Mr. Speaker. I rise to express my support for H.R. 7824. introduced by Congressman PANErrA and more than 100 other Members of the House to clarify the intent of Congress when it adopted the 1974 amendments to the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act. and to refocus the resources of the Department of Labor on improving the lot of migrant farmworkers by effective enforcement of this act with regard to true farm labor contractors or crew leaders. This Congress has before it two proposalsthe BorenPanetta bill. which I support. and the JavitsFord bill. It is clear that the supporters of both bills agree on one conclusion: The present wording of the Farm Labor Contractor Registration Act. as interpreted by the Department of Labor. imposes needless and burdensome requirements on employers and inadequate protection for migrant farmworkers. Both sides of this debate agree that corrective action needs to be taken by the Congress. It is clear that the Department of Labor has no intention or inclination to interpret the act as intended by the Congress. It is true that the proposal of the Congressman from Michigan would relieve most agricultural employers from the requirements of fingerprinting. annual registration. disclosure of salaries of employees. and some other administrative requirements that are unnecessary and burdensome. but the heart of that bill is to confirm the basic interpretation of the Department of Labor. namely. that Congress intended that most agricultural employment be brought under the regulatory requirements of this act. The real issue here is whether the Congress is going to put its stamp of approval on the misinterpretations of the Department of Labor. This act. as I read its legislative history. was intended to protect migrant farmworkers in this country by requiring