|
LOBBYING REPORT |
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Section 5) - All Filers Are Required to Complete This Page
2. Address
Address1 | 1320 Capitol Street, NE |
Address2 |
|
City | Salem |
State | OR |
Zip Code | 97301 |
Country | USA |
3. Principal place of business (if different than line 2)
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
|
5. Senate ID# 400263203-12
|
||||||||
|
6. House ID# 400040000
|
TYPE OF REPORT | 8. Year | 2014 |
Q1 (1/1 - 3/31) | Q2 (4/1 - 6/30) | Q3 (7/1 - 9/30) | Q4 (10/1 - 12/31) |
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report
10. Check if this is a Termination Report | Termination Date |
|
11. No Lobbying Issue Activity |
INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
12. Lobbying | 13. Organizations | ||||||||
INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period was: | EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period were: | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
Provide a good faith estimate, rounded to the nearest $10,000, of all lobbying related income for the client (including all payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying activities on behalf of the client). | 14. REPORTING Check box to indicate expense accounting method. See instructions for description of options. | ||||||||
Method A.
Reporting amounts using LDA definitions only
Method B. Reporting amounts under section 6033(b)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162(e) of the Internal Revenue Code |
Signature | Digitally Signed By: DAVID DILLON |
Date | 11/23/2014 6:17:05 PM |
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code LBR
16. Specific lobbying issues
Sought congressional resolution/intervention to west coast port issue resulting in delay of ag products leaving the Port of Portland. Labor issue is between the port and union workers, but the dispute has a direct affect on Oregon's agriculture industry.
Continued to work a legislative path to fix USDOL abuses against growers, dating back to July 2012. Congressman Schrader questions DOL officials in a July hearing on the use of hot goods orders on perishable crops. Schrader and subcommittee Chair Austin Scott introdcued HR 1387 in March 2013 to prevent USDOL from issuing such orders on perishable commodities in the future. The bill was introduced as a result of hot goods orders place on Oreogn blueberry farmers in 2012.
It became clear from teh testimony that the Dept. of Labor doesn't even know or follow the regulations it purports to have on these issues. A federal judge vindicated the farmers earlier this year ruling that the Dept. of Labor made the farmers sign admissions of guilt under economic duress. The farmers were prohibited from shipping their blueberries until the signed papers saying they violated minimum wage and record keeping laws and waived their right to appeal.
Schrader pointed out in the hearing that the hot goods orders had never been used on perishable products in more than seventy years under the Fair Labor Standars Act of 1938 until USDOL began issuing them in 2008.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Gail |
Greenman |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code IMM
16. Specific lobbying issues
Expressed concerns over a possible executive order by the administration. OFBF does not believe anything other than comprehensive legislation will work for the ag industry. Evaluated necessary provisions and communicated those needs to Congress of what must be included in a comprehensive immigrations bill regarding an agriculture workforce program. Stronly supported S.744 and adamently opposed House piecemeal approach. Evaluated House guestworker bill.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Gail |
Greenman |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code NAT
16. Specific lobbying issues
Worked with natural resource groups in prepartion for possible sage grouse listing. Also, supported HR 4315, The Endangered Species Transparency and Reasonableness Act with a bipartisan vote of 233-190. This legislation focuses on sensible and specific updates to the ESA in the areas of data transparency and species recovery
All four bills tackle transparency and litigation issues as it relates to the Endangered Species Act. HR 4315 incorporates all four stand-alone bills into one legislative package. Summaries of all four bills, now HR 4315, are below.
H.R. 4315, The 21st Century Endangered Species Transparency Act, would require data used by federal agencies for ESA listing decisions to be made publicly available and accessible through the Internet. The bill would allow the American people to actually see what science and data are being used to make key listing decisions.
H.R. 4316, The Endangered Species Recovery Transparency Act, would require the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to track, report to Congress, and make available online: 1) funds expended to respond to ESA lawsuits; 2) the number of employees dedicated to litigation; and 3) attorney fees awarded in the course of ESA litigation and settlement agreements.
H.R. 4317, The State, Tribal, and Local Species Transparency and Recovery Act, would require the federal government to disclose to affected states all data used prior to any ESA listing decisions and require that the best available scientific and commercial data used by the federal government include data provided by affected states, tribes, and local governments.
H.R. 4318, The Endangered Species Litigation Reasonableness Act, would prioritize resources towards species protection by placing reasonable caps on attorney fees and making the ESA consistent with another federal law. The Equal Access to Justice Act limits the hourly rate for prevailing attorney fees to $125 per hour. However, no such fee cap currently exists under the ESA, and attorneys have often been awarded huge sums of taxpayer-funded money. This bill would put in place the same $125 per hour cap on attorney fees for suits filed under the ESA that currently exist under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Gail |
Greenman |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code AGR
16. Specific lobbying issues
Worked to educate congressioanl delegation on growing program of misunderstanding of genetically modified organisms.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Gail |
Greenman |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code HCR
16. Specific lobbying issues
Simplifying Technical Aspects Regarding Seasonality (STARS) Act (HR 5213)
The STARS Act, introduced by Congressman Schrader in late July, would clarify and simplify the definition of a season employee under the Affordable Care Act
Currently, there are two definitions of seasonality under the Affordable Care Act. One was created by the US Treasury Department; the other was defined under the Affordable Care Act statute. The different definitions continue to cause confusion in the business and agriculture communities.
The STARS Act aims to simplify the seasonal worker exception in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and the Treasury Departments treatment of seasonal employees. Under current law, the seasonal worker exception for determining large employer status is limited to employers who employ an average of more than 50 full-time equivalent employees over the course of a year by calculating all hours of service performed by all employees, including seasonal employees, and those employers must not exceed 50 full-time equivalent employees for longer than 120 days (4 months). Because this seasonal worker exception is widely misunderstood and continues to be poorly explained by legal, accounting, and benefits experts, the STARS act excludes seasonal employees from the calculation of Applicable Large Employer size in the Affordable Care Act.
To align the seasonal worker exception with seasonal employee treatment, the bill adopts the Treasury Departments definition of seasonal employee in the ACA as an individual that is employed in a position for which the customary annual employment is not more than 6 months and which requires performing labor or services which are ordinarily performed at certain seasons or periods of the year. The bill also codifies the Treasury Departments treatment of seasonal employees that work six months or less, clarifying that seasonal employees are not be considered full-time employees for the purposes of determining Employer Shared Responsibility penalties. Employers can use a look back period of between 3 and 12 months to determine if a seasonal employee is full-time (works more than an average of 30 hours per week).
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Gail |
Greenman |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code ANI
16. Specific lobbying issues
HR 1528 was signed into law on August 1, 2014. The Senate companion legislation was S. 1171 and passed without amendment and by unanimous consent. This legislation would clarify that it is legal for veterinarians to carry and dispense controlled substances to ensure they are able to provide proper care for their animal patients, so long as they are licensed in the state in which they practice and registered with the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA).
Beginning in 2012, large animal and equine veterinarians who identified their residential address as their principal place of business began receiving notices from the DEA that they were in violation of the Controlled Substances Act. It is not uncommon for many rural veterinarians with home-based practices to provide mobile veterinary services to their clients; and for more than 40 years, the DEA had recognized the unique circumstances surrounding the veterinary profession and provided them with the flexibility they needed to treat their animal patients in the field.
It was only until recently that the DEA changed its interpretation and began targeting veterinarians. After contacting the DEA in 2012 and exhausting all avenues to work with them to fix this problem administratively, Congressman Schrader introduced the Veterinary Medicine Mobility Act, H.R. 1528, which would clarify the Controlled Substances Act so that it is indeed legal for licensed veterinarians who are registered with the DEA to carry and use medications in the field. The legislation was endorsed by over 130 organizations across the country, including all 50 state veterinary medical associations.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Gail |
Greenman |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
Information Update Page - Complete ONLY where registration information has changed.
20. Client new address
Address | |
||||||
City | |
State | |
Zip Code | |
Country | |
21. Client new principal place of business (if different than line 20)
City | |
State | |
Zip Code | |
Country | |
22. New General description of client’s business or activities
LOBBYIST UPDATE
23. Name of each previously reported individual who is no longer expected to act as a lobbyist for the client
|
|
||||||||
1 |
|
3 |
|
||||||
2 |
|
4 |
|
ISSUE UPDATE
24. General lobbying issue that no longer pertains
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
25. Add the following affiliated organization(s)
Internet Address:
Name | Address |
Principal Place of Business (city and state or country) |
||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
26. Name of each previously reported organization that is no longer affiliated with the registrant or client
1 | 2 | 3 |
FOREIGN ENTITIES
27. Add the following foreign entities:
Name | Address |
Principal place of business (city and state or country) |
Amount of contribution for lobbying activities | Ownership percentage in client | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
% |
28. Name of each previously reported foreign entity that no longer owns, or controls, or is affiliated with the registrant, client or affiliated organization
1 | 3 | 5 |
2 | 4 | 6 |