Long Time Coming and to What End, Part II

I realize that stats and numbers are really dry, are rarely interesting, but please hang in their with me as I line things out to let us all know where we are with the workings of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022.

And here, the wheels of justice also ground slowly. Farmers who claimed to be "distressed borrowers" received their checks almost immediately under section 22006. As of January 15, 2025, the FSA had paid out over $2.74B to more than 58,000 farmers and ranchers who had outstanding debts. This was a "race neutral" law signed by Congress and the President. Race neutral meant any farmer of any color or gender or sexual orientation could be eligible. The maximum for this category was $3.1B. Only 2,225 Black farmers were eligible and received debt relief. My understanding is that since the USDA/FSA knew about the indebtedness, a check was simply cut and shipped to their checking account. At one point in time, our group of advocates across the country could count on two hands the number of Black farmers who had benefitted from this operation. In one case, the dollars were so far away from actual indebtedness that the farmer refused it. 

Here's the problem. By all acceptable methods of counting, in 2012 there were 46,582 Black farmers; in 2017 there were 48,697; and in 2022 there were 46,738.  And if there are by all means available counting 13,000+ Black farmers in Texas, why are there only 2,225 reported as prevailing under 22006. If these 2,225 are .038% of the grand total of farmers who prevailed under 22006, then their total anticipated income would be $104,166,236. Or, figured another way, the mean of dollars received would be $46,816. These figures do not add up against themselves or against the figures USDA released as part of the 22007 package. 

These numbers do not compare favorably with the Ag Census data nor the data released by the USDA that account for funding under section 22007

At one point a few months back, I reported on these pages that a staffer of a congressional had shared with us that the total indebtedness for all Black farmers was approximately $210,000,000 for 3,100 farmers. 

Again, the numbers do not add up. Even with Ag Sec Tom Vilsack and the FSA reporting numbers by state X borrowers, X number of loans, X IRA payment, and X race, the numbers do not add up. Even if we add another 198 for those who identify as biracial, i.e., Black/African American and other races, the total only comes to 2,423, not 3,100. The total of dollars allocated was $104M+ and not $310M. 

Something still looks pretty crooked. 

Also found within the pages of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was section 22007 or $2.2B for those farmers/ranchers of any color, age, gender, sexual orientation, etc., etc., who could prove that they had been discriminated against. Since this is "race neutral," and not just for farmers and ranchers who qualify for the 2501 designation, the number should be astronomically high. 

My assertion all along has been that by adding other farmers to the 2501 categories, that the number of dollars would be artificially dampened as more people are added to the pool. The total pool of $2.2B would not change, but the total gaining access to it. It made no sense to me that there would be an outpouring of farmers and ranchers other than African Americans and a few other minorities. 

A set of factors that artifically suppressed the numbers for this section, also known as DFAP, or Discrimination Financial Assistance Program. Applicants had a very narrow deadline, from July 7, 2024 to January 17, 2025. Each had to fill out a 40-page document complete with necessary papers.  The burden of proof was on the farmers. There was no appeals process. One of two "hubs" would process the documents, and the final decision would be a third party entity in concert with Secretary Vilsack and the USDA.  

Lest my comments be met with skepticism, several months back, I lined out the malfeasance committed against the Black farmers who participated in the documentary co-produced by Shoun Hill and Waymon Hinson. A review of that page could clarify pretty much what Black farmers face unlike white farmers. 

Under section 22007, there was no onerous application process and the money was automatically transferred into the farmer's account with the Farm Service Administration County Office. Much easier than for Black farmers.  

At the end of the day, USDA reported that 58,000 applied to the two hubs via the three hub process and the 40-page document process. More than 23,000 prevailed, or 54% of all applicants. Those who prevailed received awards totaling $1.9B and individually $10K to $500K. Over 20,000 awards went to applicants who had planned to farm but were prohibited from doing so. They received $101M with awards ranging from $3,500 to $6,000. 

The USDA released data by state, number of recipients, total dollars for those recipients, the number of producers, the number of planned producers, congressional district within each state, race/color/national origin/ethnicity, sex/sexual orientation/gender identity, marital status, age, religion, disability, acreage,  reprisal for prior civil rights activity, and total number, dollars, and producers by category. 

The document reports that Black or African American recipients, or 38,263, or all producers numbering 19,585, or planned producers of 18,678 prevailed to the tune of $1,622,788,610. All recipients numbering 43,244 received $1,998,580,380. 

Readers must do their own math in order to drill down for more specifics. For instance, if you want to know the number of Black farmers who prevailed, you have to calculate the percentage of Black farmers from the data provided. And if you want to know how Black farmers prevailed financially, you have to calculate those figures. 

One of the more fascinating features of the DFAP document was for state total and then for various districts within the states. I only tallied the number of Black farmers by districts in Texas. The lowest district, for instance, was District 19 which covers West Texas. There were only sixteen Black farmers in that district. Or District 31 in Central Texas had only 8 Black farmers who prevailed. The largest district for the number of Black farmers was District 17 in Central East Texas that had 67 Black farmers who prevailed. People living in specific states will find this data of much interest. 

The report of "Black or African American" were of much interest. The total number of recipients was 38,263 while the actual number of current producers in 19,585. Those who planned to farm but could not due to discrimination numbered 18,678.  When comparing these figures with the reported number of 3,100 from a congressional's office, the numbers do not compute well. That 19K+ would report discrimination when 3K+ are farming, where do the additional 11K+ go? Is it accurate to say that 19K+ report discrimination and have it validated out of a total of 3K+? The number is staggering. 

Some truths are stranger than fiction. Since I live in Texas, I have a deep interest in matters related to Black farmers in this state. I follow the Texas Small Farmers & Ranchers Community-Based Organization with much interest. When the data for the awards was released, I immediately went to Texas' information. Texas, according to the 2022 Ac Census has 10,818 Black farmers on 7,235 farms, by far the largest numbers in the country. However, the DFAP document indicated that there are 1,311 recipients in Texas who received $59,157,570. There are 661 producers and 650 planned producers, those who wanted to farm but were prohibited from doing so by USDA's malfeasance. The average farmer received $45,124, no doubt lowered by the large number of planned producers who received lesser sums of money. Still, however, the gap between 10,818 farmers and 1,311 who participated in the DFAP process is quite stark. One farmer volunteered that there is a low level of trust in USDA, so fewer Black farmers would particpate in the process. Makes sense to me. 

Data revealed that the award type fell into categories of $10,000 to $49,999, $50,000 to $99,999, $100,000 - $249,999, $250,000 - $499,999, and $500,000. The bill written by Congress created an arbitrary cap of $500K regardless of the figures reached by the farmer in terms of actual damages. Some farmers also were told not to participate in this process because it would inhibit their being appropriately award under individual or class action suits later on. This has turned out to be fallacious. 

Curiously enough, the lowest category resulted in awards to 14,543 and the cumulative of the other categories added up to 8,627. The cap of $500K was reached by 889 farmers. 

I am supposing that some of my melanin-challeged friends are saying, "What a waste! Why give away dollars to undeserving farmers and ranchers?"  To which I'd reply, "What do you mean, 'waste' and 'undeserving'?" White folks need  to step out of their whiteness and learn about people of different races, because after all, we are all Americans regardless of how we look. 

One penalty is hard to explain. One set of farmers, white farmers, got a specific 1099 which did not demand payment of taxes. They got a free card to get out of the proverbial economic jail. For others, specifically Black farmers got a specific type of 1099 that demands that taxes be paid on the amount allocated on the 1099. For many, that will put them under. They don't actually see the money, and they are not required to pay taxes on it. If they were under, stayed under, and now have to pay taxes, how much under do you have to be before you can't breathe. 

I'm hoping against hope for my Black brothers and sisters, that they have the wherewithall and the economics to pay their taxes and that there is enough from this settlement to give them a new lease on life. 

For some farmers, the dollars are too little too late. For others, it was not enough to get them going again. There may be enough to pay off the feed company or the implement company, but very little to start over again. For others, it's a real do over and we're all celebrating with them. 

"How Many Deaths Will It Take.....?" Or Will the USDA's Discrimination Funds Settle the Score?

“Blowin’ In the Wind,” originally written and recorded by Bob Dylan back in the ‘60s sends a chilling message to those of us who are involved in the Black Farmer Movement. Here is a cover by Pentatonix that moves me deeply. The line, “How many deaths will it take till we know that too many people have died?” sends chills down my spine. And the refrain, “The answer is blowin’ in the wind” rings true. Sometimes in radio programs or presentations or even the Whistleblowers Conference and Film Festival, we will read the names of Black farmers who have died fighting these battles. Seeing that list and reading those names brings tears to our eyes as our emotions run deep.

By now many know that checks have been written to various farmers of all races and genders from the United States Department of the Treasury. We know that some are pleased and some are still in agony, and those are just the ones who applied.  

But the questions remain, how did we get here? And what were the governmental processes that allow for these decisions to be made?

You will find in other places my opinions about how Black farmers have been discriminated against since the very beginning of the US Department of Agriculture from the days of President Lincoln all the way up to now. Those articles of mine and of others tell the brutal truth of “farming while Black in America.” It is an ugly picture, especially for those of us who value our country and freedom to choose and the knowledge that we will be respected as all of us are created equal.

The Justice for Black Farmers Act never saw the light of day, but we appreciate its authors, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Raphael Warnock, Bernie Sanders, Cory Booker, and perhaps others.

While the American Rescue Plan Act was being debated back in 2021, Senator Warnock placed a couple of things into the Bill that was a stroke of genius. That Bill, had it not been sabotaged by a group of white farmers with their racist, in my opinion, attorneys, would have covered 100% of the farmers’ indebtedness plus 20% for taxes. However, as I have written elsewhere, Secretary Vilsack slow-walked the process, American bankers protested, and lawsuits were filed in the name of “reverse discrimination” across the country. Two judges made decisions to halt the process of covering the indebtedness of Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers (SDFF).

Then, Congress, knowing that a “race neutral” approach must be used, developed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2023 and with it were two significant areas for farmers, regardless of color or gender or any number of other areas where discrimination can occur. Section 22006 offered $3.1B for “distressed borrowers” and wiped out the debts of Black farmers back to owing $0 plus one extra check to give them a heads up. We know of several who were recipients of these funds.

Section 22007 provided $2.2B for those who could prove that they had been discriminated against. Some thought of this as a great deal, but others of us knew better.

This is where it gets interesting for those of us in the Black Farmer Movement.

The USDA, first of all, issued an announcement about it. It even had a catchy acronym, the DFAP program, the “Discrimination Financial Assistance Program.”  For those who like a lot of details, here is the website.  

The DFAP evaluation guide is a 201-page document. Those wish to do deep dives into processes for receiving application forms, how they were adjudicated, and all, this source is invaluable.

Second, there were a number of flaws in the process and we protested about it. For instance, no immediate ag economist was involved, no fees for lawyers, no appeals process, and Black farmers had to submit a 40-page document while white farmers completed a three-page process. We understand that white farmers had their checks almost immediately, as within a few days, while Black farmers had to wait and wait and wait.

Third, the USDA appointed two “hubs” with a rather limited range of experiences with farmers in general and aggrieved farmers specifically. USDA paid these entities millions of dollars. Those hubs were Analytic Acquisitions and Windsor Group. The national administrator group was The Midtown Group. See this page for details.

Fourth, a number of “cooperators” were brought on board, most if not all without any application process, but instead were those identified by Secretary Vilsack as “friendly” to the USDA. I wrote about them in another location, about how this process was flawed from the get go. On the other hand, it is true that these “cooperators” were able to surface, meet, and inform Black farmers as to processes. I listened to one early on as the speaker informed listeners as to broad generalizations of the program. Then, later I listened to a person with more details about the process. Here is the announcement by USDA as the process came to a close.

Fifth, the process dragged on for months, deadlines were changed, and eventually an announcement was released with a number of curious details. While Secretary Vilsack has maintained that releasing data by race is illegal despite the fact that it is mandated in the 2008 Farm Bill and again in the 2018 Farm Bill.

According to the USDA,

 

“The recipients include over 23,000 individuals who have or had a farming or ranching operation, who are receiving between $10,000 and $500,000 of assistance, with an average of nearly $82,000. Recipients also include over 20,000 individuals who planned to have a farming or ranching operation, but reported they were unable to do so because they couldn’t get a USDA loan. These individuals are receiving between $3,500 and $6,000 of assistance, with an average of $5000.”

Other sources released information as to numbers and dollars. These details add to the information we need but that the USDA is concealing from us, because “it would make us look bad,” so an insider told us. We are informed that 58,000 applied for the funds for discrimination, 48,000 “prevailed,” and received some sum of money from the $2.2B pot. A majority of the 48,000 were Black farmers and ranchers and they received $1.76B of the total pot of $2.2B. Over 80% were Black farmers who received these funds. Over 70% of the Black farmers are from the southeastern region of the US. Those who attempted to farm but were kept from it received anywhere from $3,500 to $6,000. The average payout was $82,000.

At the end of the day, it is a mixed bag. Some farmers are very pleased with their check. Some are extremely disappointed. At face value, probably there is not a Black farmer in the country who received a check in the total amount of damages incurred. Some readers may remember that scholars estimated that between 1920 and 1997 Black farmers lost approximately $326B in generational wealth that their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren will never see.

In addition to those disappointed with the numbers on their checks, there is a sizeable group of Black farmers who did not trust the process that USDA utilized, so they did not apply for the DFAP funds. There is another group of farmers who were told by at least one person who had at one point held a high position with USDA that applying for these funds would disallow applying for other funds via individual lawsuits or class action suits. That is not the case, but some of our people trusted misinformation.

Ultimately, “the last plantation” lives on and as it does Black farmers and family members continue to suffer under the boot to the neck of injustices. Until USDA wipes out racism from its halls and offices and personnel, discrimination will continue.

 

 

Dear President Biden and Vice President Harris: We Need to Talk

August 16, 2024
 
President Joe Biden
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20050
 
Vice President Kamala Harris
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington. DC 20050
 
By way of introduction, we are representatives of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees and the Justice for Black Farmers Group. The Coalition began as an employee organization at the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 1994. It has now evolved beyond just employees to include focusing on major issues with Black farmers. The Justice for Black Farmers group is an extension of this important work.
 
We are aware of the sacrifices and services you have made to our country. Perhaps the most courageous act is your stepping back and allowing your Vice President, Kamala Harris, to move into the spotlight she rightfully deserves under the circumstances. We respectfully ask that you use that same courage to address our pressing issues. Now is the time to do good for our Black farmers and others suffering at USDA, especially when there is lingering skepticism about USDA and your support of Secretary Vilsack.
 
While many in the United States are actually confused and/or completely unaware of the background to the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) and how the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) was originally intended to level the playing field for Black farmers who have experienced racism since the very founding days of our country. Those of us who know live out of a different narrative.
 
We are asking for justice for a group of your supporters, Black farmers and their families. Their commitment to the Democratic party is waning, and that makes this request very important.
 
Some matters that we care about deeply lie in the darkness of Capitol Hill, the White House, and the offices of USDA. You undoubtedly know what they are because we have written to you before, and we demonstrated in front of the White House March 1, 2023. See this link as well. Secretary Thomas Vilsack continues to ignore Black farmers’ struggles for justice as well as the systemic racism and sexism that exist within USDA. As our proof, this has been reported widely by newspapers and other investigative reporting.
 
Yes, some Black farmers are not pleased with the checks they got in the mail from the US Department of the Treasury. Some are bitterly disappointed. Frankly, Mr. President, with the race-neutral approach taken within the IRA, funds were disbursed not because of what racism has done to them. The white farmers in the lawsuits which derailed the ARPA demanded their share of benefits because of reverse discrimination. This, despite the fact that white farmers have always had the upper hand in farming, loans, goods, services, and benefits at the county level. Sadly, whiteness matters. For the uninformed public, to give out $2.2B to 43,000 which would include some Black farmers and others, but we know the inside stories, and we want you to hear them as well. We understand that 80% of the total number who prevailed were Black farmers who received $1.76B from the total of $2.2B. It seems to us that embedded within this story is fear on the part of Black farmers to speak out due to retaliation and intimidation by USDA.   We find it interesting that USDA releases this type of data when it is convenient for them.   
 
Our message has been consistent since our inception in 1994 as the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees. From our communication of October 25, 2011 to Vilsack through seven letters to congressionals, seven to you in the White House, eight to your staffers, and twelve to Vilsack, we have articulated a consistent message: 1) remove the indebtedness from Black farmers; 2) cover their taxes; 3) root out racism, sexism, and violence from USDA, especially the Forest Service, Western Division; 4) treat all farmers equitably and institute policies that do so; 5) eliminate the County Committee system where much of the racism occurs; 6) put the Office of Civil Rights (OASCR) in receivership and hold the guilty accountable; 7) put a firewall between the Office of General Counsel (OGC)  and OASCR; 8) institute an environment and policies that insure accountability and transparency; 9) settle the many unresolved cases that lie languishing in the bowels of the Office of Civil Rights;  and 10) endorse a program that puts land back into the hands of Black farmers who have had their land stolen from them because of a failed civil rights process. There are others, Mr. President, and this list is only a partial list.  In fact, a lengthier list is found in correspondence with you in 2022 in which we advocated for systemic change.
 
While there are some who would insist that the economic efforts amount to reparations, we call it justice. By comparison to our issues with USDA and the demand for funding to level the playing field, the State of California is undergoing an intense process toward providing reparations for citizens whose ancestry goes back to days of enslavement. We participated in that effort by a discussion of the Black farmer issue. The entire report is available.
 
In short, Mr. President, we, Black farmers and advocates, are seeking accountability, transparency, and justice. USDA, until these factors are included, will continue to be labeled “the last plantation,” because, indeed, Secretary Vilsack runs the agency like a plantation, and it has been that way for decade after decade. Yes, we do want a better accounting for actual damages, and we want a process that is much clearer and transparent, one that is legal according to the law. Vilsack allowed his Equity Commission to leave in place the racist county committee system that for decades has destroyed lives of our Black farmers and others. We believe that his Equity Commission was tarnished from the beginning with many having received funds from the check-book of USDA and several of his former colleagues from the dairy industry and the Office of General Counsel.
 
We are also shining light on the issue of racism and discrimination within the USDA by presenting these and other materials at the Whistleblower Conference and Film Festival held in Washington, DC from July 26 through August 4 on the topic “Seeking Truth and Justice.”
 
To expand on these requests and opportunities, we offer the following by way of background.
 
On March 1, 2023, as noted earlier, Black farmers, advocates, and their supporters from across the country assembled in front of the White House to remember the Fairness Hearings before Judge Friedman and to demonstrate USDA’s failures and our concerns on behalf of Black farmers and the injustices we have received from your administration and USDA. Two of our members wore a provocative sign which read, “We Gave You the White House. You Gave Us Tom Vilsack.”
 
As inflammatory as that reads, we believe it to be the truth.
 
In 2019, we offered Senator Warren a different view on Black land loss. While she had believed and had said so publicly that it was due to heirs’ property issues, we showed her otherwise, that the majority of Black land loss since 1910 has come as a result of racism within USDA, especially at the County Committee level where matters and personnel are unsupervised and personnel are not held accountable. We believe that Senator Warren’s plan is the standard bearer in this significant area.
 
Our many communications have gone unanswered with the exception of one meeting on May 28, 2021 in which Secretary Vilsack pontificated about his programs and failed to allow us time to ask questions. Even in that meeting, we were provided with false information from OASCR. It is no wonder that Black farmers do not trust USDA. We communicated our disenchantment with Secretary Vilsack. Secretary Vilsack runs a closed system. He refuses to listen to those who complain about his policies and procedures. It looks good and smells good, but to those of us who look inside know that it is anything but a healthy organization. On the other hand, we had a series of very productive conversations and follow-ups with two White House staffers, Cedric Richmond and William T. McIntee, in the Office of Public Engagement. The heart of the matter was the large number of letters written by us to Secretary Vilsack without any response from him. This was the most productive conversation that we have had with your staff in many years.  
 
We participated with your agriculture transition team in the policy development phase of racial justice for Black farmers. We eventually realized that Tom Vilsack was pulling the strings and that the appointees with whom we were dealing had no authority. The ultimate insult was when one of Vilsack’s attorneys said that what we wanted was unconstitutional. We came to believe the bitter truth of that because when you signed the ARPA , the banks complained to Vilsack, and Vilsack slow-walked the process of paying the 120% to Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers for debt write-off and taxes, giving white farmers across the country enough time to file twelve (12) frivolous and racist lawsuits complaining about reverse discrimination.
 
From there, Congress got busy, passed, and you signed the race neutral Inflation Reduction Act, which allocated $3.1B for “distressed borrowers” in order to bring their debts in line, and $2.2B for farmers who could prove that they had been discriminated against. Since farmers of any color could apply for either or both of these provisions, the pool was watered down. Those who deserved to be compensated for their actual losses received little to nothing. On top of that, Mr. President, those few Black farmers who have had their debts full or partially forgiven will now face the onerous task of dealing with the 1099 form and hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes. Due to having to pay taxes, we think, many will be at risk to lose their land, houses, and property. Additionally, we are of the opinion that the “process” for addressing discrimination by farmers is flawed and inadequate. One administrator, two hubs for the entire country, numerous “cooperators” that facilitate information, a minimal process for white farmers and 40 pages for Black farmers, was all flawed. Our understanding is that this system was actually illegal. There are several flaws in this legislation and its procedures: no attorney’s fees were covered, a lawyer and ag economist were glaringly absent for Black farmers, there were no appeals rights, it is said that white farmers only completed three pages and were paid quickly, and Black farmers were required to complete an onerous amount of 40 plus pages and had to wait. USDA refused, in addition to all of the above, to provide the guidelines for their decision-making.  
 
As alluded to earlier, we observe clear connections between Vilsack’s attorney on the transition team declaring that our efforts to secure justice for Black farmers was unconstitutional. From there, just weeks after the ARPA was signed into law, numerous white farmer lawsuits derailed the process along with the banking industry while Secretary Vilsack purposefully delayed the payment to Black farmers. We chronicled those matters for the public’s consideration. Then, Congress passed the race neutral IRA of 2022 in which any race of “distressed borrower” and any race of a farmer experiencing discrimination are eligible for funds that were originally calculated to level the playing field somewhat for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers (the 2501 designation) were now falling into the hands of persons for whom the county committee, FSA, and USDA have always turned out well. So, it is not a stretch to see “unconstitutional” as undergirding all that happened between your agriculture transition team’s work through the ARPA and on to the IRA and out into the bank accounts of all farmers including white farmers.
 
We believe the Justice for Black Farmers Act would provide measurable improvements in the lives and livelihood of Black farmers as it includes debt relief and land at decent process for those who want to farm. We note that no one is offering land to Black farmers from the USDA Land Bank and its holdings. This is all about the taking of the land.
 
Now we know what we did not know before. With the disappointments of aggrieved Black farmers for whom the pay-outs from the IRA pools of funds did not do justice, there will come, we predict, a plethora of class action suits. An inadequate reconciliation of past injustices with present-day funds via the USDA, the hubs’ poor handling of the processes, and the loop holes for some, but not for the benefit of Black farmers are all obvious to us. Such actions for the USDA continue to leave angst in their souls and a bitter taste in their mouths.
 
We now understand that $500M to $700M from the $3.1B pool have been purposely held back by Secretary Vilsack. Our network is nation-wide, and we know of only a handful of Black farmers who have had their debts full or partially removed and there seems to be no rhyme or reason for these farmers other than they were “cherry-picked” by USDA. These numbers do not line up and Secretary Vilsack and his team are not forthcoming about racial categories and debt relief. Money blinds us to the reality existing within USDA the system problem of its structure and behaviors. Money is not the issue.
 
We read the news reports as do you and your advisors. And in this time of transition, we see the young voters moving toward Vice President Harris. Black cousins from the south talk to cousins from the north, and her favorability rating is climbing. We believe that if you and she do the right thing by Black farmers, that the favorability rating among others will rise. You did the courageous thing, several weeks ago, and now, we ask you to do one more courageous thing.  
 
We are aware that you have held various meetings in the White House, the latest of which was February 1, 2024 in which you discussed matters related to Black America. We are aware that one person affiliated with Black farmers was in attendance. We are convinced, Mr. President, that you do not see the severity of the plight of Black farmers and others because your appointee at USDA of Secretary Tom Vilsack, is concealing them from the public and you. What is concealed is the pain and suffering of Black farmers as well as their loss of land and productivity from the land. Estimates suggest that the losses are at least $326B from 1910 to 1997.
 
The November, 2023 General Accounting Office (GAO) report provides a scathing evaluation of the inadequacies of the internal system that tracks complaints of both those who utilize services of USDA as well as employees within USDA. These inadequacies have been known for years, perhaps even decades as the complaints have fallen on deaf ears. Also, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) Report of September, 2021 pointed out numerous inadequacies within OASCR including failure to process complaints in a timely manner, inadequacy of support and processes, failure to track and measure progress, failure to follow its own strategic plan, and even potential circumvention of the law. A recent doctoral dissertation uncovered truths about the county committee that we have known for years and yet, Secretary Vilsack’s Equity Commission opted to do nothing to this unfair and racist process. Bottom line is that white farmers are more likely to benefit from programs and services. When the primary source of discrimination against minority farmers originates from within the county committee, it is reasonable that this specific area receive attention.
 
Secretary Vilsack himself declared on one occasion that to reveal information about debt forgiveness and other factors by race was illegal despite the fact that this requirement was written into the 2008 Farm Bill and the 2018 Farm Bill. Now we are awaiting information from the IRA of 2022 in both categories for “distressed borrowers” and those who experienced discrimination although recently a USDA employee provided global numbers for us. Naturally, we are given state-wide data, but that is insufficient and an insult to the American population that wants these numbers while he is required by law to release them.
 
Various investigative reports by Joyce, Rosenberg, and Stucki; Holloway; and Rosenberg and Stucki; and numerous internal and external reports, tell the tragedies of white farmers receiving the overwhelming majority of funds for farming, fewer white farmers having their loans rejected than Black farmers, covid era relief funds going to white and not Black farmers, and other inadequacies. These matters of racism and injustice have been occurring under your watch as well as that of Obama, Bush, Clinton, and previous administrations for decades. The USDA acts as if it is a law to themselves and fails at too many levels to display transparency, accountability, and a commitment to removing racism from its halls and offices.
 
In addition to the above complaints, we are dismayed at the processes and outcomes related to the Equity Commission. While this would perhaps take a more lengthy conversation, in short, we believe it is redundant when surveying the large number of reports, both internal and external, related to the USDA and Black farmers in particular. The composition of the commission and the subcommittee on agriculture was problematic as a number of the members were, in our opinion, compromised by having received funding as a “cooperator” or other means. It has the very appearance of conflicts of interest for a number of the group.
 
Recently, Secretary Vilsack announced that he wanted his Equity Commission to evaluate his civil rights office and programs. This is nothing more than “the fox watching the hen house,” a stacking of the deck to hide and to protect him from his abysmal civil rights record and failures. We want a level playing field at USDA.
 
Given the severity of these complaints and concerns, we ask you to act in an expeditious manner to address our concerns listed in paragraph seven above and the communication of September 28, 2022 in which we listed our concerns and demand systemic change. Black farmers are a part of America’s middle class working families that Vice President Harris aspires to enhance through economic policies.
 
Many farmers have talked directly with us and shared their concerns about Vilsack returning in a Harris administration. That should not happen. The decades of discrimination are acknowledged by Tom Vilsack, but he has done nothing to fix it. It would be devastating for the Black farmers and others of our country if he were to return. We hope that Kamala Harris will address these issues if she is elected president.
 
We respectfully request an in-person meeting with a host of farmers and their advocates with you and Vice President Kamala Harris. We eagerly await your response.
 
Respectfully,
 
 ---S---
 
Lawrence Lucas
President Emeritus, USDA Coalition for Minority Employees
Representative, Justice for Black Farmers Group
Www.BlackmeninAmerica.com
LawrLCL@aol.com
856-910-2399 
 
---S---
 
Waymon R. Hinson, Ph.D.
Representative, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Representative, Justice for Black Farmers Group
www.letjusticering.blogspot.com
Psychologist
Waymon.hinson@gmail.com
903-271-4654

Dear Senator Vance: You Got This One Very, Very Wrong

August 21, 2024

Senator J. D. Vance
288 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
 
Dear Senator Vance:
 
Words matter. Perspectives matter. Policies matter. I am confident that you know about the importance of these things. That leaves many of us in the Black Farmer Movement decidedly dismayed and even angry at your uninformed comments in the interview on Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.
 
Your comments seem to come out of left field, were terrifically misguided, and are not grounded in reality. Here is your comment:
 
“The Harris Administration, for example, handed out farm benefits to people
based on skin color. I think that's disgraceful. I don't- I don't think we should say,
you get farm benefits if you're a Black farmer, you don't get farm benefits if
you're a white farmer. All farmers, we want to thrive, and that's certainly the
President Trump and JD Vance view of the situation. But I do think unfortunately,
when our leaders divide us by race, you're going to have hate on the left side
of the political spectrum. You're going to have hate on the right side of the political spectrum. We should just judge people based on individual characteristics and
based on merit, and that's certainly what President Trump and I want to do.”
 
Whether your misstep was intentional or not, it insulted a large group of African American farmers and their families. These families have fought to save their farms and to maintain their chosen way of life since the earliest days of Freedom, and for you as a leader in the Senate and now a candidate for Vice President adds insult to injury. If anyone should know about the pain and suffering it should be you as you represent a constituency that numbers 344 Black farmers according to the Nature Conservancy. This represents a drop from 2,000 in 1900. You, then, Senator Vance, have a vibrant and relatively large number of Black farmers whom you represent.
 
The ease with which you so smoothly spoke of these complicated matters leaves us furious and your devotees and listeners ill-informed. Your assertion that Black farmers got these dollars is partially right and partially inaccurate. Your assertion that farm benefits were “handed out to people based on skin color” is completely wrong. Either way, you managed to insult Black farmers and their families and friends.
 
As a professional who has been involved with Black farmers since 1994, and as a professional whose life has been lived in the academy, I am left with questions as to why you said what you said. I can think of four, and perhaps there are more.
 
One, are you simply uninformed? Two, are you opposed to leveling the playing field when discrimination is clearly evident, or do you believe in drawing distinctions based on skin color? Three, do you harbor ill will toward people of color, Black farmers in particular? Or, four, was it a convenient piece of data useable to take a jab at your opponents in the election, Kamala Harris and Tim Walz?
 
My first foray into the world of Black farmers came in the late ‘90s when I served as expert witness to four of the first fifteen Black farmers who prevailed against the DOJ and USDA. I got my first glimpse of the challenges of working with USDA and the county committee by listening to their stories of pain and suffering. As I continued in this arena, I published two peer-reviewed articles that were informative to me, and perhaps they can be to you and your staff. This article is co-authored in 2008 and this one that was published in 2018.
 
I would recommend that you do some further study into the history of Black farmers in particular and their challenges of dealing with the USDA and its racist orientation. Even if the Biden Administration was offering financial compensation for their years or even decades of discrimination, it would be totally appropriate. The shadows of discrimination and racism reach back into the past, and even USDA admits to it. Many authors chronicle the history of farming while Black in our country all the way back to the brutalities of the Middle Passage and into days of enslavement.
 
Another line of research is that of detailing the history of Black farmers in America versus white farmers. Against all odds, Black farmers became prolific land owners in the early decades of the 20^th century, and then in the third decade Black farmers began to lose their land. It is curious to me that two things overlap: the demise of Black farmers and the rise of government subsidies in the 1930s.
 
The data and historical narratives validate the fact that white farmers have always had the upper hand in programs and services when dealing with the USDA. Black farmers know that they’ll bring up the rear and have learned the hard way to distrust USDA and its employees, especially at the county committee level.
 
Pigford I and Pigford II did not level the playing field. Instead, those class action suits left farmers in far worse shape that before. Government reports indicate that only 371 of the thousands who prevailed under Pigford I actually received debt relief.
 
When the Justice for Black Farmers Act had been introduced in Congress in 2020, authors of the bill knew that it had no chance of passing. Then, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 offered some degree of hope for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers (the 2501 designation) until white farmers driven by the absurd belief that they were victims of reverse discrimination filed 12 frivolous and racist law suits, the banking industry complained, Secretary Tom Vilsack slow walked the process, and that bill had an untimely death. Had it been passed, it would have offered 120% for eligible SDFR producers, 100% for their loans and 20% for taxes.
 
Congress then realized that nothing was going to pass unless it was “race neutral,” and so the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 was passed, and within it were sections dealing with “distressed borrowers” and those who had been victims of discrimination. The pool of potential candidates for these funds was opened widely such that any victim of discrimination regardless of race, color, creed, sexual orientation, etc., etc.
 
Back to your failure to adequately communicate meaningful numbers and perspectives, it is
true that 58,000 farmers applied, 43,000 prevailed, and according to an upper-level official at USDA, 80% of those prevailing were Black farmers, and they prevailed to the tune of $1.76B of the $2.2B. Without have precise calculations for farmers by group, as Secretary Vilsack refuses to release them, we are left to estimate the characteristics and numbers of those who prevailed. Either way this was sliced, white farmers were a part of the equation, so you cannot truthfully assert that these funds were only for Black farmers. The same goes for the $3.1B allocated by Congress in the IRA for “distressed borrowers,” and as most of those funds have been allocated, we do not know the distribution by race due to Secretary Vilsack’s lack of transparency in providing those numbers.
 
Given these footprints through the sands of time, Senator Vance, you are terribly wrong and
ill-informed about the role of Black farmers. Black farmers have indeed faced brutal discrimination and efforts to make amends for this are justified. However, you are also misguided in failing to assert that other groups were recipients of the DFAP funds under the IRA section 22007 who experienced discrimination and 22006, those farmers who were categorized as “distressed borrowers.”
 
A compelling piece of data is that between 1920 and 1997, Black farmers lost $326B in land. If we add to that figure production from the land, that total number of dollars in losses goes up exponentially. Most of this loss can be attributed to malfeasance within the USDA and the county committee. That is the game. Figure out how to get the land back and into white hands. As the USDA has been largely responsible for these losses, by implication, it is the USDA and the federal government who owe Black farmers the opportunity to start again.
 
It is also the case that Black farmers have faced the most violent of acts of discrimination since the days of enslavement, Freedom, Jim Crow, and to this very day. USDA has had a notoriously wicked reputation for ensuring that white farmers were given the majority of benefits and programs and that Black farmers were kicked to the curb. And that Black farmers faced a higher percentage of foreclosures than white farmers. Previously referenced reports verify these facts.
 
If indeed you would like to know how the USDA treats Black farmers, the film, “I’m Just a Layman in Pursuit of Justice: Black Farmers Fight the USDA,” produced by Shoun Hill and Waymon Hinson will reveal the brutal realities of their efforts to hold on to their land. These nine farmers in this film were nine of the fifteen Black farmers who filed suit against the USDA between 1997 and 1999, just before the certification of Pigford I v. Glickman.
 
So, Senator Vance, when you say it is a “disgrace” that the Harris administration handed out benefits to Black farmers, you are wrong and you are spitting in the faces of Black farmers who legitimately deserved recompense for the malfeasance perpetrated upon them by employees of USDA. You, sir, are also spitting on the graves of those who died in the battle for justice for people who looked like them. I could list them by name, some I only heard about and some I met during my time of working in this area.
 
You are saying things in a public forum that insult the lives and livelihoods of Black farmers and families who have tilled the soil and in doing so, helped to make this country the great country that it is.
 
I ask you, therefore, to study up on these issues, their history, and the legitimacy of these complaints, and that you make a public apology and speak more accurately as to what it means to farm while Black in America. It may be too late to make amends to our people in terms of votes being cast, but it could potentially go a long way toward redeeming you and your message regardless of what happens in November.
 
If a conversation with me would prove helpful, please feel free to contact me.
 
Respectfully,
 
 
Waymon R. Hinson, Ph.D.
Representative
USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Justice for Black Farmers Group
www.letjusicering.blogspot.com
https://blackfarmersinsearchofjusticefilm.com/
Waymon.hinson@gmail.com
903-271-4654

Once Upon a Time in a Land Called the United States of America

Once upon a time there was a newly developing country. Land as far as one could see and beyond which had earlier been inhabited by others was now seized and claimed by white men with long guns. Dreaming big dreams and counting their dollars before they came into being, they dreamed of cotton as far as they could see, rice growing in those fields, and free labor to get it all harvested in time.

So, they sent their minions to the shores of Africa and brought back people from that continent on slave ships, with human cargo stacked like sardines in a can, and some died and were tossed into the sea, and some wanted to die, but instead lived. Standing upon the auction block of port cities from the northeast down to New Orleans, and perhaps as far south as Galveston, men with money examined them as if they were a horse or a cow or a pig or a goat, and paid prices for them, all depending upon gender, age, and purpose.

The humans, enslaved Africans, were then led across country to their new places of abode. Living under harsh conditions of enslavement, they were the labor that would make America great. They provided with their own flesh the economic structure of America, the land of the free and the home of the brave. And it worked.

It worked until it no longer worked.

Then War came. Then Freedom came. Then Reconstruction came. Then violence came. Then formerly enslaved people were now enslaved once more, but just under different laws and codes.

A miracle of sorts occurred, and these formerly enslave people, those who brought agrarian skills from their homelands, were able to purchase land and came to be farmers owning and working their own land, some 950,000 working some 19,000,000 acres around 1910, give or take a few years. They made up 14% of all farmers of the country. Life was good despite Jim Crow South, the KKK, the lynching tree, and other heinous things.

Then, they began to lose their lands at the same time that the federal government strengthened farming with subsidies. Funds that were to have gone to the share croppers landed in the pockets of the white men who owned the land. It was a similar form from the plantation days.

As the years progressed, white men ran the county offices that provided loans for crops or purchases of land or seed or fertilizer. Black men needed similar funds, but the white men voted their prejudices and mostly the white men got the money and Black farmers were slowly and convincingly starved out and forced off their land.

And academic papers were written, speeches were made at professional meetings, and documentaries were filmed. 

Black farmers had enough and began to file complaints against all manner of acts of discrimination, but their complaints found their way into a file room where those carefully written documents were treated with disrespect. After all, if the president shuts down the civil rights office, then civil rights complaints must not be very important.

Then, a firebrand of an attorney caught wind of these shenanigans and one by one, the Black farmers lined up, arm in arm with him, to take on Goliath. In some instances, they prevailed. Some 15 of them prevailed before the big class action suit, Pigford, was declared a class.

Depending upon where you abide in America, Pigford was a success, a failure, or a huge scam, a give-away of America’s hard-earned money.

Thousands applied for admission to the class, a lower number in the thousands were admitted into the class, many received a financial award of $50K, but only 371 received debt cancellation, that for which they had worked hard. Lead counsel surrendered discovery, a process by which each farmer could have proved via a “find of discrimination” that they had indeed been wounded financially.

Years passed, complaint after complaint was filed in the Office of Civil Rights, but most were unresolved, as the office was a disaster, and many cases simply were allowed to play out the clock. As the statute of limitations was initiated, those inside the office simply watched the calendar, and then when two years ended, the cases were cast aside.

A courageous group of Senators, Warren, Booker, Sanders, and Warnock, amongst others, saw what was happening and developed the Justice for Black Farmers Act of 2020, but they knew that under the Republican administration, the bill had little chance, so with the election of a Democratic administration, it was resubmitted as the Act of 2021.

At the 11^th hour, the senate moved two sections from the JBFA to the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. These two sections allowed for debt cancellation for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. White farmers were noticing and strategizing. They filed 12 frivolous and racist lawsuits which stopped debt cancellation in its tracks. The banking associations even had enough time to file their own complaints. The secretary of agriculture had done what he did there as we watched. He slow-walked the process.

Finally, as a new Bill was being debated before our eyes, with the slimmest of margins, 51 to 50, another Bill was passed. This time, racially charged language was removed so as to mollify the complaints of racist America. Even the white farmers had opportunity for debt cancellation under the provisions of the $3.1B section for “distressed farmers.” Another section of the Bill committed $2.2B to address grievances for those who have bonified acts of discrimination against them.

On the sidelines in Zoom meetings and phone calls, we negotiated with staffers. We challenged leaders to do the right thing. One staffer called us his “kitchen cabinet,” and we appreciated the acknowledgement but only wanted for this Bill to finally come to pass.

That which we have worked for for decades, debt cancellation for those who have experienced first-hand the degradation of racist attitudes by the USDA and its employees at the county level are sitting and waiting and hoping.

Once upon a time in America these things happened.