PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 19, 2011
Helping Agriculture Receive Verifiable Employees Securely and Temporarily Act of 2011 or the HARVEST Act of 2011 - Amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to redefine "H-2A worker" to include a nonimmigrant who: (1) is seeking to perform agricultural labor in the United States in a job for which U.S. workers are not available and willing to perform such service or labor, and (2) commutes each day across the U.S. border and returns to his or her foreign residence and place of abode at the end of each business day.
Sets forth employer and employee association petition and attestation requirements.
Requires H-2A employers to participate in the the E-Verify program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires: (1) the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA) to conduct investigations and random audits of employer work sites; and (2) the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) to provide each H-2A worker with a single machine-readable, counterfeit-resistant document that authorizes the alien's U.S. entry, serves as an employment eligibility document, and has at least one biometric identifier.
Sets forth provisions regarding: (1) penalties; (2) working conditions, wages, transportation, and housing; (3) admissions and extensions of stay; and (4) worker replacement.
Amends the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act to: (1) limit the conditions under which the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) may provide legal assistance for any alien or provide financial assistance to any person or entity that provides legal assistance for any alien, (2) require a good faith mediation attempt prior to bringing a civil action for damages on behalf of an H-2A worker, (3) require an H-2A employer to post LSC contact information in the dwelling and at the work site of each nonimmigrant employee in a language in which all employees can understand, and (4) require that the LSC pay a prevailing defendant's costs.
Authorizes appropriations to adjudicate H-2A petitions.
People & committees
Sen. Chambliss, Saxby [R-GA] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1384 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1384 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1384 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1384 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.