Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Capital press. (Salem, OR) 19??-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 16, 2018)
6 CapitalPress.com Editorials are written by or approved by members of the Capital Press Editorial Board. February 16, 2018 Opinion All other commentary pieces are the opinions of the authors but not necessarily this newspaper. Editorial Board Editor & Publisher Managing Editor Joe Beach Carl Sampson opinions@capitalpress.com Online: www.capitalpress.com/opinion O ur V iew ‘We’re from the government, and we’re here to help’ T he phrase, “We’re from the government, and we’re here to help,” often gives farmers and ranchers pause. While some agencies do indeed offer much-needed help in the form of crop insurance and other programs that help 2.1 million U.S. farms and ranches feed 320 million Americans — and much of the world — other efforts come up short. Like the U.S. Department of Labor, which several years ago placed a “hot goods” order on fresh blueberries as a way to coerce several Oregon farms into paying a fine based on unproven allegations that two farmworkers were working on the same ticket. Only after the farmers took the agency to court did they get any justice — and their money back. Then there was the Environmental Protection Agency’s funding of the What’s Upstream smear campaign against Washington farmers in an attempt to push through the state legislature new buffer zones along rivers and creeks. EPA lawyers say that was OK as long as no specific legislation was mentioned. You get the idea. The concept of “help” is in the eye of the beholder. To the relief of many, during the past year many federal agencies have changed their tune, taking another look at rules such as the Waters of the U.S. regulation, which would have expanded the federal government’s control of that most precious commodity. Then this happened. It amounts to a tortured tango between California regulators and the USDA. The losers are California dairy farmers. It’s no secret that milk prices have fallen far below the cost of production. In California, farmers estimate they lose an average of $5 for every hundredweight of milk they produce. To get some relief, farmers petitioned the state Department of Food and Agriculture to increase prices to slow down the flow of red ink. Because the state has its own marketing set-up, the CDFA has the ability to make small adjustments in prices. But CFDA last week told the farmers it wasn’t going to help. O ur V iew BLM bigwigs should move west A bipartisan group of senators and congressmen say the headquarters for the Bureau of Land Management should move out of Washington, D.C., and relocate in the West where the agency manages 385,000 square miles of public lands. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, who overseas the BLM, agrees. So do we. Colorado Republican Sen. Cory Gardner introduced a bill to move the BLM to one of a dozen states in the West — Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington or Wyoming. “You’re dealing with an agency that basically has no business in Washington, D.C.,” Gardner told The Associated Press. Colorado Republican Rep. Scott Tipton introduced a similar measure in the House, and three Democrats signed up as co-sponsors: Reps. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, Jared Polis of Colorado and Ed Perlmutter of Colorado. The logic of this idea isn’t hard for people in the West to understand. BLM manages huge swaths of Western states. Its decisions impact the livelihoods of people who populate rural communities but those decisions Federal land by state 11-30% 31-50% For the Capital Press 51-80% > 80% Wash. Mont. N.H. Ore. Idaho Wyo. Nev. Calif. Utah Ariz. Colo. N.M. Alaska Hawaii are made far from the forests, grasslands and high deserts they call home. Not everyone is in love with the idea, particularly the special interests who court influence inside the Washington beltway. Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club’s public lands program, said the Bureau of Land Management is already decentralized, and moving the headquarters would waste money. “It’s a solution in search of a problem,” he told AP. Critics say the BLM and other agencies need to be headquartered in the capital to be included in budget and policy discussions. But having all those discussions in Doing what is required to comply with broken immigration law By JON DEVANEY Land area by percent of state 0-10% A federal milk marketing order is in the works, so state officials decided to defer to the USDA, which would control prices once it is in place. Simple enough, except that the folks at USDA have put the marketing order on hold pending the outcome of an unrelated Supreme Court case. In that case, the role administrative law judges should play in the bureaucracy is under consideration. The upshot is the state won’t consider raising milk prices, and neither will the USDA. In the meantime, California dairy farmers are getting all the help they can handle from the government. D.C. Source: Congressional Research Service Fla. Alan Kenaga/ Capital Press Washington is part of the problem. That’s better for K Street lobbyists and the environmental special interests, but not so good for the people those policies impact. While it’s true that less than 5 percent of the bureau’s 9,000 employees are stationed in D.C., they have more say and less access to the national treasures they administer than their colleagues in the field. Putting BLM headquarters in Denver, Boise or Seattle wouldn’t change its statutory mission. But it would give the agency bigwigs a different perspective and a better- than-nodding acquaintance with the territory they manage and the people who live there. A mericans across the political spectrum rec- ognize that our federal immigration system is broken. It does not work for those seek- ing to become part of our nation and pursue the American dream. It does not work for employers seeking to fill gaps in the cur- rent workforce. And it does not work for concerned citizens who are offended by the arbitrary or inconsistent enforcement of ex- isting laws resulting from the im- practicability of these laws. Producers of labor-intensive crops, including tree fruit, are particularly conscious of and subject to the failures of current law and policy on immigration. Temporary and seasonal agricul- tural jobs have long been filled by migrants, whether domestic or recent immigrants, seeking to take their first steps up the eco- nomic ladder. While exact data is hard to come by because all em- ployees present documents that appear valid when they are hired, anonymous survey data suggests that approximately half of the seasonal agricultural labor force is not properly documented. It is with this reality in mind that our industry and others in labor-dependent agriculture have sought reforms to our immigra- tion system for over 25 years. Specifically, we have urged changes that would address the current workforce and allow those who are not legally pres- ent a chance to come forward and become properly authorized through a screening process. We are also seeking a guest worker program that will work for both small and large growers, and which allows willing foreign workers to take jobs that are not and cannot be filled by the do- mestic labor force. And finally, any successful reform package will include increased enforce- ment measures to verify the eli- gibility of all workers in the re- formed system. Stool with three legs Readers’ views Carbon tax only politically correct politics Farmers are always concerned about the weather, so it is proper for the Capital Press to have weath- er news. The recent push by Oregon and Washington to tax carbon to slow down the effects of “Global Warm- ing,” excuse me, “Climate Change,” is a clear case of politically correct politics. I remember when scientists warned us about “Global Cooling.” Why do the advocates of global warming start their graphs after 1965? Earlier weather history indicates that warm- ing and cooling periods are normal while carbon continually rises. Our present experience is not abnormal! Those advocating global warming point out that 2016 and 2017 are the warmest years on record. But closer examination shows those two years hardly outdo 1997 through 1999. Now we hear that 2017 is cooler than 2016! From 1999 till 2015 there was a “pause” in the rise of global tempera- tures, so the recent two years of high- er temperatures don’t prove “global warming.” Recent scientific studies have scaled back the alarmist warm- ing scenarios of the past. But that does not hinder the pol- iticians in Oregon and Washington from pushing a carbon tax. For the politician that is anxious to find more money, this carbon tax is wonderful! But the question is, how much will it reduce “global warming?” And what happens if the next couple of years there is “global cooling?” Are they going to drop the carbon tax? Ha! So my advice is that we be cau- tious before we do a carbon tax. Why not wait a few years to truly establish a pattern of “global warming?” If the carbon goes up while at the same time the temperatures remain constant or go down, then why the carbon tax? Patience at this time could save us lots of trouble. Finally, I want to say that I am in favor of “global warming” because I ride motorcycles! Bruce Einspahr Burbank, Wash. All three legs of this stool must be in place for immigration policy to function properly. To pursue only increased enforce- ment, without providing a viable legal pathway for immigrants, temporary workers, and their employers is to court economic disaster. Even with undocument- ed workers present in the work- force, unemployment rates have already fallen below levels pre- ceding the 2008 financial crisis. In tree fruit-growing counties of Central Washington, unem- ployment rates are at record lows not seen since electronic records began being kept 28 years ago. It is not reasonable to suppose that citizens and other workers who have moved on to other work will choose to take more physically demanding tempo- rary work when so many other options are available. Ongoing technological innovation and au- tomation is helping to slow the Guest comment Jon DeVaney demand for farm labor, but the complete elimination of humans from any economic sector re- mains the stuff of science fiction. While some might blithely say that this work is undesirable and that we can do without fresh fruit or vegetable production in the United States, this would be short-sighted. Shifting production of perishable produce offshore to countries where farm labor is readily available would reduce all Americans’ food security, as well as sacrificing the jobs of those in skilled fields ranging from sales to truck driving that exist only because of domestic produce pro- duction made possible through farm labor. The Washington ap- ple crop alone supports 20,000 indirect jobs in support industries, with an annual payroll of over $1 billion per year. State legislation It is with these concerns in mind that the Washington State Tree Fruit Association support- ed SB 5689 in the Washing- ton State Legislature. The bill creates an advisory group on employment in agriculture and other industries with a large im- migrant workforce. It also directs the Attorney General to provide model policies to guide cooper- ation with federal immigration officials such that Washington meets, but does not exceed, its enforcement obligations. Some have mistakenly de- scribed this as a “sanctuary” pol- icy. However, most Americans understand sanctuary policies to be a willful refusal to follow or enforce the law, rather than a “comply but do not volunteer for more” approach as proposed in SB 5689. This should hardly be controversial and is far from unusual. Every farm or business would cooperate with a regula- tory enforcement investigation on labor, environmental, or oth- er issues, but neither would they volunteer extraneous informa- tion. And every American knows to pay their taxes as required, but few would volunteer to send ad- ditional contributions to the IRS. Washington’s tree fruit pro- ducers will continue to press Congress and the Administration to enact meaningful reforms to our broken immigration system. They will also continue to sup- port compliance with immigra- tion law, as growers have always complied with laws and regula- tions that aren’t working even while seeking to change them. But until that reform takes place, the “comply but don’t volunteer” approach may be the best chance of averting disaster for labor-in- tensive agriculture and the rural Washington economy. Jon DeVaney is the president of the Washington State Tree Fruit Association, based in Yakima, Wash.