Can you explain the downsides of farms or other businesses prematurely automating because they don't have enough workers? Any research that highlights these things both within and outside of the ag context?
Many reasons. I think some of the big reasons are the following:
1.) Peer pressure within the GOP: On most issues, Senate Republicans try to be as united as possible unless they believe that something is truly worth fighting for. The pro-immigration Republicans don't want to upset the anti-immigration people in their own party. It also upsets Republican voters and could invite a primary challenger.
2.) Agricultural groups were divided: The agricultural groups themselves were divided because the bill would've extended the Migrant Seasonal Protection Act (MSPA) to H-2A workers. The Farm Bureau Federation didn't support the bill but allowed their state chapters to support it. Some of them remained silently opposed. The problem here is that this is an additional layer of bureaucracy and farmers don't want to finesse learning about MSPA and also deal with the H-2A regulations (which are already more robust and protective than MSPA). MSPA also allows farmers to get sued by labor unions more easily and many are worried that a lot of unions will be driving frivolous lawsuits. Here is some criticism from an H-2A expert about the bill in this senate testimony. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2023-05-31%20-%20Testimony%20-%20Carr.pdf
3.) Mandatory E-Verify and unions: Some agricultural groups opposed the bill because they felt that the E-Verify mandate kicked in too quickly. The idea was that mandatory E-Verify would be phased in after many years, but farmers would also benefit from getting a capped amount of year-round H-2A workers that would also gradually expand over the years. Some farmers felt that the mandatory E-Verify provision would prevent them from being able to keep their undocumented workers and they felt that the year-round H-2A visas had annual caps that were too stringent. Unions did not want to raise the caps. Mike Crapo gave his reasoning in this press release for not cosponsoring the senate version of the bill. https://www.crapo.senate.gov/news/in-the-news/weekly-column-not-walking-away_partisan-expediency-must-not-be-prioritized-over-genuine-solution-to-farm-labor-shortage
Ultimately, there were divisions between Democrats and Republicans. Divisions between pro-immigrant Republicans and anti-immigrant Republicans. Divisions between agricultural sectors who have different needs and are subject to different regulations. And divisions between labor unions and agricultural groups.
Can you explain the downsides of farms or other businesses prematurely automating because they don't have enough workers? Any research that highlights these things both within and outside of the ag context?
If the Farm Workforce Modernization Bill has been proposed multiple times, what are some of the reasons keeping it from being passed?
Many reasons. I think some of the big reasons are the following:
1.) Peer pressure within the GOP: On most issues, Senate Republicans try to be as united as possible unless they believe that something is truly worth fighting for. The pro-immigration Republicans don't want to upset the anti-immigration people in their own party. It also upsets Republican voters and could invite a primary challenger.
2.) Agricultural groups were divided: The agricultural groups themselves were divided because the bill would've extended the Migrant Seasonal Protection Act (MSPA) to H-2A workers. The Farm Bureau Federation didn't support the bill but allowed their state chapters to support it. Some of them remained silently opposed. The problem here is that this is an additional layer of bureaucracy and farmers don't want to finesse learning about MSPA and also deal with the H-2A regulations (which are already more robust and protective than MSPA). MSPA also allows farmers to get sued by labor unions more easily and many are worried that a lot of unions will be driving frivolous lawsuits. Here is some criticism from an H-2A expert about the bill in this senate testimony. https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2023-05-31%20-%20Testimony%20-%20Carr.pdf
3.) Mandatory E-Verify and unions: Some agricultural groups opposed the bill because they felt that the E-Verify mandate kicked in too quickly. The idea was that mandatory E-Verify would be phased in after many years, but farmers would also benefit from getting a capped amount of year-round H-2A workers that would also gradually expand over the years. Some farmers felt that the mandatory E-Verify provision would prevent them from being able to keep their undocumented workers and they felt that the year-round H-2A visas had annual caps that were too stringent. Unions did not want to raise the caps. Mike Crapo gave his reasoning in this press release for not cosponsoring the senate version of the bill. https://www.crapo.senate.gov/news/in-the-news/weekly-column-not-walking-away_partisan-expediency-must-not-be-prioritized-over-genuine-solution-to-farm-labor-shortage
Ultimately, there were divisions between Democrats and Republicans. Divisions between pro-immigrant Republicans and anti-immigrant Republicans. Divisions between agricultural sectors who have different needs and are subject to different regulations. And divisions between labor unions and agricultural groups.
Thanks!