. Serves as the
director of immigration law and policy research at the Economic
Policy Institute. Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Our witnesses are Mr. Leon ``Sequeira''--is that pretty
close? Okay. Thank you. He's currently an attorney in private
practice where he represents agricultural employers and ag
associations across the country. He previously served as
Senate-confirmed Assistant Secretary of Labor for Policy under
President George W. Bush. At the Department of Labor, he was
involved intimately in developing the Bush administration's
immigration policy reforms, including the first overhaul of the
H-2A program in more than 20 years. He received his bachelor's
degree from Northwest Missouri State University, and his law
degree from George Washington University Law School.
The second witness is my constituent, Chalmers Carr. Mr.
Carr is a first-generation farmer and the owner, president, and
CEO of Titan Farms located in Ridge Spring, South Carolina. He
oversees a farming operation consisting of over 6,100 acres of
peaches and several hundred acres of vegetables. And employs
over 850 H-2A temporary workers annually.
Mr. Carr has served on many national boards for the U.S.
Department of Agriculture, and is the current president of USA
Farmers, a national organization representing H-2A employers.
He's a member of the South Carolina Agriculture Commission,
serves as treasurer of the South Carolina Peach Council, and is
an executive board member of the Palmetto AgriBusiness Council.
He and his wife moved to Ridge Spring in 1995, Lori. And
they have farmed there ever since. I've been to their farm, and
he has the best peaches in the world. So thanks.
Chair Durbin. We're going to have a peach competition
before this is all over.
Senator Graham. And that's saying something of South
Carolina.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Graham. So I'll lay out
the mechanics of the process. It's simple. Five-minute opening
statements, 5-minute questions by each individual Senator. We
kick it off with the oath. And I ask each witness to please
stand and raise their right hand.
[Witnesses are sworn in.]
Chair Durbin. Let the record reflect that the witnesses
have answered in the affirmative. Ms. Torres, you're first.
STATEMENT OF DIANA TELLEFSON TORRES, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
UFW FOUNDATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA
Ms. Torres. Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Grassley, and
distinguished Members of the Committee, I want to thank you for
this opportunity to testify. My name is Diana Tellefson Torres,
and I am the CEO of the UFW Foundation, based in California and
serving farmworker families around the country.
Behind me are farmworkers and children of farmworkers who
have worked in the fields. Take Jackie, who began picking
blueberries at age 14. Our Nation's food supply relies on about
two million farmworkers, about half of whom are U.S. citizens
or lawful permanent residents, according to the Federal
Government.
Farm work is a career. And farmworkers across the country
often will proudly share about the decades that they have
worked feeding the Nation, and, in fact, much of the world. And
yet our fellow U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents who
are farmworkers often live in poverty, and struggle to feed
their own families.
Fifty percent of the men and women they work alongside
either do not have documentation or are here through the H-2A
guestworker program. Lack of legal status, combined with a
shameful history of excluding the industry from basic labor
laws such as overtime pay or the right to join a union, makes
farmworkers vulnerable to a range of abuses.
The threat of immigration enforcement is a form of coercion
that employers can use against both undocumented and H-2A
workers. U.S. citizens and work-authorized colleagues also
often work in fear, as they know that they can easily be
replaced by more vulnerable workers. Esther from California,
who has worked as a farmworker in the U.S. for 25 years picking
grapes, vegetables, and oranges asked me to tell you, ``I wish
to tell our lawmakers in Congress to please pass legalization
for farmworkers so we may see our families without fear. That
we may work without fear. And that we may contribute to this
country without fear.''
Today, the United States has a choice. We can recognize the
incredible value of farmworkers, and work towards a day when
the industry is characterized by workers who work and live
without fear because they have a way to earn citizenship and
enjoy equal labor rights. This choice will enable farmworkers
to stay in agriculture and help the industry in our rural
communities thrive.
Or, we can continue to turn a blind eye to the fact that
too many farmworkers work without legal authorization, and that
the existing H-2A visa program has become the worst source of
human trafficking among U.S. visa programs. And workers in the
program too often have their rights violated.
The number of H-2A jobs approved by the DOL has increased
rapidly from 79,000 H-2A positions in 2010 to 371,000 in 2022.
It is hard to know which stories to tell when it comes to the
lives of too many H-2A workers. I hope you have read my
testimony and understand that the problems for H-2A workers
most often begin before they even get to this country because
the system is dependent on recruiters that are able to
discriminate in the workers they choose, and often insist on
the payment of illegal recruitment fees. Accordingly, H-2A
workers come to this country largely indentured.
Additionally, Federal law excludes H-2A workers from the
Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, which
protects farmworkers' rights. Workers live in substandard
conditions, work in extreme conditions for well over 10 hours a
day, experience wage theft, and do not speak up because they
will only be chosen to come back to the U.S. in future years if
they don't complain. This is why our increasing reliance on the
H-2A guestworker program in its current form threatens the
conditions of all farmworkers.
Congress not passing bipartisan agricultural immigration
reform that honors the women and men who feed us is an active
choice to support a deeply flawed system, harming both workers
and law-abiding employers. That is why we have worked for
decades to craft bipartisan solutions to enable career
farmworkers to gain legal status, and to reform the H-2A
program.
The Farmworkers' Movement, led by the United Farm Workers,
has come to an agreement with most of the Nation's major grower
associations to move forward bipartisan agricultural
immigration bills that won the majority votes in the House or
Senate during the administrations of Presidents Bush, Obama,
Trump, and Biden. And indeed, many of you here today have been
part of those efforts. We have come so frustratingly close in
passing agricultural immigration bills, and we remain ready to
partner again. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you
about the important work that farmworkers do.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Torres appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Ms. Torres. Mr. Sequeira.
STATEMENT OF HON. LEON SEQUEIRA, FORMER ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
LABOR FOR POLICY, PROSPECT, KENTUCKY
Mr. Sequeira. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Durbin,
Ranking Member Graham, and Members of the Committee. I
appreciate the opportunity to testify today about the critical
role of the H-2A agricultural visa program in providing much-
needed farmworkers to America's farms.
I've worked on employment and immigration policy for nearly
20 years. Throughout my career, there have been two constants
on America's farms. First, a profound shortage of domestic
labor. And second, misguided Government policy that makes it
harder to farm.
Unfortunately for farmers, each year, both of these factors
get worse. The lack of sufficient domestic labor means that
farmers with labor-intensive farming operations have no choice
but to rely on the H-2A program to secure their labor.
Throughout its history, the H-2A program has been plagued by
complicated regulations, bureaucratic inefficiencies, high
costs, processing delays, artificial limits on which
agricultural employers can participate, and, most
distressingly, open hostility from the Department of Labor.
Despite the program's numerous shortcomings, farmers have
no other legal option. But each year, the Department of Labor
seems intent on making it harder and harder to use the H-2A
program. In the event there is any lingering doubt about
whether there are sufficient numbers of domestic workers to
take these farm jobs, a few statistics from the Department of
Labor's data on the H-2A program will make this clear.
In 2022, farmers submitted more than 18,000 applications
for certification of about 370,000 positions. As part of the
Department's certification process, these positions were
advertised nationwide, and farmers were required to hire any
U.S. applicant who met the basic job qualifications.
Last year, fewer than 300 U.S. workers accepted these
positions. That's not 1 percent. That's not one-half of 1
percent. That is six one-hundredths of 1 percent of available
farmworker openings filled by U.S. workers. To say it another
way, if math isn't your strong suit, as it is for me--or is not
for me, I guess, I should say--for every 10,000 farmworker job
openings, just 6 were filled by U.S. workers. And 2022 was not
an unusual year.
Participating in the H-2A program is no easy task, and it
is certainly not for the faint of heart. Even for a Government-
administered program, its costs and difficulties are legendary.
The Department of Labor sets annual wage rates for the program.
And over the past 5 years, they've increased these rates, on
average, nearly 25 percent.
Nationwide, the average H-2A wage is more than $16 an hour.
In Washington and Oregon, it's nearly $18 an hour, and in
California, it's $18.65 an hour. On top of that, farmers also
must provide their employees with free housing and free daily
transportation benefits that virtually no other employer,
farmer, or otherwise provides. In addition, farmers also pay
all the expenses of their workers in traveling to the United
States and then returning home each year.
Despite the profound lack of workers willing to perform
this work in the U.S., and despite the already high cost of the
program, the Department of Labor has recently devised yet
another way to ratchet wage rates and farm production costs
even higher. New Department of Labor regulations will
fundamentally change how H-2A wage rates are calculated. And
they have decided to further increase rates for certain basic
tasks performed on the farm such as driving a truck loaded with
vegetables, transporting a worker from housing to the field, or
erecting a fence to contain livestock.
This misguided approach will lead to significant disruption
in farm operations and tens of millions--if not hundreds of
millions of dollars in additional costs to farmers. My written
testimony contains a more detailed description of how these new
regulations will harm America's farmers.
The Department seems to assume that every time they
increase wages, farmers will just correspondingly increase
their prices to recover those costs. But the Department is
oblivious to a central element of the agricultural economy.
Unlike virtually every other business, farmers do not get to
set the price of their products. The market sets the price.
And increasingly, the market is dominated by low-cost
imports, especially from Mexico, where the required wage rate
is the equivalent of $10-$11 per day. In the United States, H-
2A farmworkers must be paid at least $16 per hour on average.
Is it any wonder why we have a $37 billion trade deficit in
fruits and vegetables with Mexico?
Plain and simple, the Department of Labor is pricing
farmers out of the market and out of business. And as you said,
Mr. Chairman, this will be the first year in which the United
States imports more food than it exports. That should be a
clear warning to policymakers that Government policy must
change.
We need a future workforce solution that provides farmers
access to labor with a fair and predictable cost structure that
enables them to remain competitive in the international
marketplace. Otherwise, within a generation, or even sooner, we
will be totally defendant on foreign countries to feed us. Mr.
Chairman, thank you, again, for the opportunity. I look forward
to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sequeira appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Mr. Sequeira. Mr. Lytch.
STATEMENT OF ADAM LYTCH, OPERATIONS MANAGER,
L&M FARMS, EAST PALATKA, FLORIDA
Mr. Lytch. Good morning. My name is Adam Lytch, and I'm the
regional manager for L&M Farms, located in East Palatka,
Florida. Our operation spans several States, including Florida
and Georgia. And we produce a variety of specialty crops
including potatoes, cabbage, broccoli, bell peppers,
watermelons, squash, cucumbers, and many more.
First of all, let me thank Chairman Durban and Ranking
Member Graham for the opportunity to come here today to speak
to this distinguished Committee on an issue that is very near
and dear to me, the domestic workforce crisis facing U.S.----
Chair Durbin. Mr. Lytch, could you pull your microphone a
little closer, please?
Mr. Lytch. Excuse me.
Chair Durbin. Thank you.
Mr. Lytch. For me, this issue transforms politics, and we
need reforms that will allow us to have a stable workforce so
that our growers can continue to feed the Nation. Like many
farm kids, I grew up wanting to do the same thing that my dad
did. I grew up in the fields alongside him and other workers
doing everything from chopping cotton to cropping sand lugs. It
was all hard work. I remember over 30 years ago, it started to
become harder for my family to find workers. Our existing
workforce had begun to age out, and others no longer wanted to
pursue this type of work.
During this time, a man from Mexico, Ruben, stopped by
asking for a job. He shared with me the love he had for a place
he called home, and the importance of making sacrifices for
your family. He simply wanted to be here in the U.S. so that
his family in Mexico could have a better life. As the years
went by, Ruben started to recruit more workers from Mexico. Our
family operation had no other way to meet our seasonal work
needs. That's how from an early age, I began to understand that
American agriculture was dependent on immigrant workers to get
the jobs done.
Fast forward over 30 years, and not much has changed. There
have been no fixes to the problem that I witnessed firsthand
all those years ago, and America's food system still requires
seasonal workers. As American farmers, we face a variety of
challenges. Most of these are things we cannot control, like
weather, market conditions, rapid inflation, and supply
disruptions, like during the recent COVID-19 pandemic.
However, the single biggest issue we face is the
unprecedented shortage of domestic labor and the restricted
access to a H-2A guest workforce. The H-2A program is currently
our only option. The program is greatly flawed and made even
more challenging by the Federal agency entrusted to administer
it, with a volatile wage structure and program restrictions
such as seasonal need which does not work well in this era of
modern agriculture.
Additionally, under the H-2A program, a self-inflating
Adverse Effect Wage Rate, or AEWR, is set each year for
workers. The methodology for which lacks visibility, accuracy,
and stability for growers. The AEWR was originally created to
protect American workers who perform the same duties as those
on the H-2A contracts so that they would not be adversely
affected.
But that is no longer the case since there are no American
workers willing to do these jobs. In fact, American families
are the ones being adversely affected as our workforce crisis
will continue to drive food prices even higher.
We treat our workers fairly. And most of them, over 93
percent, come back year after year. It is important that they
earn a fair wage that provides us stability. We want them to
come back every year. We want a program that works for all
involved. But if nothing changes, there will certainly be a
sharp decrease in production, affecting not only farmers and
farmworkers, but the rural communities in which we operate who
also depend on agriculture.
For 2023, the AEWR in Florida increased 15.5 percent, and
we received notice of this just 38 days before it went into
effect on January the 1st. We had workers on the way from
Mexico when we found out we had nearly a $2 dollar per hour
increase coming. At the same time, our crops were mostly all
planted, giving us little to no time to react.
Our crops are touched by human hands at every step of the
production, harvest, and packing process. Labor alone makes up
between 40 and 50 percent of our total cost to grow and harvest
most of our crops. As a result of the AEWR changes this year,
my company will see at least a $1.4 million payroll increase
over the prior year. These rising labor costs tied to the H-2A
program exacerbated by a new Labor Department wage rule, make
it nearly impossible to compete with countries that pay a
fraction of what we do for their workforce.
It is often said that food security is national security.
We must create a pathway to earned legal status for those in
the current domestic workforce, have wage stabilization, and
greater H-2A program access to ensure that the U.S. can feed
itself. But it is up to Congress to act.
In closing, I will ask you this: Will you support our
American food system by passing agricultural workforce reform,
or will we have to rely on our foreign competitors to step up,
and meet our food and nutrition needs the next time our supply
chain is so greatly disrupted? We need Congress to support and
seed real change on this issue before it is too late. The
future of American agriculture, especially the fresh fruit and
vegetable industry, depends on it. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lytch appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Mr. Lytch. Mr. Carr.
STATEMENT OF CHALMERS R. CARR, III, OWNER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER, TITAN FARMS, RIDGE SPRING, SOUTH CAROLINA
Mr. Carr. Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Graham, and
Members of the Judiciary Committee, good morning.
Chair Durbin. Good morning.
Mr. Carr. My name is Chalmers Carr. I'm a first-generation
farmer from South Carolina, where my wife and I own and operate
Titan Farms. We grow peaches, bell pepper, eggplant, and
broccoli.
Over the last 24 years, we have grown into the second
largest peach operation in the country. We could not have done
this without participating in the H-2A program for the last 25
years, where we annually bring in over 800 workers, and we have
over a 90 percent return rate of these workers. This, coupled
with our great full-time employees, have allowed us to build a
future for us and our family. I greatly appreciate you holding
this vitally important hearing entitled, ``From Farm to Table:
Immigrant Workers Get the Job Done.''
While this was very true for more than the last half of the
century, things have changed greatly. There's ample evidence
that we have a substantial shortage of domestic and immigrant
workers choosing to work in agriculture. Yet nonimmigrant
workers, guestworkers coming in through the H-2A program are
taking these jobs by the hundreds of thousands.
Unfortunately, ag labor reform has been tied to immigration
reform since 1990. Therefore, we have had no reform to ag
labor. As a result, we have a very fragile food supply chain
that was highlighted during the pandemic. Food inflation is at
an all-time high. Our imports and our dependence on foreign
countries for our food sources is growing rapidly.
The Department of Labor is using a flawed wage methodology
which has increased wages nationally 7 percent this year, and
24 percent over the last 5 years. Ten States this year, like
mine and like Adam's in Florida, saw double digit wage
increases. To couple the problem, DOL has recently passed a new
wage rule that will bring in new wages, higher wages, and more
complexity to the H-2A program, adding fuel to this problem.
Allow me to share a few impacts from our farm. Under the
flawed AEWR methodology, this year our wages increased 14
percent. This will result in a $2.6 million payroll increase.
But more importantly, it will raise the cost of our box of
peaches 5 percent. This is what we call food inflation.
The problematic new DOL wage rule will drive our wages up
another 10 to 15 percent, adding another $2 million to our
payroll. We will have to file 15 to 20 H-2A contracts annually
instead of the 5 that we currently do. We will have to hire two
full-time employees, one in H.R. and one in accounting, just to
implement this new rule. And we are very concerned about the
liability of this new rule as it is very vague to how it's
going to be applied. Honestly, with these recent changes and
the current H-2A program, we are finding it difficult to
understand if we can remain profitable.
Things to consider. The Adverse Effect Wage Rate, as Adam
said, was designed to make sure that we protected domestic
workers from foreign workers coming in and lowering wages in
similarly employed positions. But yet we have less than 1
percent, as Leon said, 0.006 percent of American workers
choosing to do these jobs.
So who are we adversely affecting? I would say we're
adversely affecting the U.S. consumer with higher food prices.
We are threatening our national security as our increased
dependence on foreign imports grows. And yes, we're affecting
the American family farm.
The new DOL wage rule uses BLS, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
nonfarm wages to set new wage rates. How can this be considered
similarly employed? That's like comparing peaches to oranges. I
believe the future of our great Nation is imperative that we
reform the H-2A program in order to stop, and hopefully undo,
many of these negative trends that I've shared with you.
But first, I implore you to prioritize ag labor crisis as a
national security issue. To separate ag labor reform from
immigration reform which seems to be intractable by supporting
and passing the following: Senate Joint Resolution 25, a
congressional review action on the new DOL wage rule; and
supporting the bipartisan bill, S. 874, Farm Operations Support
Act. This is the first step you can do to put a tourniquet on
the problem.
The next steps I would ask you to do is examine the issue
closely, understanding the world today and our labor force is
completely different than it was just 20 years ago. Study the
issue, debate the issue, and then pass meaningful agriculture
labor reforms that will help secure our country's future. I
stand ready to work with you, and I thank you for allowing me
to testify today. I appreciate you having this hearing, and I
look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Carr appears as a submission
for the record.]
Chair Durbin. Thanks, Mr. Carr. Mr. Costa.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL COSTA, DIRECTOR, IMMIGRATION LAW AND POLICY
RESEARCH, ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Costa. Good morning, Senator Durbin and Ranking Member
Graham, and other distinguished Members of the Committee. I'm
especially honored to be before the Judiciary Committee today
given my own interest and personal history on the topic.
I am myself the son of immigrants. Each who came to the
United States from a different country, and through a different
immigration pathway. The first jobs that most of my family
members on both my mother's and father's side had, after
arriving in the United States, were in the food supply chain in
the agricultural heartland of California where I grew up and
now live.
My dad's entire side of the family, when they immigrated to
the U.S., almost all lived and worked on dairies milking cows
in the Central Valley. My mom worked at the local poultry
processing plant while she was still pregnant with me. Thus, I
feel deeply connected to these issues that we're discussing
here today.
I believe that the United States has benefited greatly from
immigration and the immigrants who arrive both economically and
culturally. It's also why I believe that the United States
should grow and expand permanent immigration pathways. And I
believe that we should do much more to improve the migration
pathways that currently exist.
And Congress should first and foremost regularize the
status of those who are in the United States but lack an
immigration status. Or have only a precarious temporary status.
That one action on its own would be the best and most impactful
reform to improve conditions across many low-wage industries,
including in the farm labor market.
At present, 5 percent of the U.S. labor force lacks an
immigration status. That leaves those workers vulnerable to
retaliation by employers, leaving immigrant workers fearful of
complaining when their rights are violated which degrades
standards for all workers, and allows employers to violate the
law with impunity. It also makes it difficult for those workers
to organize and join unions.
Increasingly, it's not just unauthorized immigrants who are
suffering from the impact of this dynamic. There are millions
of workers today, including those with DACA, TPS, and parole,
for example. These workers have a precarious status that is in
a gray area. They have some protection from deportation along
with the work permit, which is good because, in practice, it
means having workplace rights.
However, many of those migrants do not have a permanent
path to remain in the United States. Their status is subject to
the whims of policymakers and can be taken away at any moment.
That prevents them from being able to integrate and participate
fully in American economic and political life. Congress should
also provide them with a path of permanent residents
immediately.
And then there are temporary work visa programs like H-2A
which are an instrument to ultimately deliver migrant workers
to employers, but without having to afford them equal rights,
dignity, or the opportunity to integrate and participate in
political life. And which undermine labor standards, and leave
more than two million migrant workers vulnerable to abuse.
Those work visa programs can and should be reformed to include
a quick path to a green card.
How do we know that lacking status harms workers, and that
providing status can make a significant, positive impact? Take
a look at the research. Here's just a few examples. A landmark
study of low-wage workers found unauthorized immigrant workers
were more than twice as likely to be the victims of minimum
wage violations as compared to U.S.-born citizens.
A study of DACA recipients, who have protections from
deportation and a work permit, showed that they doubled their
wages after receiving a work permit. And in terms of
citizenship and permanent residents, there is a very broad
consensus that exists among economists and in the literature.
And there are some real-world examples, like the studies done
on the wage gains after the IRCA legalization, showing that
permanent residents and citizenship both raises wages and
reduces poverty.
And finally, I'd like to say a few words about the
conditions in the fields for farmworkers that cultivate and
grow the food we eat, and the wages they earn. Working on a
farm is one of the most dangerous and difficult jobs in the
entire labor market. Farmworkers earn very low wages even
compared to the wages of other low-wage workers. In fact, the
wages farmworkers earn are either at or near poverty levels,
making it so that many cannot afford the fresh fruits and
vegetables that we all buy that they picked with their own
hands.
As a thought experiment, a co-author and I at UC Davis
posed the question, How much would it cost to give farmworkers
a significant raise in pay, even if it were paid entirely by
consumers? The answer is, not that much--about the cost of two
movie tickets or a nice bottle of wine.
If average farmworkers' earnings rose 40 percent, and the
increase were passed on entirely to consumers, the average
spending on fresh fruits and vegetables for a typical household
would rise by only $25 per year. A 40 percent raise--some might
recall--was a wage increase that Cesar Chavez helped to win in
the first UFW table grape contract in 1966.
Taking the current national average wage of $16.62 per hour
for farmworkers, a 40 percent increase would mean a new hourly
wage of $23.27 per hour. Such a raise could greatly improve the
quality of life for farmworkers without significantly
increasing household spending on fresh fruits and vegetables.
And then finally, it's also important to keep in mind that
many of the claims you'll hear today about the rising wages of
farmworkers are misleading. First, because they cite percentage
increases that are often not adjusted for inflation. And
second, because the so-called large increases are almost always
starting from a very low number. Like the $12.41 an hour that
H-2A farmworkers earned in Florida last year, which is the
biggest State for H-2A employment. Or the $11.99 an hour they
earned in Georgia, the second largest H-2A State. With that,
I'll conclude. And I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Costa appears as a
submission for the record.]
Chair Durbin. Thanks, Mr. Costa. I was just conversing with
my colleague, Senator Graham, about our experience on the Gang
of Eight. Was that about 10 years ago?
Senator Graham. Yes.
Chair Durbin. We had four Democrats and four Republicans
and we spent months putting together a comprehensive
immigration reform bill which passed in the floor of the
Senate. Included in that farm bill was a section on farmworkers
agreed to by both growers and farmworkers and it involved a
path to citizenship. It was, I think, a thoughtful and serious
attempt to address this problem. It passed in the Senate. It
was never called for consideration in the House of
Representatives.
Senator Bennet has been one of the leaders on this issue
from Colorado--Senator Feinstein, Senator Rubio, and a few
others. I do believe there is a will to solve this problem. And
the fact that it is a part of comprehensive immigration reform
is the fact that we think valid arguments in many aspects of
immigration to consider it. And I hope we do. I ultimately hope
we do.
I want to say that I have no prejudice against growers and
farmers at all. I had a valued member of my staff for many
years whose family was one of the largest employers of migrant
farmworkers in Southern Illinois. Good people. Really
thoughtful people who cared a lot for their workers, and they
showed it.
I also want to say that we're living in a world that is
hard to understand. I pass by these fast food restaurants, and
I see what's written on the signs outside. Burger King, $15.70
an hour to start at your Burger King. You go by on I-55,
driving from Chicago to Springfield, you pass an Aldi
warehouse. Aldi, of course, being a major grocery company,
they're offering nearly $20 an hour for starting salaries for
people who come to work for Aldi.
I don't know what they'd be doing, but it certainly would
not start off as being too technical. And they're being offered
$20 an hour to sign up. So when we talk about the current wage
rate in this country, I think we have to be honest and
realistic about it. There's a competition going on and a
bidding war for our limited number of workers.
Having said that, Ms. Torres, I read your entire statement.
You didn't have a chance in 5 minutes to present it. And there
are many parts of it that are just heartbreaking to think in
America this is taking place. Would you address the issue of
wage theft that is in your statement there? And it appears that
many workers who are nominally being paid so much per hour are
actually being paid less because there's a middleman. What's
that all about?
Ms. Torres. Well, thank you for your question, Senator. You
know, I'll begin this with a story from Georgia because I was
just there last summer. And I was speaking with some farmworker
women who were indigenous workers, spoke an indigenous language
from Mexico. Their first language was not Spanish or English.
And, you know, they were walking through some of the issues
that they're seeing and started to tell me that when they get
paid, they're getting paid by the person who actually gives
them a ride to work.
So, it's not the foreman, it's not the actual owner of the
farm, and they're getting paid in cash. And they're very aware
that often the wages that they're being paid in cash don't
include the amount that they should be paid for the work that
they did that week. And so we're looking at not just a foreman
as an intermediary. Now, we're seeing this random person who's
giving them a job keeping some of the money.
And so these workers were letting me know that, ``Well, we
can't say anything. We don't have papers, and I need a ride to
work because I don't own a car. I can't afford a car.'' And so
we're talking about the most vulnerable of workers. And we're
talking about individuals who are keeping our food secure.
We're talking about individuals who often don't feel like they
have a voice. They don't have legal status. They feel that if
they say anything, they may get deported. And so they're----
Chair Durbin. Let me ask, if I can?
Ms. Torres. Of course.
Chair Durbin. Just a few weeks ago, it was disclosed about
the exploitation of child labor--immigrant child labor. And
some of that's happening in the heart of the Midwest. You know,
I'm not going to name names for the States that are involved.
But we think that we're above that sort of thing, and it's not
true. In food processing, in slaughterhouses, children are
being employed. I don't know if it's intentionally or
negligently, but it doesn't speak well for our country that
that would be happening. You mentioned one of the young people
with you today who started picking fruit at age 14. Did you
say?
Ms. Torres. Fourteen, correct.
Chair Durbin. Is that common?
Ms. Torres. That is common. Unfortunately, in agriculture,
children can work in ag at a very young age. And so, you know,
oftentimes you have parents--we're talking about poverty wages
here where farmworkers are making between, like, median and
mean, somewhere between $17,500 a year to a little less than
$20,000 a year.
Chair Durbin. I'm sorry----
Ms. Torres. Those are poverty wages. And so--yes, sir.
Chair Durbin. Sorry to interrupt you, but I want to ask one
other question.
Ms. Torres. Of course.
Chair Durbin. Mr. Lytch, one of the proposals in the House
of Representatives passed on a partisan basis was to impose E-
Verify on agriculture workers. That, of course, would check
whether they're documented or undocumented. That legislation
also included changes to the H-2A program reversing recent
Department of Labor regulation setting wages.
The bill did not include a path to legal status for
undocumented workers even though we know they make up at least
40 percent of the agriculture workforce. What would a mandatory
E-Verify provision for agriculture workers do to the
agriculture industry?
Mr. Lytch. E-Verify alone without some reforms to the H-2A
program or a visa program would certainly be devastating. I
think both have to happen together. We live in and operate in
States that currently do have E-Verify, and we comply with
those laws.
But I think for the ag sector overall, which is, I think,
what you're asking, it would be pretty devastating to have that
based on the percentage that you mentioned of workers that are
undocumented. So both have to happen together. There has to be
some type of H-2A reform, greater access to the program before
mandatory E-Verify.
Chair Durbin. Mr. Carr, I'm going over a minute here, but I
want to give you a chance to respond to Ms. Torres about
practices at your farm. I want you to have a chance to say a
word about it.
Mr. Carr. I'd be glad to. Well, first of all, Ms. Torres
was referring to non-H-2A workers, and unfortunately, she was
also referring to undocumented workers. This is one of the
reasons why I joined the H-2A program 25 years ago.
I have the oversight of the Department of Labor
investigating or coming and looking at me every time. My
payroll and my payroll records are published. They come in and
look at those. Every employee on my farm gets a separate
paycheck with their wage statement. So participating in the H-
2A program is one way we can make sure that there isn't farm
labor abuse.
Chair Durbin. Thank you. Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. So let's see if I can do kind of a recap
here. Does everybody on this panel agree that--is it 40
percent, Mr. Chairman, of people working in agriculture are
here illegally? Is that generally accurate?
Mr. Carr. Senator, that's probably a low number in farm
labor. Actual crop growing, harvesting of crops, that is
probably a low percentage.
Senator Graham. All right.
Mr. Costa. The data from the Labor Department says that
it's about 44 percent are undocumented. But that's obviously a
very difficult population.
Ms. Torres. Nearly half is what we've seen from the Federal
Government. So, yes, some consensus there.
Senator Graham. Yes. Okay. Let's just assume for a moment
it's half. All right, America, half the people in the food
supply chain, in vegetables, in peaches, and all that other
stuff we like to eat, are here illegally. If they all left
tomorrow, what would happen to the agricultural community? Mr.
Carr.
Mr. Carr. I would ask you, What would happen to our
country? Because our food supply would go down, and our food
security would absolutely disappear overnight. We----
Senator Graham. What do you think, Mr. Lytch?
Mr. Lytch. I would agree. I think that a lot of those jobs
are likely being filled now by people----
Senator Graham. What do you think, Mr. Sequeira?
Mr. Sequeira. I would agree with the other comments,
certainly.
Senator Graham. All right. Okay, here's the deal. Half the
people working here illegally, if they left tomorrow, we would
be hosed. So how do you fix it? You find a way to keep them
here on our terms without making other problems worse. Does
everybody agree that's kind of a reasonable solution? They stay
here, but they have to pay taxes. They have to earn their way
into some kind of legal relationship in the United States. Does
that make sense to everybody on this panel? Okay. Good.
Now, here's the problem. If we do agriculture alone--and I
know Chalmers doesn't like hearing this--you're going to have
to include other parts of the economy that have the same
problem you do. Because there are a lot of people out there
want more labor like you do. And there are a lot of people on
my side, less now, thinking this is not a problem at all. It's
a problem.
If you say there's enough American workers to make
agriculture work in America, you don't know what you're talking
about. And if you say that we can survive in this country as
farmers given foreign competition, you don't know what you're
talking about. We're going to import more food than we export
because it's so much cheaper to farm in other places than it is
here.
So the goal we've been trying to achieve all these years,
Mr. Chairman, is to fix this problem in a way that's a win-win.
Is there any asylum reform in the bill that we're talking about
regarding agricultural workers? The answer is no. So if we did
this bill tomorrow, and you didn't change the asylum system,
you're going nowhere with illegal immigration. That's the
problem.
A secure border is necessary, I think, as part of any
effort to provide legalization to people already here that are
adding value to our country. Most Americans want to secure the
border. And Democratic colleagues have been in the past very
good on this. So I don't want to sugarcoat this. Everything you
say is true, Ms. Torres. Everything you say--I don't doubt one
bit what you say is true about--particularly women, how they're
being treated.
Mr. Lytch, Mr. Carr, I don't doubt one bit if these rules
keep going into effect, we're going to put you out of business.
And, Leon, you've been trying to fix this for years. And Mr.
Costa, we may have a different view about the impact of raising
wages to $23 an hour across the board on the American consumer.
So, Mr. Chairman, thank you for having the hearing. The
only solution available to us is to take the problem in
agriculture, come up with a win-win for the agricultural
community. But also, deal with the other magnets of illegal
immigration, and help other parts of the economy that are
experiencing the same thing you're experiencing.
So I'll end where I began. I'm for small deals. I'm for
medium deals. I'm for big deals. But we're living in a world of
no deals. To the American people, we've got a lot of problems.
But what this hearing tells me, if we don't reform our
agricultural system, food prices are going to spike in this
country. It's going to become a national security problem. And
a lot of American farmers are going to be out of business
because they can't compete with foreign entities that don't
have to deal with these problems. Thank you.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Graham. I couldn't agree
with you more, and we've at least got a little experience
working together. And I hope that others will join us in our
renewed effort. Senator Klobuchar.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you, both of you, for your work. I think that whether it is in
the agriculture area, whether it's in manufacturing, whether it
is in our nursing homes, or hospitals, it is very clear that we
need reform. I have been a long supporter of comprehensive
immigration reform.
I was part of the original deal we had back when Bush was
President where we had a few Democrats in the room. And we also
had Senator Graham, I remember, in the room. Then we had the
bill that when Senator Grassley and Senator Leahy were leading
the Committee that passed through this Committee.
And then recently, Senator Rounds, during President Trump's
time, led a group that we came up with an agreement that would
have greatly helped on this front. But, unfortunately,
President Trump didn't support it. And so now we are where we
are. And three times. Three times we came close. And I believe
we need a reform that includes agriculture workers, but also
includes other things like doctors, and nurses, and healthcare
aides, and the like. And I just don't think we're going to be
able to wait anymore.
I'll start with you, Mr. Lytch. You discussed how you've
been unable to fill all of your job openings with American
workers. Last year, Minnesota had 6.9 job openings for every
100 jobs in the State. The third highest job vacancy rate since
the State started tracking data. It's the number one concern I
hear in rural Minnesota--and not just in ag, but with
restaurants, manufacturing, and the like. I am proud of our
good economy in our State, but it's getting to the point,
especially in some of our healthcare settings, where we simply
don't have enough workers.
As a business owner, could you talk about what challenges
you faced? And also last year, Senators Cornyn, Coons, Tillis,
and I urged the administration to fix the backlogs that keep
seasonal workers and businesses that rely on them waiting.
Could you talk about that, and what happens when there's a
processing delay?
Mr. Lytch. I'll be glad to. Thanks for the question.
Similar to the story that Chairman Durbin shared about Shay
Myers mentioning a couple of years ago his issues with
asparagus. We had the same issue on our farm. December of 2021,
we had 120 workers scheduled to come on December the 10th.
There was delays at the State Department processing their
visas--most of the workers that were all returning.
We had about 160 acres of broccoli that was ready to
harvest that we completely lost, were unable to harvest. Our
loss on those fields of broccoli totaled somewhere around
$600,000 which was a significant hit on our crop, and
ultimately led to us losing pretty significant money for the
season just because we lost that much because we did not have
the workers to harvest it.
So, I think one of my concerns going forward with the new
OEWS wage desegregation, and one of the issues that that could
create is like one of the issues that Chalmers mentioned on the
increase in applications. So, I think a lot of employers are
looking to do that. They're having to desegregate and list
these different jobs on different contracts. And I'm worried
that there's already significant delays within both DOL and at
the State Department that this could create an even worse
backlog. So that's a major concern going forward.
Senator Klobuchar. Okay. Thank you. Ms. Tellefson Torres,
you talked about human trafficking and how there have been ag
workers that have fallen victim to that. Senator Cornyn and I
led the Abolish Trafficking Reauthorization Act, clearly, a
priority of this Committee to move forward. What additional
protections are necessary to protect farmworkers from human
trafficking?
Ms. Torres. Well, thank you for the question, Senator.
Well, we're here also talking about the need for legalization
with a path to citizenship for farmworkers who are here
undocumented. We're talking about the dignity of all
farmworkers, and so H-2A workers who are coming into this
country need to be able to understand that they can enforce the
law themselves.
And so this is why there is a need for equal rights, for
the opportunity for H-2A workers to enforce their own rights.
And really impose joint liability between employers, farm labor
contractors, and recruiters to prohibit recruiting fees,
prohibit wage theft to ensure that all of the different layers
within the ownership and the people who are employing these
folks understand that there shouldn't be any shenanigans. That
farmworkers are here and need to be protected.
So we really feel that it's necessary to have H-2A workers
be part of the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker
Protection Act. They're excluded at this point. We're not sure
why. Why are farmers who have only domestic workers having to
abide by this Act, and those who are bringing in H-2A
guestworkers not having to abide by one of the only Federal
protections that covers farmworkers? And so there's a lot that
needs to be done.
Senator Klobuchar. Well, that's for sure. So, thank you.
And I do hope, Chairman, as we work on these, that we also in
addition to getting the Farm Workforce Modernization Act--that
I strongly support--that we look at other issues I raise with
H-2Bs, with the healthcare area, our Conrad 30 bill, and the
like. When we look at this, we look at other areas as well
where we need to add more workers. It's just becoming a near
crisis point in my State. Thank you.
Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Klobuchar. Senator Grassley.
Senator Grassley. Mr. Sequeira, I want to briefly discuss
policy issues, and implications surrounding undocumented
immigration, and amnesty. First, does providing a mass
legalization program for undocumented immigrant farmworkers
actually address the problem of shortages in the agricultural
labor? And does such a program do anything to break the cycle
of agricultural dependence on undocumented labor?
Mr. Sequeira. Thank you, Senator. I think the easy answer
to your question is, no. The data shows us that providing
legalization--and there may be perfectly valid policy reasons
to do so. But the data shows that that does not solve the
workforce labor shortage. All of those workers, or nearly all
of them who would receive legal status, are already employed.
Providing them legal status, again, may have some benefits, but
it doesn't create any more workers to fill any of the openings.
Senator Grassley. Okay. Also to you, the last time you were
before this Committee, I spoke about my concerns with the 1986
Immigration Reform and Control Act, and issues with Special
Agricultural Worker program. Does the Immigration Reform and
Control Act offer us any cautionary tales with respect to the
results of a mass farmworker legalization program?
Mr. Sequeira. Yes, Senator, it does. Which is, it's the
exactly wrong approach to take. Providing legalization without
ensuring a workable future, reasonable guestworker flow doesn't
solve the problem.
The workers who were legalized under the 1986 amnesty
quickly left agriculture to pursue other jobs in the economy.
And no one can blame them for attempting to move up the
economic ladder. That's part of the American dream. But those
workers left agriculture and left additional openings that had
to be filled, and with no reasonable means of filling them
through any legal process. And with virtually no enforcement at
the border, workers flooded across, and filled those jobs that
the recently legalized workers had vacated.
Senator Grassley. Okay. Then also for you. Several
constituents have reached out to me regarding issues of the
Labor Department's Adverse Effect Wage Rate, and the impact
that it has on them. What changes would you like to see
Congress or the Department of Labor pursue in terms of how the
wage rule is calculated?
Mr. Sequeira. Senator, I'm quite sure that everyone here
will not stand around long enough to hear the long list in
response to that question. I think, in short, the current wage
calculation status is broken. Simply put. It's not rational.
It's not transparent. And most importantly, it's not
predictable.
As we've heard today, being notified 30 days in advance
that you're going to have to increase your wage rates 10, 15,
20 percent per hour is an impossible business structure.
Farmers are already committed for the year. They've already
gone to the bank. They've already borrowed money based on what
they expect their expenses are going to be. And the Department
of Labor at the 11th hour will dramatically raise them. And
they do this, year in and year out.
It's worse this year because the Department has now pursued
an entirely new methodology and theory for trying to raise
certain wage rates. It's going to insert even more
unpredictability and more complexity into the system. And the
bottom line is, it increases costs for farmers by tens of
millions of dollars.
Senator Grassley. Mr. Carr, we all know that farmers are
struggling to find stability for their labor pool. In your
view, what are the main drivers of the agricultural sector's
reliance upon undocumented immigration labor?
Mr. Carr. When you say reliance on undocumented labor, the
first and foremost is we have a society, a domestic workforce
that is not choosing to do these jobs. It's definitely--it's
clearly and amply pointed out when you see that less than 1
percent of Americans apply for the over 300,000 H-2A positions
authorized every year.
So, it's an economic incentive for a foreign worker to come
to this country. They're coming here not to migrate here and
become citizens here. They're coming here for the economic
opportunity. If we created a better guestworker program and
reformed the H-2A program, we could solve this problem. And we
could have a legal flow of workers coming in and out of this
country to support our domestic food production.
Senator Grassley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chair Durbin. Thanks, Senator Grassley. Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Durban, Ranking Member
Graham for this hearing as well as for your leadership on this
issue over so many years. And I'd like to thank all of the
witnesses today.
In my home State of Delaware, immigrant labor is absolutely
key to agriculture. Roughly 40 percent of our State's land is
in agriculture. Although we're a small State, ag is a big part
of our economy. The family farms that are largest in my State--
Fifer, Vincent, Papen, others--all rely on immigrant labor to
harvest our fruits and vegetables and are essential. And the
badly broken H-2A system, and overall immigration system,
imposes real and lasting costs.
When I meet with farmers in Delaware, they raise the need
for more reliable, more transparent, more fair labor system,
and faster processing in order to feed our Nation and the
world. And I think we need to be mindful that we owe the food
on our tables to farmworkers who've kept these farms growing
despite shortages, uncertainty, unpredictability.
And in my view, their tireless, hard work under the sun
must earn them a place outside the shadows of the American
system. And to do that, we need to move, Mr. Chairman, towards
an immigration system that is safe, humane, orderly, fair, and
consistent with the rule of law.
I was pleased to see an initiative last week by
Representatives Salazar and Escobar to introduce a bipartisan
Dignity Act. A bill that would include substantial investments
in border security, significant reforms to our asylum system, a
path to legal status for Dreamers and others if they meet work
requirements, and reforms specifically to our agricultural
workforce. It is clearly a work in progress, but it's a start.
And it's clear to me that the ball is now in our court in
the Senate to answer a simple question: What can we find 60
votes to do, and to finally get done, particularly in this
area, to address a system every Senator knows has fundamental
flaws? So I'm committed to working with my colleagues to find a
path forward, and I hope they will join me in doing so.
For years, I've heard from Delaware farmers that the H-2A
program's application process is too complex, too time
consuming, too costly, too unpredictable. Many have to hire a
consultant just to fill out the forms and pursue this. The
process can't be sped up when needed to catch an early harvest.
This past mild winter in the Mid-Atlantic caused whole fields
of strawberries and asparagus to ripen weeks early. And
multiple Delaware farms lost produce because their H-2A workers
hadn't arrived yet, and there was no flexibility to allow them
to arrive a week, or 2, or 3 earlier.
Mr. Lytch, could you just talk a little bit about how
you've seen that same dynamic, and what pending legislation
might do to address the issues I just raised?
Mr. Lytch. Yes. Thanks for the question, Senator. Like I
mentioned earlier about--you brought a good point about crops
maturing early. We're obviously picking a date out on the
calendar that we want our workers to arrive. And so months in
advance, 3 to 4, sometimes 5 months in advance when we start
working on these applications.
And obviously, Mother Nature deals us the card that we're
dealt. So we have a seed to put in the ground when we think
it'll be harvested. And so the uncertainty of that is pretty
dramatic. I will say, for our operation, especially after the
issue we had a couple of years ago with our crops getting
ready, the crew not able to come. We've just had to kind of cut
back on what we do earlier, what we're putting at risk, because
we have a continued worry that that will happen.
As far as legislation that's currently out there, I think
any of them, obviously, it has to be a bipartisan effort. We
understand that we have to have both sides, but we also need to
address both parts. The workforce that is here, and we have to
address these changes to the H-2A program. So we cannot have
one without the other.
Senator Coons. We've been achingly close over and over in
the 13 years I've been here. Mr. Costa, I know I'm about to run
out of time. I was struck by your testimony that addressing our
economic workforce needs is not just a matter of reforming the
employment-based system. It's about addressing those who are
here who are undocumented, and providing lawful and orderly
pathways for people to come here more generally. Could you just
elaborate briefly on those points as well?
Mr. Costa. Sure. Having a permanent status means, in
practice, having labor and employment rates. It also means not
being afraid to leave your house to go to work and show up at
your job. And so that is one of the main ways that you can
really stabilize the workforce and allow people to know that
they can show up at work.
In many cases, it'll also mean being able to join and form
unions. Although, unfortunately, in agriculture, farmworkers
are not covered by the National Labor Relations Act. So it
wouldn't help farmworkers for that, but it would for other
undocumented workers.
Senator Coons. Well, what I've heard across the panel this
morning was, first, that millions of people deserve to live
without fear. And that those who are employers, who are
farmers, need predictability, transparency. If we're going to
have a legal system, we need to make changes here. And we are
falling short of what all of you need and deserve. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Coons. Senator Cornyn.
Senator Cornyn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to each of
the witnesses for being here today. The problem you're
describing is real, and I just want to make sure everybody's
clear. Mr. Carr, Mr. Lytch, you're not suggesting that any
immigrant worker that has an H-2A visa would get a job that an
American citizen was ready, willing, and able to perform. Are
you?
Mr. Carr. No, sir. You have to go through an application,
and DOL has to certify that there are no domestic workers
willing and able to take those jobs.
Mr. Lytch. Correct. And we have to report to DOL the number
of applications that we get for the jobs that we do have
posted. You heard the number earlier, but we think it's less
than one-half of 1 percent that apply for the jobs that we post
and advertise for.
Senator Cornyn. Well, I note that the Farm Workforce
Modernization Act which passed the House last year hasn't even
been reintroduced in the House of Representatives this year. So
I'm not really sure what bill it is we're talking about. But as
one or more of you have noted, there's no way anything's going
to pass unless it passes both houses of Congress and gets
signed by the President. Which means, by definition, it has to
be bipartisan.
And the House has passed a border security bill which could
serve as a vehicle to do other things on the immigration issue.
But so far, there hasn't been any indication from either the
Chairman of this Committee with jurisdiction or Senator
Schumer, who controls the agenda on the floor, that that is a
priority for them. So that's part of our challenge.
I hope we can come up with maybe a rifle-shot way to
ameliorate some of the hardship associated with the H-2A
program. I'm not optimistic that we are somehow all of a sudden
going to have an epiphany and figure out how to do
comprehensive immigration reform. I'm skeptical that that could
happen. And one reason why is because the Biden
administration's current policies are a magnet for illegal
immigration.
And Senator Graham, I agree with completely, has pointed
out that the asylum system, as currently operated, again, is a
magnet for people to come from all over the world to the United
States, claim asylum, or be paroled. Which it means, to be
released into the interior, and then being told, well, at some
future date, maybe--maybe you'll appear in front of an
immigration judge.
I'll repeat something that I've said before, an experience
I had when a bipartisan group of Senators went to the Yuma
Sector, the Border Patrol Sector, the agricultural community
there in Southwestern Arizona. We were greeted by the Border
Patrol Sector chief who said, ``Welcome to the Yuma Sector. We
have seen and encountered people from 170 plus countries that
speak more than 200 languages at our Yuma Border Patrol
Sector.''
Those people, of course, under the current policies of the
Biden administration were then released into the interior,
either given a notice to appear for a future court hearing, or
a notice to report to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement
office for potential processing of their future and as yet
unstated asylum claims.
Senator Kelly, one of the Senators from Arizona, pointed
out that Mexicali, which is a city in northern Mexico, just
close--just not very far away from the Yuma Sector. So he said,
``I suspect what happens is, people will fly in here from all
around the world, and Uber--Uber over to the Border Patrol, and
claim asylum.'' So there is so much wrong and broken with our
current immigration system.
I really feel like this hearing, as important as the
subject is we're talking about, is almost a parody when it
comes to how much our current system has failed, and how much
we have failed as Members of Congress to address this in a
rational, reasonable way. But it's not going to happen by
either party trying to dictate what they want. The only way you
pass things around here is in a bipartisan way, bicameral way,
and something that gets a President's signature.
I have not yet seen a serious discussion that would give me
any optimism that that's in the process of occurring or may
occur anytime in the near future. I hope I'm wrong. I've been
here for two decades now, been involved in every immigration
debate that we've had, tried to be constructive, and I wish to
continue to be constructive. But the way that this issue is
being handled by the administration, and the failure of
Congress to deal with this in a realistic fashion doesn't give
me a sense of optimism. Thank you.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Cornyn. Farmers have to be
optimists, I don't know how you would survive otherwise. We
should be, too. I would take that as a charge from Senator
Cornyn and accept it. Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Blumenthal. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. My grandfather
was a farmer. And not always optimistic because he had to deal
with many of the obstacles that have been described here. The
weather, the markets, and the need for people to work for him.
And he was a farmer in Nebraska. He raised corn and cattle on a
farm just south of Omaha, Nebraska.
But I do think, in the interests of being constructive, to
use my colleague's term, we can replicate the kind of process
that we had in 2013 when we passed in this Committee--I was
proud to be a part of it--a bipartisan effort, comprehensive in
dealing with many of these issues. I think it's not only
possible, it's obligatory at this moment in our history.
So I would like to work with you, Mr. Chairman, and the
Ranking Member in this effort. I have supported the Farm
Workforce Modernization Act, which would expand the H-2A
program by permitting year-round contracts. And in our State,
dairy farmers and produce farmers are desperately in need of
this additional workforce.
But right now, this system, as the Senator from Texas said
so well, is broken in fundamental and disastrous ways. One
effect is not only on the prices of commodities for consumers,
but also the human toll on workers, particularly in illegal
trafficking. And I want to expand on the questions asked by
Senator Klobuchar to you, Ms. Torres, dealing with the issue of
trafficking. I know that your response to her was that one
solution would be to include H-2A workers in the Migrant and
Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, which would give
them remedies and rights.
My fear is that they would be reluctant in seeking to
enforce those rights. They would be intimidated by the system.
Perhaps there would be private efforts to aid them. But isn't
the issue of enforcement fundamental even now to preventing the
illegal recruitment fees and other measures that are right now
a violation of law under our current statutes? Don't we need
more aggressive enforcement by the Department of Labor?
Ms. Torres. That would be a resounding yes. We do. We
definitely need more increased DOL enforcement. You mentioned
workers coming forth even when they do have rights. Right?
Worker representation is also helpful. Right? Organizations
that work directly with workers that can develop the trust,
like unions, for example. It's important for workers to
understand what their rights are. We're talking about very
vulnerable workers who sometimes don't know how to read and
write, even when I mentioned the indigenous workers that I've
met with in Georgia.
So it's important to understand that sometimes even the
rights that workers do have aren't always--you know, the
workers will say that the laws on the books are not the laws in
the fields. And so it's really important that workers
understand what is available to them. And I also want to just
say that, you know, any legalization program would be
undermined if we just move forward with H-2A changes in
isolation. So, you know, any type of policy really has to be
something that is addressing undocumented workers here, and
that is addressing the H-2A worker protections that are needed.
Senator Blumenthal. I would suspect, and I think you would
agree, that the kinds of abuses that are documented in the
Polaris Project, in Operation Blooming Onion--you refer to them
in your testimony--are much more widespread and I agree with
you that it has to be more than just one piece of this
framework to prevent illegal trafficking, wage theft, other
abuses. There has to be a comprehensive approach. Would you
agree?
Ms. Torres. I would definitely agree. Yes.
Senator Blumenthal. My time has expired. Thanks, Mr.
Chairman.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. Senator
Blackburn.
Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to pick
up where Senator Cornyn left off, and really focus on the
timing of this hearing. And this issue at the southern border
is something that is a paramount concern. And this year, with
you as the Chairman, we have not had a single hearing that
really focuses on the crisis at the southern border.
And we know that girls are being trafficked. They are being
raped. We know what is happening with all the fentanyl that is
coming into this country. We know the numbers of illegal
migrants that are coming into this country. And while Title 42
and the expiration of Title 42 loomed, this Committee, instead
of focusing on that and the subsequent issues, we had a hearing
about delegitimizing the Supreme Court.
And we have literally focused on so many topics, just about
everything, except what is happening at the southern border. We
did have Secretary Mayorkas come before us. He basically
refused to answer any question. You mentioned earlier the
concern with child labor laws. That is something that concerns
me also.
But Secretary Mayorkas and Secretary Becerra, they've lost
85,000 children. They don't know if they're being trafficked.
They don't know if they're alive or dead. They don't know if
they're in work gangs. They don't know if they're being abused.
But, you know, Mr. Chairman, I think we need to focus on the
entire crisis at that southern border.
Now, in January of this year--and Mr. Carr, I want to come
to you on the question--DHS proposed a new rule that would
increase the application fees for the H-2A visas. Now, I think
one of the things that is so troubling to Tennessee farmers
that I talked to is here's this new asylum program fee which
would charge employers seeking to sponsor immigrants for
certain work visas, an unprecedented $600 per visa.
Now, Tennessee farmers tell me that this is something that
is making it just about unaffordable. And, of course, the fee
is going to be there to support what is turning out to be a
broken asylum system. And what frustrates a lot of our farmers
is instead of rewarding people like you that are bringing in
legal H-2A through a legal process, those that are able to be
H-2A workers, that they're paying this fee, and then the fee is
being used to prop up this illegal entry. And those that are
trying to do it right are the ones paying the cost in more than
one regard.
So, I've enjoyed listening to your testimony, and you've
been at this for years. And I want you to talk about--
specifically about this proposed rule, and the impact that that
is going to have on farmers like you.
Mr. Carr. Thank you very much, Senator. So the Department
of Homeland Security in their justification for their fee
increase, which they said they needed more staff and it was
costing them more to do the applications, also put in there
that a portion of that increase would go to paying for the
asylum process.
This is putting that burden on the workers--employers, such
as myself, that are doing it legally and properly to pay for
illegal workers coming into this country claiming asylum, which
has nothing to do with agriculture. So I ask the question, why
should agriculture be paying for this process?
Senator Blackburn. Well, and what I hear from farmers is
there is no efficiency that they are being given in this
process. That it's still taking them longer for this backlog to
be cleared and to get people cleared. And sometimes the crop is
already ready for harvest before they're getting the okay. That
there does not seem to be any urgency from DHS. Is that what
you're seeing?
Mr. Carr. I've seen those cases. What you have is a problem
with the application process in itself. You have the ability
for the Department of Labor to basically request further
evidence, or give a notice of deficiency just because the
complexity of the program. As these notices of deficiency go on
and on, the timeframe of getting your workers moves out further
and further.
If we streamline the H-2A process, and made the application
system more easy, allow for an attestation where the employer
can certify that they understand the rules of the game and they
will abide by the rules of the game, we could then get our
workers in much more timely manner.
Right now, we're not able to apply for H-2A workers. It's
more than 75 days out from our date of need, but no less than
60 days from our date of need. That's a 15-day window that we
have to work in, and then we have to try to figure out all the
hoops and hurdles that we're going to get.
I've had notices of deficiencies on a contract written the
year before that had no notices of deficiency given back to me
the next year because a different reviewing officer looked at
it and chose that there was something wrong with that
application. Those inconsistencies are what's driving these
delays.
Senator Blackburn. Thank you. That's helpful. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator. I'd like to address the
issues which you directed to the Chair when you suggested that
we did not have a border security hearing. You were present,
were you not, when Secretary Mayorkas came before us? I know
you did. And it's an annual appearance by the Secretary, which
was not the case before I took over the gavel. And he was here
for virtually 3 hours all about border security. Start to
finish. So to say that----
Senator Blackburn. And refused to answer----
Chair Durbin. Well----
Senator Blackburn [continuing]. Mr. Chairman----
Chair Durbin [continuing]. That's your conclusion,
Senator----
Senator Blackburn [continuing]. He refused to answer the
questions.
Chair Durbin [continuing]. You're entitled to your
conclusion. The second point I want to make about a hearing on
delegitimizing the Supreme Court. I sat here thinking, ``What
is she talking about?'' Well, of course it has to do with
Clarence Thomas and the gifts which he received, and whether
the Supreme Court of the United States should have a code of
ethics like every other Federal court. That is your
construction of delegitimization of the Court, I don't see it
that way.
In terms of fentanyl, thank you for coming last night. You
and Grassley. Senator Grassley came with a presentation from
DEA. I hope you understood that it was a bipartisan effort, off
the record, so that we both understood the issue better. We're
not ignoring it. We're trying to address it in a constructive,
bipartisan way. And I'll continue to do that if I can. Senator
Hirono.
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank all of the
panelists for your testimony. Clearly, we have a broken
immigration system, both on the legal immigration side as well
as the undocumented persons who are in our country, some 11
million or so.
Mr. Costa, I understand that in terms of the percentage of
people who are in the ag sector who are undocumented, perhaps
some 45 percent of the ag workers are undocumented. It's hard
to tell because it's not an easy statistic to get. But a very
large percentage of ag workers are undocumented. And then those
with H-2A visas, these are legal migrants, constitute perhaps
11 percent or so of those in the farm segment--ag segment. Are
those accurate statistics?
Mr. Costa. About 10--depending on how you count it,
somewhere between 10 and 15 percent of the ag workforce. Yes.
Senator Hirono. So of the 45 percent or so of the ag
workforce who are undocumented, they are the most exploited in
terms of recruiting fees, wage theft, and all of that. Correct?
Mr. Costa. I would say they're very similarly exploited. I
know that H-2A workers technically have a legal status, but
they arrive here usually after paying illegal recruitment fees.
Which leave them in debt. Which leave them sometimes more
vulnerable than undocumented workers because they don't have
family here and a network here.
Senator Hirono. Thank you. I realize that it is not an easy
thing to determine what steps we should take. Some of the
information I have, for example, Mr. Costa, is that if we were
to increase the legal pathways to enter our country--I'm not
talking about pathways to citizenship. But just increasing, for
example, our visa program, that it reduced illegal crossings at
the southern border. Does that make sense to you? That if we
were to increase the availability of legal visas that would
decrease illegal border crossings?
Mr. Costa. I have pushed back against the administration's
efforts to channel the flows at the border into these
indentured worker programs. I'm not sure, I think, it makes
more sense to expand our asylum programs, and expand refugee
numbers because the people who are showing up at the border are
mostly people who need protections.
Senator Hirono. So, I'm sorry, I'm running out of time.
While there may be some connection, there are all these other
issues with regard to persons presenting themselves at the
southern border. I agree. I think both of--both you and Ms.
Torres indicate--more so Ms. Torres--that H-2A workers perhaps
should be covered under the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural
Worker Protection Act. I think Ms. Torres testified to that.
Mr. Costa, would you agree that we should contemplate doing
that?
Mr. Costa. Yes, absolutely. And I would add on to what Ms.
Torres said about labor enforcement in agriculture. Last year,
we had the lowest number of inspections of agricultural
employers that we've ever had on record. And the funding levels
for the wage and hour division are at 2006 levels after
adjusting for inflation. So there just aren't enough
inspections to be able to protect workers in agriculture.
Senator Hirono. Do the other panelists agree that putting
everyone, all these ag workers, under the Migrant and Seasonal
Agricultural Worker Protection Act would make sense as opposed
to having two regimes? You know, the H-2A regime? Would you
agree that we should consider putting everybody under the
Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act? This
is for the other three panelists who have not responded.
Mr. Sequeira. Senator, I would not--I would not support
that. Of course, ultimately, that's a decision for Congress.
But when the Migrant and Seasonal Ag Worker Protection Act was
passed by Congress, a conscious decision was made to exclude H-
2A workers.
Senator Hirono. Yes, I realize that. But it doesn't make a
heck of a lot of sense to me.
Mr. Sequeira. It's----
Senator Hirono. You disagree?
Mr. Sequeira [continuing]. I would say yes. It is
principally because there are no protections in the Migrant
Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act that don't exist in
H-2A. And in fact, the H-2A program has far more. The one
difference is, under the Migrant and Seasonal Ag Worker
Protection Act, workers get a private right of action to sue
their employers and Congress determined that was a bad policy
to extend to H-2A employees.
Senator Hirono. Well, in my view, giving the employees a
right of action is probably--I would consider it a positive
thing. Mr. Lytch, what do you think?
Mr. Lytch. I would have the same concerns that he shared. I
think there's a lot of protections under the H-2A program that
are already granted. And it all boils down to, you know, what I
mentioned. We treat our workers fairly. We want them to
continue to come back. We have a lot of incentive to make sure
that they're treated fairly, and so that they want to come
back. We want the same skilled workforce to return year after
year.
Senator Hirono. Mr. Chairman, if I could ask Mr. Carr to
respond also.
Mr. Carr. Thank you. My H-2A workers are part of my family.
I've been in this program for 25 years. I started with 175 H-2A
workers in 1999. I have over 800 now. They've come, they've
built their families, and what they've done is grown the
prosperity for their families back home. So to think that we're
going to mistreat them is absolutely erroneous.
I would say to you also, if you come to my farm--and invite
each and every one of you to come to my farm--every one of my
farmworkers have cell phones with cameras and have access to
the internet. If we were doing anything wrong, I would be on
CNN tomorrow and every other farmer would be, too.
But back to your question about the Migrant and Seasonal
Worker Protection Act. There are more rules and regulations in
the H-2A program that go far beyond protecting workers than the
Migrant and Season Worker Protection Act does. What it does by
putting into the program, as Mr. Leon Sequeira said, is it
gives the right to private right of action. Which means that
farmers are going to be carried into courts of law where
they're not comfortable, particularly, maybe not even in their
home State, to have to defend themselves, often, from frivolous
lawsuits.
Under the H-2A program, workers are guaranteed a wage. They
have a contract for a wage, a contract for employment, and are
provided free housing, and free transportation. Whereas any
other workers in agriculture are not afforded or not given
those rights. So I wonder why--what is the motive for putting
the Migrant and Seasonal Worker Protection Act into the H-2A
program other than having access to sue in the courts?
Senator Hirono. Mr. Chairman, since that we have some of
our panelists testifying against the Migrant and Seasonal Ag
Workers regarding the private cause of action, could I ask a
question of Ms. Torres----
Chair Durbin. Sure.
Senator Hirono [continuing]. On that point----
Chair Durbin. Yes.
Senator Hirono [continuing]. Or Mr. Costa?
Mr. Costa. I'll give you a data point on it as well.
Senator Hirono. Under the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural
Worker Protection Act where workers do have a private cause of
action, are we seeing thousands and thousands of private
lawsuits in this area? Mr. Costa, perhaps you're the person to
ask.
Mr. Costa. Absolutely not. What we saw for the workers who
actually have that right to bring a private action, I believe
there were 33 lawsuits nationwide last year out of the entire
farm workforce.
Senator Hirono. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Hirono. Mr. Carr, I hope
the only reason that you're going to appear on CNN is for the
quality of your peaches. Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It seems to me
that America was born on a farm and you can't operate a farm
without workers. We can't feed ourselves or our world's
neighbors without farmworkers. And sometimes we need help from
neighbors who live in foreign countries. Is that a fair
statement, Mr. Costa?
Mr. Costa. Yes. I believe immigrants play an important
role.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Costa, do you believe that illegal
immigration is illegal?
Mr. Costa. Under the statutes, yes.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. Mr. Sequeira--am I saying your name
right?
Mr. Sequeira. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Do you agree with that statement?
Mr. Sequeira. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. Mr. Costa, what grade, A, B, C, D, F,
would you give President Biden's administration on combating
illegal immigration?
Mr. Costa. I don't know what grade I would put. I think
they've made some useful improvements. But, you know, I think
that the border has--there's so much money going to the border
that I think the border is mostly secure. People are mostly
turning themselves in. They're not really crossing the border
without authority.
Senator Kennedy. You can't give a grade? You're an expert
on immigration and you can't give a grade?
Mr. Costa. Oh, I guess if I had to, that it'd probably be
about a C, right in the middle somewhere.
Senator Kennedy. A C or a D?
Mr. Costa. A C, because they kept some Trump policies in
place. They've made some improvements that's sort of in
between.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. How about you, Mr. Sequeira?
Mr. Sequeira. Are we grading on a curve, Senator?
Senator Kennedy. No, sir.
Mr. Sequeira. I would be generous and say a D minus.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. All right. Can we agree that either
President Biden's administration believes in open borders or
the person that he has put in charge of making immigration
policy is not qualified to manage a food truck?
Mr. Costa. I would fully reject the notion that the Biden
administration believes in open borders.
Senator Kennedy. Okay. How about you, Mr. Sequeira?
Mr. Sequeira. At the risk of being too lawyerly, I might be
interested in the definition of open borders. I think it's
certainly fair to say there is a lack of significant
enforcement at the border. And in fact, my clients who try to--
--
Senator Kennedy. Let me try to put a finer point on it.
Right now, we have conscientious farmworkers who live in other
countries. Some of whom have worked here before. We have
Nigerian doctors, we have German engineers who are waiting
years, patiently in line trying to follow the rules of legal
immigration to come into our country. But yet, the Biden
administration will welcome anybody who can either secretly or
less than secretly come into the United States from the
southern border. Is that not correct?
Mr. Costa. I don't believe so. I believe that the people
showing up at the border are mostly seeking humanitarian
protections because there's a dire need in this hemisphere.
Senator Kennedy. How about you, Mr. Sequeira? Do you think
that my description is correct?
Mr. Sequeira. I do, Senator. And that seems to be obvious
from watching the evening news.
Senator Kennedy. Well, the agencies responsible for the
legal immigration system, Mr. Costa, are failing to process
applications promptly. Aren't they?
Mr. Costa. For--I would say it depends. For low-wage work
visas, they are mostly processing them quite quickly. I'd say--
--
Senator Kennedy. We've got a backlog of 24 million
applications. What do you mean, it depends?
Mr. Costa. It depends on which visa you're talking about. I
would say for H-2B, for instance, the USCIS prides themselves
on how quickly they process those visas. When it comes to other
things, like work permits, they've been slow. And I think the
problem is that Congress has not appropriated funds for them.
They have this----
Senator Kennedy. It's always on money.
Mr. Costa [continuing]. Fee-based structure.
Senator Kennedy. We now have a larger Federal budget--
adjusted for inflation--than we've ever had in the history of
the United States of America.
Mr. Costa. With all due respect----
Senator Kennedy. It's always the money. Mr. Sequeira, what
kind of job do you think that the Biden administration has done
with legal immigration with a 24-million-person backlog?
Mr. Sequeira. I think any fair estimation is that it's
poor.
Senator Kennedy. Well, can we agree that legal immigration
is good and illegal immigration is bad?
Mr. Sequeira. I would think so. The country is founded on
immigration, people coming here from other countries. Legal
immigration is good. Yes.
Senator Kennedy. Does anybody disagree with that statement?
Does anybody want to defend the Biden administration's 24-
million-people backlog in legal immigration, but yet millions
have come illegally across the border? Does anybody want to
defend that? Anybody? Thank you for being here.
Chair Durbin. Senator Padilla.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank you
and Ranking Member Graham for convening this hearing. There's
limited time and a couple of important questions I want to make
sure to get in. So let me get right to it and I'll ask
responses to be under a minute, if at all possible.
Clearly we have established today that farmworkers play a
critical role in ensuring our domestic food supply is both
secure and sustainable. Farmworkers--and I've seen this
firsthand--work in jobs that are among the most dangerous, the
most strenuous, and yet the least compensated in the country.
And far too often with the fewest labor protections.
As Mr. Lytch stated in his testimony, food security is
national security. And that could not have been clearer than
what we all saw during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
It's one of the many reasons that the first bill I introduced
in the Senate was my Citizenship for Essential Workers Act.
My first question is for Mr. Costa. Agricultural workforce
industry employs about 400,000 workers. Given the significant
overrepresentation of undocumented immigrants in the industry,
how could providing a pathway to legalization for farmworkers
bolster the U.S. economy and trade relations?
Mr. Costa. Well, it would bolster the economy by allowing
immigrants to have rights in the workplace, labor and
employment rights, and be able to better themselves. And their
wages would rise, and they'd be able to pay taxes, and have
just the security of being able to go to work. And I would say
it's actually 800,000 workers in California--400,000 is full-
time jobs. So it's a very large number of workers that need
those protections.
Senator Padilla. Thank you. I'll just add to that that they
are paying taxes. Taxes into programs that they are not
eligible to benefit from. So it's in a benefit to the----
Mr. Costa. Agreed. That they'll be able to----
Senator Padilla [continuing]. Federal Government and to the
U.S. economy.
Second topic. As temperatures continue to rise across the
country, more and more workers, including farmworkers, are at
increased risk of heat illness. Which can often lead to not
just cramps, but organ damage, heat exhaustion, stroke, even
death. In fact, according to a recent Public Citizen report,
heat stress is expected to kill 2,000 workers, and cause an
additional 170,000 workplace injuries across the country.
That's why I've introduced the Asuncion Valdivia Heat Illness
and Fatality Prevention Act. Ms. Torres, can you discuss what
protections exist for farmworkers currently that suffer from
heat-related injuries, or what Congress can do to better
support these protections?
Ms. Torres. Thank you, Senator. Well, for most farmworkers
there remains no requirement that would provide access to shade
for periodic breaks, to be able to get a reprieve from the sun,
something that basic. At the national level, there is no heat
standard.
And clearly, the bill that you have introduced as Asuncion
Valdivia bill would basically do what we have done in
California where farmworkers do have access to be able to take
paid breaks whenever they need them when it is hot so that they
can get that reprieve, and, you know, the type of water and
access to water that they would need. So these are all very
important things and so we certainly encourage having that
Asuncion Valdivia Act pass. California is only----
Senator Padilla. And I was just going to add, and to be
clear, we're not talking about shade and cool drinking water as
a luxury or as a----
Ms. Torres. It's basic.
Senator Padilla. We're talking about basic protections in
conditions that are on a very regular basis. In other parts of
the country, but particularly the west, temperatures of 110,
120 degrees from sunrise to sunset. Extreme weather conditions.
The last topic, if I can get to it quickly, deals with
worker protections. Despite the grueling and dangerous work,
farmworkers themselves often struggle to feed their own
families because of low wages. In fact, official data tells us
one-third of farmworkers live below the poverty line. I
actually think the real number is bigger. Fewer than half have
health insurance or paid sick leave of any kind. They do not
qualify for unemployment insurance or other social safety net
programs because of their undocumented status.
And most farmworkers do not have the right to collective
bargaining. And without that they can be retaliated against for
organizing, or for reporting unfair labor practices, or even
complaining about working conditions. That's why I've
introduced the Fairness for Farmworkers Act, last Congress,
that would have guaranteed overtime. Simple concept. Overtime
pay, and additional minimum wage protections for farmworkers.
Can you describe for a minute what some of the protections that
have been gained in California, and how they've helped workers?
Ms. Torres. Absolutely, Senator. Well, you know, overtime
pay, as you mentioned, is something that farmworkers around the
country don't usually get to experience. And so in California,
we were able to pass an overtime law that allows for
farmworkers to be able to get overtime after 40 hours' worth of
work. Prior to that, workers could work up to 60 hours or
more--that's 6 days a week, often working 10 or more hours a
day. And so what time do they get to spend with their children?
You have farmworkers now who are able to spend that time
with their kids. They are able to get overtime like any other
worker after they work those 40 hours. So it makes a huge
difference in the quality of their life, but in addition for
their paycheck. Right? It makes a difference to be able to get
paid for the very deserving back-breaking work that they do.
Senator Padilla. Thank you. And Mr. Chair, I know my time
is up, but I just can't help but to request a fact check.
Earlier in the hearing, Senator Graham cited a statistic
suggesting that 60 to 75 percent of our farm workforce are
immigrants, and was surprised that it's not a higher figure. My
understanding is that 60 to 75 percent figure refers
specifically to undocumented immigrants. If we were to add
lawful immigrants, visa holders, and otherwise, the figure
would clearly be a lot higher. And I'd be surprised if the
total figure isn't in the mid to high 90s.
Senator Graham also implied that providing permanent
protections for farmworkers would serve as a magnet for
migrants and lead to a surge at the border. Let's be real.
Republicans said the same thing about the lifting of Title 42,
and the surge did not happen. For Members wanting to address
irregular migration, we have to acknowledge that the pressures
created for irregular migration are in large part driven by how
hard we make it to come to this country lawfully. Whether it's
the process. Whether it's the backlogs. Whether it's the caps.
Mr. Chair, there was no surge when Title 42 was lifted.
There will be no surge if we pass the Farm Workforce
Modernization Act. There will be no surge if we pass the DREAM
Act. To paraphrase Senator Graham, once again. We can do a
small deal. We can do a medium deal. We can do a big deal. But
my God, let's get past the pretext. Let's get past the excuses.
Let's get past the rhetoric. And let's do a deal that's good
for growers, good for workers, good for consumers, and good for
our national security. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Padilla. Senator Ossoff.
Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And let me begin,
Mr. Chairman, by thanking you for being so responsive to my
request to bring the Committee together. To bring
representatives of growers and farmworkers together to work at
a solution here.
And I just want to share with you, and with our panel, and
with the public that I feel optimistic that we are on the cusp
of getting something done that will protect farmworkers from
abuse, that will protect growers from the uncertainty and
volatility of AEWR, and that will address the reality that's
been acknowledged by every panelist here today: That 40 to 50
percent of the farm labor workforce is undocumented, but
lacking any pathway to legal status which puts both farm
operators, and growers, and those workers at risk.
And so I'm optimistic, Mr. Chairman, because the solutions
are staring us right in the face. And we almost got there last
Congress. And thanks to Senator Bennet's leadership, intensive
bipartisan negotiations, we were this close to achieving
something that has eluded Congress for decades.
And the service that you, our panelists, have done today
for this Committee is to illustrate that now is the time. The
current situation is untenable for growers. The current
situation is untenable for workers. We have the power in this
Committee and this Congress to act, and to build upon a
bipartisan framework that exists.
And I'll tell you that when I talk to growers in Georgia--
and I'm proud to represent Georgia's extraordinary agricultural
sector--they see it the same way. They support legislation that
will give them certainty and stability on AEWR and that will
strengthen protections for farmworkers. Because we all know
that while the overwhelming majority of growers do the right
thing, and want to keep bringing back H-2A laborers year after
year, and build strong relationships with their employees, that
there is abuse. That it's unacceptable and that Congress can
take action to prevent it.
Operation Blooming Onion, a DOJ prosecution in Georgia, Ms.
Torres, just after those revelations of shocking abuse were
made public, I led a letter from Senators to State labor and ag
requesting administrative reforms to protect workers. Ms.
Torres, it is the case, is it not? And look, and growers and
farm operators in Georgia, they recognize this as well, that
there is abuse, and we can and must do more to prevent it. You
agree, Ms. Torres?
Ms. Torres. I would definitely agree, Senator. It's
necessary to do more in it. Just circling back to this Blooming
Onion case that you talked about. The DOL cannot do this work
alone. Right? That case, specifically, required multi-agency
involvement. We're talking about DHS, the FBI, the State U.S.
Attorney. And so it's a multifaceted effort because we are
dealing with egregious abuse. But that was not a one-off case.
We are seeing over and over again, hearing from farmworkers who
are calling us and calling our team in different States that
are talking about the type of abuse that they're experiencing.
Senator Ossoff. Thank you, Ms. Torres. And Mr. Lytch, I
found your testimony encouraging and you echoed the sentiments
I hear from Georgia growers every day, which is they want a
commonsense, bipartisan solution because the current situation
is untenable. Can you describe the impact, the uncertainty that
growers face when they're suddenly saddled with a double digit
increase in the AEWR, and they haven't had the ability to plan
with certainty, and they're facing other input cost hikes?
Why is it necessary that as part of a comprehensive bill
that will address labor and human rights protections, that will
provide a path to legal status for the undocumented farm labor
workforce, that we address the urgent needs of growers to get
certainty and stability on their costs?
Mr. Lytch. Absolutely. Senator, I want to thank you for
your work on the bipartisan effort that you tried to lead on
this. It's a very important issue, and I think you stated that
well. As far as the uncertainty related to the AEWR, we just
don't have enough time to plan. We cannot--no one could
rightfully say that they could manage a business that you could
foresee a 15 percent, double-digit increase literally in 30
days. And no one would manage their business that way. And we
as growers can't either. The costs are just unsustainable.
So the effects that it will have on us is that we will just
have to look at the crop mixes that we produce. We have a major
operation in Moultrie, Georgia. We're proud to be Georgia-grown
and we want to keep it that way. So we want to be able to grow
the diversity of crops that we have there, but we have to have
some certainty around the wage rates for sure.
Senator Ossoff. Well, thank you for your work in Georgia.
And let me just close, Mr. Chairman, by saying that if we can
just disentangle this from Washington politics, we can
strengthen labor and human rights protections for workers which
is urgently needed. We can address the need of an undocumented
farm labor workforce, and it's a need shared by those workers
and growers to get on track to legal status.
And we can address these issues around the AEWR that are
causing so much instability, and so much uncertainty for
growers in Georgia and across the country. What it's going to
take is political will. And I want growers across the country
to know that we're this close and we need voices raised across
the Nation for Congress to take up that legislation that was
almost passed at the end of the last Congress. Sit back down at
the table and pass legislation to address these issues. Thank
you all. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator Ossoff. And once again, I
want to thank you and Senator Tillis for requesting this
hearing. Senator Whitehouse, then Senator Welch.
Senator Whitehouse. Thank you, Chairman. First of all, let
me say that I don't know that there's a better Chairman and
Ranking Member to breathe a little life into immigration reform
here. I've been involved in at least three separate bipartisan
immigration reform efforts. You've been at the center of many
of them, particularly with respect to the Dreamers. And Ranking
Member Graham has been heavily involved in them. And hearings
like this, I think, give us some hope for some significant
progress.
So there's also obviously real problems with not having an
adequate farm workforce. And I'd like to ask Mr. Costa,
American families saw food prices jump pretty dramatically
recently. Do you assign any connection between that price jump
and labor disruptions, inadequacy of the workforce, food left
in fields, and the difficulty of farmers finding a steady and
reliable workforce?
Mr. Costa. I actually do not. My colleagues at the Economic
Policy Institute have shown that most of the price increases
from inflation have come from corporate profits and not from
labor costs. There just isn't a connection there.
Senator Whitehouse. And would it be to our advantage to
have more reliable and stable farm workforce both in the
farming community and for consumers?
Mr. Costa. Absolutely. No question.
Senator Whitehouse. That is why? I'm asking you an obvious
question, but it'd be helpful to have you just go ahead and
explain why.
Mr. Costa. Because we need--having an adequate food supply
is a national security issue, I believe. And I think that, you
know, farmers need to have the workforce that they have. And
farmers and the agricultural industry plays a very important
role in many communities, including the one that I grew up in.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to follow up on
Senator Padilla's comments about safety and respect for the
farm workforce. And with the Supreme Court now so much the
center of attention, I'd like to just recall the Cedar Point
decision which barred union access to farms. Like so many of
the decisions of this Court, this was a partisan decision. It
was 6-to-3.
Like so many of these decisions that undo precedent and
advantage corporations over regular people, this one was
heavily populated with front group amici, and even front group
litigator groups. In fact, the litigation was such a sham just
to get an issue to the Supreme Court where the litigation
groups knew they'd get a partisan victory that they actually
went into the lower courts asking to lose.
Think about that for a minute. I've tried a bunch of cases,
and I've sure as heck been around a lot of trials, and I've
supervised a lot of lawyers who try cases. And going into court
and saying, ``Your Honor, I'd like to lose, and as quickly as
possible,'' that's not something you see much. And then getting
up to the Circuit Court of Appeals and saying, ``Your Honors,
we'd really like to lose, and as quickly as possible.''
I think that kind of behavior sends a very strong message
about how predictable this Court is and why. And we don't talk
about Cedar Point as much as we do about, say, Janus, the labor
case, Friedrichs, its predecessor, which had these same
characteristics of front groups coming in.
In the case of Janus and Friedrichs, the front groups
actually swapped position. So in one case, they're the
litigating group. In the next case, they're the amicus group.
And the amicus group in the front case becomes the litigating
group in the second case. And the lawyers go in saying, ``Your
Honor, we'd like to lose, and as quickly as possible.'' It's a
telling signal about what is wrong at the Supreme Court, and I
wanted to remark on that today. Thanks very much.
Chair Durbin. Thank you, Senator. Senator Welch.
Senator Welch. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and to
Ranking Member Lindsey. And I want to associate myself with the
remarks of all of my colleagues.
In Vermont, it's the dairy industry that is absolutely
critical to the well-being of our agricultural economy. They
really account for two-thirds of the milk supply in the New
England market. And also in Vermont, all of us who are not
farmers benefit by the custodial connection they have to
keeping 80 percent of our open land open. And our farms need
workers and workers need protections. And everything I've heard
from the panel suggests that you agree with that.
We've got to fix this. And it's really caught up in the
situation at the southern border. And that becomes an excuse
not to do anything that can be done concretely that will be
beneficial to the agricultural community and agricultural
workers throughout the country. You know, in Vermont it's
dairy. I guess in Georgia you claim it's peaches. We got some
pretty good peaches in Vermont, but we'll give you that for
purposes of discussion.
But the point here is that local agriculture is incredibly
important to the well-being of all of our communities. And it
is dairy in Vermont. It is perhaps peaches in Georgia. But
bottom line, all those farms need the workers. And I appreciate
the comments that you've made.
And the problem is in Congress because instead of
coalescing around doing something that will be beneficial to
the agricultural sector that is part of our local regions, the
specter of doing anything that politically can be seen as
winning or losing on the whole southern border situation gets
in the way of us doing anything that would be beneficial all
around the country.
So a big issue for us in dairy is that the H-2A program is
not available and you've got to milk cows 365 days a year. So
having seasonal workers as opposed to permanent workers just
doesn't work. And, you know, in my discussions with our
workers, I went to the Open Door Clinic, which is a healthcare
facility that was started by some volunteers in Middlebury,
Vermont, for many of the agricultural workers.
Initially, farmers were somewhat skeptical and apprehensive
because there's legal questions that everybody's living with,
looking over their shoulder all of the time. But this Open Door
Clinic is now embraced by the farmers. It's been a tremendous
benefit for the workers. But you know what? It's pretty
shocking to me that that has to be a big deal. Shouldn't you be
able, in the total plain light of day, go see a doctor for a
medical situation?
I mean, it's pretty outrageous that the failure of Congress
to act to protect people who are doing what we all acknowledge
is fundamentally essential work, milking our cows. Really
acknowledge that it's hard work, then dignified work, and that
folks who do that have to be worried as to whether they'll get
picked up because they're getting a medical checkup, I mean,
that's really on us.
So, you know, my hope is that we will be able to come
around together to pass something comparable to what I voted
for when I was in the House last year, and that's the
Modernization Act. And is there anyone on the panel who would
like to just comment--just go down quickly--about the benefits
of Congress coming together on that bill? And I'll start with
you, Ms. Torres. And thank you for all your work----
Ms. Torres. Thank you----
Senator Welch [continuing]. Over the years.
Ms. Torres [continuing]. Senator. I appreciate that. Yes,
we've been working on this for two decades now. And as you
mentioned, the Farm Workforce Modernization Act was incredibly
important. I mean, we really showed on the farmworker movement
side that we were negotiating and compromising in good faith.
You mentioned the year-round jobs, you know, in the context of
legalization for undocumented workers, and further protections
for H-2A workers--we actually compromised on that.
We have supported expansion of the year-round guestworker
program with a cap, but in the context of the entire program
that we discussed. And I want to say, for year-round jobs,
these are some of the most coveted jobs that farmworkers want
because most of the work is seasonal. Workers who are U.S.
based, domestic citizens, lawful permanent residents want these
types of jobs.
And so, you know, we need to have a conversation in
addition to the FWMA, and then, when we're talking about the
Adverse Effect Wage Rate, that farmworkers need to be making
more money, not less.
Senator Welch. Thank you. My time is up, but I want to
thank the panel and my colleagues. I yield back.
Chair Durbin. Thanks a lot to my colleagues on both sides
of the aisle for coming together for this hearing. It's timely,
it's important, and I really believe it's a test. A test for
Congress. One of my colleagues was asking for grades on the
performance of the President. What would be the grade on the
performance of Congress when it comes to immigration? Failed
grade, I'm sure, by every standard. To wait for 30 years and to
watch the situation grow as desperate as it has, not only at
the border, but with businesses and farms represented here
today.
I've been involved in this immigration debate. My mother
was an immigrant to this country--I proudly add--and I think
I've made a contribution as her son. As my kids will, too.
That's part of America. Immigration has made us what we are
today. But there are Members of Congress, make no mistake--and
I won't name names--who believe that we don't need one single
immigrant. Not one, for any reason. They believe that
passionately. And I know because I've heard their speeches over
and over again.
So we have a challenge. And the challenge, I think, is to
do it right, and do it quickly. Now, that may be too much to
ask with a divided Congress, but we certainly should put the
effort into it. I've been involved in comprehensive immigration
reform and I believe that is the only way to address this. To
say, ``I'll just pick my immigration issue, and I don't want to
talk about anything else.'' Everything's connected, my friends.
This is a connected Nation, and a connected economy, and we
ought to have a sensible policy.
Look what's going on at the border now. We are saying, if
you come across the border with an appointment--with an
appointment, we'll consider your case. But if you're turned
away and you try to come back a second time, you'll be
disqualified for 5 years from ever returning. Guess what's
happening? Fewer are coming. They don't want to get that
second-time jeopardy. It's understandable.
We also say that if you had immigration quotas for certain
jobs people will line up to take those jobs. They believe they
have a chance to get from their country to our country in a
legal fashion. And that is appealing to them. I've talked to
the folks coming off of those buses in Chicago over and over
again. I cannot imagine Carlos taking his wife with a nursing
infant, and a 4-year-old daughter, and making that trip through
the Darien Gap.
I've seen what circumstances they face. How desperate they
have to be. And their first question to me in Chicago is not,
``Where is the welfare office?'' Their first question is,
``When can I go to work? Anything. Tell me, Senator.
Anything.'' They want to work and they want to work hard.
And I believe--I thank Mr. Lytch and Mr. Carr for being
here. I believe that you are conscientious, fair-minded people
that are trying to make a living at a very tough job, running a
farm operation. There are people who take advantage of other
people in everything. In business, in farming, in politics. It
happens. And I wouldn't blame any of that on you. I believe,
based on my impression of your performance today, that you are
in it for the right reasons.
So now what are we going to do? Senator Ossoff, you're in
charge of this, my friend, from this point to talk about the
next step. I want to rely on you and Senator Tillis, who asked
for this hearing, to meet with Senator Bennet, which I'm sure
you've done already, and to talk about a practical step to move
towards some bipartisan hearing or markup in this Committee so
we can get this issue moving. We've got to get off dead center
and do something. And I think we're the only Committee that can
on the Senate side. And I'm looking to you for inspiration and
leadership. And I know you'll deliver.
With that, the Senate Judiciary Committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:13 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows.]
A P P E N D I X
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Questions Submitted to Daniel Costa
By Senator Hirono
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Questions submitted to Diana Tellefson Torres
By Senator Hirono
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Responses of Daniel Costa to Questions
Submitted by Senator Hirono
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Responses of Adam Lytch to Questions
Submitted by Senator Klobuchar
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Responses of Diana Tellefson Torres to
Questions Submitted by Senator Hirono
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]