Checking In With Congress

One day earlier, the men and women attending the Professional Lawn Care Association of America’s Renewal & Remembrance had been hard at work, dressed in shorts and t-shirts, spreading lime and beautifying the grounds of Arlington Cemetery – and braving the heat of late July weather in Washington, D.C.

But on the morning of July 23, the scene during the walk to Capitol Hill was quite different – attendees, dressed in suits and dresses, shuffled legislative papers and silently rehearsed their upcoming conversations with their Congress representatives. As participants in this year’s Legislative Day on the Hill, lawn care professionals nationwide had the chance to touch base with their state’s senator or representative and make their cases for a variety of pending industry legislation.

As Tom Delaney, PLCAA executive director, pointed out, this event lends focus to the detailed legislative issues industry representatives deal with on a daily basis. “Some of the biggest issues we have to face are at the state level,” he said.

The following are the issues PLCAA members brought to Congress on July 23:

Issue #1: Telemarketing

Background: The Federal Trade Commission is aggressively moving forward with expansive regulatory efforts to further restrict the telemarketing business channel. Additional restrictions on telemarketing could impair a lawn care marketer’s ability to communicate with consumers and conduct business in a cost-efficient and productive manner, and reduce the convenience and value lawn care marketers can offer consumers.

PLCAA’s position on this proposal includes the following:

• Most provisions are more restrictive than necessary to achieve Federal Trade Commission objectives and may ban legitimate telemarketing activities.
• It may have serious economic consequences to small businesses and an immediate loss of jobs.
• A complete ban on use of pre-acquired account information and other proposed provisions are beyond the scope of Federal Trade Commission authority.

Requested action: PLCAA opposes the provisions of H.R. 90, the “Know Your Caller Act of 2001,” which would prevent marketers from using a person’s name and telephone number from any marketing purpose if the consumer is on the marketer’s do-not-call list. PLCAA asks Congress to modify H.R. 90 to ensure that marketers are not required to upgrade their telecommunications facilities or services to comply, and also believes Congress should propose a “final” rule with details defined and then allow for public comment on the new defined position.

Issue #2: Continued Funding for a U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Turfgrass Scientist Position and Establishment of a National Turfgrass Research Laboratory

Background: As more and more cropland is converted to houses, office parks, shopping centers, etc., the acreage of turfgrass is increasing exponentially. With increasing urbanization comes greater demand on resources as well as additional scrutiny over the use of fertilizer and pesticides. In addition, urbanization is leading to overuse of current recreational facilities such as parks, athletic fields and golf courses.

Justification: The USDA needs to initiate and maintain ongoing research on turfgrass development and improvement because the value of the turfgrass industry in the U.S. is $35 to $40 billion annually, and it is the number one or two agricultural crop in value and acreage in many states. As the urbanization increases, the acreage will also increase significantly. Although private and university research programs are working to develop improved turfgrasses, they don’t have the time or resources to identify new sources of beneficial genes in commonly used species.

Requested Action: PLCAA requests that Congress continue the $490,000 appropriated in fiscal year 2002 for the new turfgrass scientist position within the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), and that Congress appropriate $3,500,000 for the establishment of a turfgrass genetics/genomics unit and a turfgrass water quality/systems unit with USDA and ARS.

Issue #3: Ergonomics

Background: On April 17, 2002, Senators John Breaux (D-LA) introduced S. 2184, a “bill to provide for the reissuance of a rule relating to ergonomics.” As one example, S. 2184 says under Section 2, Part B, that the bill will “not apply to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) that are not related to work.” This change narrows the definition of non-work related MSDs, forcing businesses to take action regardless of whether injuries have occurred in the workplace. In addition, the bill use incomplete science that resulted in Congress initially overturning an ergonomics rule introduced during the Clinton Administration.

Requested Action: Vote against S. 2184, which would require a new rule that would be identical to, or worse than, the flawed Clinton Administration ergonomics rule that was repealed by Congress. Instead, Congress should give the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s new comprehensive results-oriented program on ergonomics a fair chance to be implemented.

Issue #4: Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA)

Background: The FQPA mandated EPA to develop methodology for evaluation of the potential cumulative risk to people from exposure to multiple pesticides having a common mechanism of toxicity. The green industry has been very concerned about the Agency’s cumulative risk assessment of organophosphate pesticides and in particular is uneasy about the manner in which several science policies may shape the cumulative risk assessment process. Decisions may set a precedent for future cumulative risk assessments of other pesticides.

Related issues that will affect future assessments by the Agency include:

• Actual data can give drastically different assessments vs. overly conservative assumptions. In one case, actual data regarding how much exposure could come from contact with treated turf showed it to be 1,000 times less than a default assumption estimate.
• Long-term, repeated-dose toxicity values should not be used to access acute, short-term risk.
• Many of EPA’s science policies are ambiguous, allowing the Agency a range of interpretations it can employ to support its decisions.

Requested Action: Congress must continue to provide strong oversight of EPA’s implementation of FQPA to insure that sound policies and decisions are employed. Forceful and continuing congressional oversight is essential to prevent U.S. agriculture and others from suffering from EPA regulatory actions that will ultimately shift food production from the U.S. to other nations, and have a negative impact on the tools to care for the green industry.

Issue #5: Continued Funding for the National Turfgrass Evaluation Program

Background: The National Turfgrass Evaluation Program (NTEP) provides a working partnership that links the federal government, turfgrass industry and land grand universities together in their common interest of turfgrass cultivar development, improvement and evaluation. For the past 70 years, the USDA’s support for the turfgrass industry has been modest at best. Failing to support the NTEP would be an oversight since the NTEP represents an ideal partnership of the public and private sectors in terms of program cost sharing, and the turfgrass industry relies heavily on NTEP for unbiased information. Discontinuing support will eliminate a reliable and credible level of objectivity that is associated with the NTEP program.

Requested Action: Restore the vital $55,000 appropriation for the NTEP in the fiscal year 2003 budget for the Agricultural Resource Service.

The author is Assistant Editor – Internet of Lawn & Landscape magazine and can be reached at kmohn@lawnandlandscape.com.