Grower Groups Split Over Gallegly, Case

Choosing sides a year before election, two groups of prominent Ventura County farmers split Thursday on whether voters should return Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley) to Washington for an eighth term.

Seven local growers, including six Republicans, endorsed Democratic congressional candidate Michael Case, saying they will not back Gallegly in next year’s election, in part because he supports trade and labor policies that hurt Ventura County farmers.

“We firmly believe it is time for a change. We need someone to fully represent us,” said Santa Paula citrus grower Robert Pinkerton, who is president of the Ventura County Farm Bureau but was not speaking for the bureau. “When Elton Gallegly voted against extending normal trade relations with China, that was a problem. So is his position on amnesty for [illegal immigrant] workers. Some of our picking crews are running at 65% of normal.”

In response, seven other local farm leaders signed a letter in support of Gallegly, who they said has represented their interests well during his 13 years in Congress.

“I think this is just an honest difference of opinion,” said Paul Leavens, a veteran citrus farmer and chairman of the county Republican Central Committee. “Elton’s been in our corner on just about all the important issues. And I think if you took a poll with Farm Bureau members you’d find 90% support Elton.”

The pro-Gallegly group cited as positives the congressman’s help in keeping Argentine citrus from pest-infested regions out of the United States, his opposition to importation of Mexican avocados and his support of farmers’ continued use of potent pesticides. Gallegly also favors a stringent guest worker program for Mexican laborers, while opposing amnesty for those who enter the country illegally.

But Pinkerton joined other growers at a Santa Paula citrus grove Thursday morning to declare their dissatisfaction with a congressman they had supported for years. Last Friday, the same group fired off a letter to other farmers seeking contributions for Case.

“This is about Mr. Gallegly’s failure to represent the largest industry in Ventura County,” Santa Paula grower Steve Onstot said. “Mr. Gallegly has demonstrated a callous disregard for the citrus industry for the last few years. So this is not a party issue for me.”

*

Political observers said the split among Republican agricultural interests suggests a lively race in the 23rd Congressional District, where Gallegly has cruised to reelection six times since defeating Bob Hope’s son in 1986.

“This may even make Elton have a real race for a change,” said political consultant John Davies, who has run several local Republican campaigns. “This is happening everywhere. We have a nation of issues now, not parties. These farmers are Republicans, but they’ve got to eat.”

Gallegly said Thursday that growers who oppose him--and he said they are a small minority--have a right to their opinions. But he said he has done a good job for local farmers, forming his own agricultural advisory committee in 1987 and hosting at least four meetings a year with local growers since.

Gallegly took particular exception to Pinkerton’s comment that growers have to “ride” him to get him to pay attention to their interests.

“That’s just dishonest,” Gallegly said. “I had the speaker of the House [Dennis Hastert] in my office in Oxnard in August, and he met with about 15 or 20 growers. Bob Pinkerton was invited. He didn’t have to ride me for it.”

While bolting from the Gallegly ranks, some growers told reporters they were not so much opposing the incumbent as favoring Case, the son of a San Joaquin Valley farmer who as an attorney has worked closely with farmers in Ventura County.

“I’m not sure this group is here to speak ill of Elton as much as it is to speak positively of Michael Case,” said Ojai rancher Allan Camp, a former law partner of Case. “Politics is a tough business and Mike is a tough guy. . . . He’s not afraid of taking an unpopular stand.”

Still, the blue-jeaned Case, his shirt open at the collar and his sleeves rolled up, criticized Gallegly on Thursday for his stands on trade with China and how to provide enough farm workers to harvest crops.

*

Gallegly has voted against granting China normal trade relations with the United States each of the past two years, joining Mary Bono as the only members from citrus-producing congressional districts to oppose such legislation, Case said.

“In addition to selling their crops, farmers have to harvest them,” Case said. “Mr. Gallegly’s stringent, excessive and counter-productive attacks on traditional labor supplies is endangering our ability to cultivate and harvest our crops.”

Case said he might support a guest worker program in which Mexican immigrants could come to the United States during harvest and then return home. That might eventually lead to the workers’ legal residency, he said.

“I can picture the possibility of an amnesty provision . . . under certain conditions it would make some sense,” he said.

Defending his positions, Gallegly said he began voting against giving China favored nation trade status just two years ago because unfair Chinese tariffs had produced a U.S. trade deficit of $50 billion with that nation. That deficit reached an all-time high of $6.9 billion last month, he said. Gallegly also said he is now concerned about allegations China has stolen technological secrets from America.

“Bob Pinkerton and I had a discussion about this about three months ago,” Gallegly said. “He said, ‘I understand your concerns,’ but all he had to worry about was lemons. Well, I have to worry about more than just lemons.”

Gallegly said agriculture is suffering from a severe labor shortage, but he opposes any new worker amnesty program because a 1986 program legalized 6 million workers, and today there are 6 million to 8 million more illegal immigrants in this country.

“Amnesty doesn’t work,” he said.

Gallegly supports a program where workers come to the United States for a few months a year by themselves, and return to their home countries after the harvest. He said he is not inflexible and might consider legal residency for workers who earn it through abiding by the law.

“If someone participated in this program for five or six or seven years,” Gallegly said, “ . . . I would be receptive to looking at a proposal for permanent status.”