ShareThis Page
Letter to the editor: Farm workers & citizenship | TribLIVE.com
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Farm workers & citizenship

The article “Pennsylvania congressman aims to expand immigrant worker program to dairy farms” (March 19, TribLIVE), which describes the bill to extend H-2A agricultural guest-worker visas to year-round jobs on dairy farms, does not discuss the downsides of the proposal nor a reasonable alternative.

The H-2A temporary foreign agricultural worker program is premised on the idea that seasonal jobs may be especially difficult to fill because many workers prefer year-round jobs and the higher incomes they may yield. Dairy farm owners with year-round jobs should attract and retain workers like everyone else is expected to do: offer decent wages, hours and working conditions.

As to immigration policy, currently many dairy farm workers are undocumented immigrants; some have been in the United States contributing to the agricultural sector for many years. They should be offered the opportunity for immigration status — a “green card” — and a path to U.S. citizenship.

If there is an actual shortage of labor for year-round dairy jobs, then foreign citizens should be offered the opportunity for a true immigration status, keeping their families together and striving to achieve the American dream. The H-2A visa program is inherently abusive and antidemocratic. There is no valid justification for forcing dairy farm workers into a temporary work visa program and denying them the economic and democratic freedoms that this nation of immigrants cherishes.

Bruce Goldstein

Washington, D.C.

The writer is president of Farmworker Justice (www.farmworkerjustice.org).


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.