Reverend Senator Raphael Warnock: Step, Stand, and Stay with Us, An Open Letter

February 25, 2024

The Honorable Raphael Warnock, Ph.D.
407 Auburn Avenue
Atlanta, GA 30312
 
416 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
 
Dear Senator Warnock:
 
It is a pleasure to worship with Ebenezer each Sunday morning and especially today with the preaching of Olu Brown. Besides growing up in the same region of East Texas, he and I share in common a concern for the gospel and for people.
 
My “transition” to Ebenezer took place several months back when two things happened: 1) my physicians told me to stay out of crowds lest I contract a disease and die and 2) my growing discontent with a white church with a smattering of Black sisters and brothers and a growing shift to the right and a lack of interest in engaging important matters in our larger community.
 
Besides our mutual degrees in theology, you and I share a deep concern for all to be included at the table and all to be included in farming across this great land of ours. I understand that you have been instructed by the writings of James Cone and Howard Thurman. I have only come to embrace their writings and ways of thinking and living in my senior years. As you share inside information as a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, I share a deep concern for the mistreatment of Black farmers at the hands of USDA. Since 1995 I have listened to injustices perpetrated upon Black farmers, I have heard and heard again of the pain and suffering that farmers and their families experience at the malfeasance of USDA/FSA that lands squarely in their laps. As a board member of BFAA, Tillery, NC, and as a representative of the Justice for Black Farmers Group and as a co-laborer with Lawrence Lucas, President Emeritus, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees, I have had the pleasure and the pain of advocating on behalf of Black farmers and families at a whole different level, one upon which you live, move, and breathe. My speeches, publications, blogposts, and even a documentary are easy enough to find.
 
In Reverend Brown’s sermon this morning, as he touched on the three actions of faith as exemplified by the Israelites there at the Jordan: Step, Stand, and Stay, I was convicted that such actions can easily apply to the Black Farmer Movement by the farmers themselves, by advocates like me, and by congressionals with power like you.
 
Those three actions exemplify the Black farmers and advocates. We stepped out in faith that their cause was a worthy cause, convinced that Black farmers had been kicked to the curb since the earliest days of USDA, and likewise convinced that the investigative reporting verified the horror stories that we had heard for decades. We have moved into standing. We would not be moved by a different administration. We were unmoved by the rhetoric of promises following by a display of inaction. We are unmoved by the cherry-picking of USDA and its debt relief while Black farmers lose their land. And we have stayed. We stay as our people die. One of my studies has been the impact of the micro and macro-aggressions of the county office on the health and well being of farmers and families. You have heard of the death of some: Eddie and Dorothy Wise and Eddie Slaughter, just to name three. While we have life and breath, we will stay in the struggle. While we have life and breath, we will stay until racism has been removed from USDA and until all of God’s children are treated with the same dignity, respect, and funding for farming.
 
We wrote you a letter on March 4, 2021. That letter is attached to this letter for your convenience. The tragedy is that much has stayed the same. Things have not changed for the better the last three years for Black farmers. In fact, we think things are actually worse and land loss and its tragedies happen right before our very eyes.
 
We are asking that you step, stand, and stay with us. We respectfully ask that you meet with us and discuss the current status of Black farmers and that you work with us to find avenues of remediation. Avenues and actions are there: the Justice for Black Farmers Act should be enacted, greater transparency and accountability should be mandated for the USDA, Black farmers should receive the same benefits as any farmer in terms of funding for farming and farm operating loans and other matters, loss of land and livelihood must cease, and the White House and USDA must declare and show with actions that Black farmers from New York, down through the South, across to Texas and then the Midwest, and across the Southwest, and even to California and the western states all matter, Black the same as white in all matters related to farming.
 
Thank you for reading this letter. We eagerly await your response and an opportunity to meet with you.
 
Respectfully,
 
----S----
 
Waymon R. Hinson, Ph.D.
www.letjusticering.blogspot.com
www.blackfarmersinsearchofjusticefilm.com
Psychologist/Marriage and Family Therapist
Advocate/Researcher
Representative for BFAA, Justice for Black Farmers Group, and
  USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
903-271-4654
Waymon.hinson@gmail.com
 
CC: Lawrence Lucas
       Corey Lea
       Michael Stovall

Dear Congressionals, Are You Listening?

March 14, 2023

Dear Senators and Representatives:

I am contacting you via phone and mail since you represent citizens of the State of _____and some of its most vulnerable citizens are under attack in Washington, DC by the USDA.

My understanding is that Texas has the most African American farmers of any state.  As Black farmers, their cases of malfeasance by employees of the USDA/FSA go back well into the 1960s, and that is just for those farmers who are still alive. Many have died in these battles for justice. That said, the latest Ag Census data indicate that there are 48,697 Black producers in the US and that there are 35,470 Black-operated farms. This document lists the number of Black producers by state: Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Virginia, Arkansas, and Tennessee. There has been a significant decline from 1920 where there were upwards of 950,000 Black farmer operators and from 1910 when Black farmers farmed 19 million acres. The losses have been horrendous and much of it is due to the malfeasance of the USDA. These losses from the land and productivity of the land are estimated at $326 billion.

Our specific aim has been to find debt relief and compensatory damages for what is known as the “Pigford Legacy Farmers,” or those who did not find debt relief under Pigford v. Glickman. To this end, a large group of us met in front of the White House on March 1, demonstrating near the anniversary of the Fairness Hearing for the Pigford v. Glickman case before Judge Friedman, March 2, 1999. We believe now, as we believed then, that Pigford was a debacle and that Black farmers were worse off before than after. Pigford promised either a $50K sum plus debt relief under track A, or a sum not determined plus debt relief under Track B. Over 22,000 applied for inclusion in the class, over 15,000 prevailed for inclusion, and only 371 received debt relief. In the face of decades of verifiable discrimination, debt relief is precisely what they wanted and precisely what they did not receive.

One sign from the Demonstration that resonated deeply with me was this one:  "We gave you the White House. You gave us Tom Vilsack." 

As we all know, Congress had  appropriated 120% of the indebtedness of socially disadvantaged farmer and ranchers within the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. These funds were for debt relief and taxes for those farmers who had suffered discrimination in the farm/services division. However, Secretary Vilsack, in our opinion “slow-walked” the process and allowed 12 white farmer class action law suits to be filed and for two courts to issue restraining orders against the USDA that disallowed them to pay Black farmers and other SDFR.

In fact, many of us protested against Vilsack’s appointment long before he was appointed, but President Biden ignored us. In fact, we participated with the Biden/Harris transition team and were told at one point in the process that what we wanted, “race-based remediation to a historical anti-black process” was “unconstitutional." We told President Biden and Secretary Vilsack about this.

Then, in 2022, Congress signed the Inflation Reduction Act which made allocations available to “distressed” farmers and ranchers, a race neutral language that circumvented frivolous law suits. In that bill, $3.1 billion was allocated for “distressed” farmers to bring them into compliance with their debts with USDA/FSA for those with guaranteed loans. It also allocated $2.2 billion for farmers who can show that they were discriminated against. The Ag Secretary is slow-walking these processes as well.

At this point, Secretary Vilsack has released $800 million to approximately 11,000 “distressed” farmers and ranchers, and our group, The Justice for Black Farmers Group, can only identify nine Black farmers who have received partial or full relief from their debts. We also are aware that they are receiving 1099s from the IRS. This is reprehensible. Their debts are paid off and now they are under the economic boot of the IRS. We know that there are approximately 3,000 Black farmers whose indebtedness is under $210 million. We think he is “cherry-picking” farmers and that this will enhance his credibility. We are not buying it.

There is much more history to Secretary Vilsack’s acts of malfeasance than we can discuss in one letter. However, my blog outlines a number of matters related to him. We believe that he is owned by Big Ag. In fact, a simple google of funds released to various agencies within Big Ag will validate this point.

There are numerous investigative reports about the failures of USDA to honor its contractual obligations to Black producers, and the consistent theme is that Secretary Vilsack has failed us.

We, therefore, would like for you to stand with us, join in concert with our voices to President Biden, to accept the resignation of Secretary Tom Vilsack, and put in that position someone who can settle these matters once and for all. Black America is watching. 

Respectfully,

Waymon R. Hinson, Ph.D.
Representative, Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association
Representative, Justice for Black Farmers Group
Representative, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees

Dear President Biden

February 17, 2023

President Joe Biden

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania NW

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President: 

Surely you agree with me that we live in perilous times with threats from Russia,  domestic threats from balloons from China and other places, and threats to democracy here in our own country. While I think you are, by and large, handling those threats well, there is one threat that you, sir, are not handling well, and that is the prompt for this open letter to you. 

You are mishandling the Black farmer issue. I am disappointed. I am bitterly disappointed and disillusioned with the manner in which you have handled the Black farmers of our land and their city cousins. Country cousins and city cousins are connected, know each other, and talk to each other. 

We were very hopeful back in the day when your campaign looked to be going down the tubes, when Representative Jim Clyburn of South Carolina stepped up and endorsed you, and we saw the winds of your campaign change. We saw outstanding successes among the Democratic Party in Georgia for both you and Reverend Senator Raphael Warnock.

Then, Mr. President, we began to wince at what some of that change meant. We had fully engaged the campaigns of Senators Warren, Booker, Sanders, and Warnock, and we engaged with Mr. Mike Bloomberg. As the ticket of Biden/Harris won, we then engaged the agriculture transition team. Much to our surprise, the gentleman with whom we had been working on this team and your policies was not actually the person in charge. We realized that former Ag Secretary Thomas Vilsack was pulling strings from behind. We were advocating for changes within the USDA, for accountability and transparency, and for full debt relief for aggrieved Black farmers. Then, in one particular meeting we heard that what we wanted was "unconstitutional." One of your team members, an attorney, told us that. We were flabbergasted. 

Then, we watched with much interest as a variety of people pressed you both publicly and privately not to appoint Tom Vilsack to another term as Secretary of USDA. Much had been written about the failures of his two terms under President Obama, and despite opposition from congressional folk and the NAACP leadership, the Justice for Black Farmers Group, and the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees, and others, you nominated him anyway. And then we observed the "love fest" at the senate confirmation hearing and I, for one, was nauseated and alarmed. 

We were hopeful despite these things at the beginning of your presidency and now we are not so hopeful. We see where the winds of change have taken us. They have taken us down the road of "Big Ag," and because of that, Vilsack, who is owned by Big Ag, is your Secretary of Ag. We want to know if you indeed are also beholden to Big Ag or is it just Mr. Vilsack. We have our suspicions and we'd like for you to dissuade us of them. We see how Big Ag is getting the major source of funding from USDA. We also see that Vilsack's favored organizations are getting millions of dollars despite there being no open application process. 

What did you miss from the messages of "don't appoint Vilsack?" Was it when you were making decisions about your cabinet? And what other voices did you ignore? What about his previous terms did you respect? What did you anticipate being different under your administration? Were you indebted to Tom Vilsack in some manner? 

Surely you know because your team had done its research that he had an incredibly spotty history: a class action suit by Black state employees in Iowa, extreme favoritism of white, corporate Ag, and a racist, dismissive attitude toward socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers. 

Research about Vilsack has been published in numerous places under numerous names such as Lloyd Wright in the Washington Post, Rosenberg and Stucki in numerous publications where investigations are published, and even me here on this blog. 

A painful political cartoon is out in public spaces. It is insulting to you. It shows you as Jim Crow Joe with Black voters in your right hand and Vilsack and Dr. Dwayne Goldmon, his equity advisor, as marionettes on the strings in your left hand. It is insulting and I cringed when I saw it, but the people with whom I work and respect say that "a picture is worth a thousand words" and have made in public in various social media. 

Your appointee knows that we are displeased with him. You know that we are displeased with him. We have written both of you numerous letters. We met with him and members of his team several months back, but he did not listen to us. Instead he spent a few minutes filibustering as to his accomplishments. That is not why we called the meeting. In a follow up letter we told him so. 

We believed that he slow-walked the process under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 and by doing so, he allowed time for 12 or 13 class action suits by white farmers to be filed in various courts around the country. My own research into the USDA database shows that not only have they NOT been discriminated against, but that the were very successful at receiving subsidies, MFP, and CFAP funds as well as the counties within which their farms and ranches are located. This research was on the first 6 litigants. There was no need to go any further although the data is there. 

Even though the language was modified under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 to "distressed" borrowers, from the appearance of things, most of those funds have gone to white borrowers and to very few Black "distressed" borrowers. At last note, Vilsack has wiped out the debts of 11,000 borrowers to the tune of $800M. We know of less than 10 Black farmers who have been recipients of that relief. We have little hope that he will disburse the $2.2B for those have experienced discrimination. We understand that he is actually trying to change the ways the second set of funds is to be managed. 

We have it on good evidence that Mr. Vilsack thinks that distributing millions to favored organizations for technical assistance and to 1890s have been good for Black farmers. He is misguided and his assertions are insulting. Until Black farmers receive relief for the USDA's blatant malfeasance and discrimination toward them, injustice and injury will continue to live on. 

As you may recall, it was Black farmers who reluctantly formed the Class Action Suit, Pigford v. Glickman. Only 4.8% of those successful litigants received debt cancellation. Those Black farmers have continued to vote for Democratic presidents only to see their hopes for remedies to USDA's discrimination dashed on the shores of Washington DC. I personally participated in a mediation hearing before USDA and DOJ in 1997 and learned first hand how the federal government treats Black farmers. It was not a pretty sight. 

We were hoping to see things different this time. While Senator Warren's policy for Black farmers was thorough and well publicized, we had to hunt via the internet for your policy. Your policy was less than satisfactory by comparison. 

Bottom line, Mr. President, we gave you the White House. You gave us Tom Vilsack. 

His racist policies continue. Sadly, you are now implicated in the process. His efforts are only putting lipstick on a pig. We know it's still a pig. 

The Democratic Party did well in the midterms. Congratulations on that. We fear that similar results may not be in the cards for the upcoming general elections. We are suspicious but that your reelection may indeed be hanging on by a thread.

City and country cousins talk to each other. They know how your secretary continues to favor unchecked, corporate Ag to the neglect of Black farmers of the land. 

There is time to turn that around, but there is not much time. The clock is ticking. 

We are hoping, praying, and demonstrating for a better day. We hope you will meet us in those spaces of hope, prayer, and conversation. 

Respectfully, 

Waymon R. Hinson, Ph.D.

Representation, Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association 

Representative, Justice for Black Farmers Group

Representative, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees

Dear Mr. President, We Gave You the White House, You Gave Us Tom Vilsack

November 2, 2022

President Joe Biden

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20050

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing this letter to you because you have not answered our letter of September 28, 2022. That letter is below.

On behalf of Black farmers and other Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers, we encourage you to have Tom Vilsack and staff move swiftly and efficiently to cancel debt for Black farmers. We encourage you to initiate processes that would cancel taxes for recipients of debt cancellation. Additionally, we request a meeting with you to discuss these and systemic changes that need to be made within USDA.

One example that told us how USDA has pointed in the wrong direction was the establishment of an Equity Commission. Their job is to research what has already been addressed. The abhorrent history of USDA is chronicled in a myriad of documents all the way back to the 1920s. To add insult, all recommendations must be cleared and accessible to Tom Vilsack…..the fox watching the hen house.

We, then, see Tom Vilsack’s actions and inactions. We see that Black agrarianism is wilting under the withering heat of racist strategies, consistent with a plantation culture. Time is of the essence. We encourage you to accept his resignation. We desire you to appoint immediately someone more attuned to issues of Black farmers across this country and bring about systemic change at USDA.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA of 2022) was a good bill; however, its intent has been bastardized by Tom Vilsack and his leadership. That responsibility rests squarely with Secretary Vilsack. He recently released a document asserting that $800 million from the $3.1 billion had already been released to bring financial security to 13,000 distressed borrowers and that $500 million more will soon be released which will help another 23,000 borrowers.  We are certain that Black farmers are receiving little if any of these funds. We know from credible sources that there are approximately 3,100 Black farmers whose indebtedness is roughly $210 million. We also have been told that heirs property issues now are front and center for him, not debt cancellation.

Our network has informed us that only ONE Black farmer has received total debt cancellation. And now, he has to worry about paying the taxes.

There is no provision within the Bill for the payment of taxes like there was under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA of 2021) because the Republicans removed it from the Bill. Since the intent of the IRA of 2022 was to relieve the indebtedness of Black farmers, cover their losses, and pay their taxes while also giving them a new lease on life, we ask for you to extend your authority via an Executive Order that cancels taxes. Otherwise, many of the farmers will be behind financially once more rather than being given a new start. We expect not doing so will have a devastating impact on Black farmers’ loss of land and generational wealth.

While debt cancellation is front and center for us at this point in our history, we also are deeply concerned regarding rooting out racism at USDA, creating systemic change within all offices and agencies, and instituting accountability and transparency. These issues have been side-stepped and ignored for decades too long.

In a recent MSNBC interview, Dr. Eddie Glaude tells us who we are as a Nation. It was a brutal yet truthful deconstruction of our country. You can do better. You can also lead USDA out of its “last plantation” mindset into a new Department that serves everyone and not just the white farmers. Discrimination wounds people and destroys families and dreams. The award-winning documentary, “I’m Just a Layman in Pursuit of Justice:” Black Farmers Fight Against USDA, produced by Shoun Hill and Dr. Waymon Hinson, explains it.

Black people of this country delivered the White House to you. Our loyalties are not blind. They are based on the legitimacy of our concerns. Democracy, and with it, equity, for all of God’s children hang in the balance. We are deeply concerned that how the Black farmer issue in Georgia is being mishandled will continue to impact our people. Your silence is interpreted as turning your back on Black farmers as you support Vilsack. There are “political consequences” for both 2022 and 2024 for ignoring or taking for granted the Black vote.

These are our expectations: first, remove Tom Vilsack from his leadership position; second, instruct the USDA team to implement debt cancellation more quickly and efficiently; third, cancel taxes for recipients of debt cancellation; fourth, resolve the backlog of unresolved program and employment complaints; and fifth, meet with a group of Black Farmer Movement representatives to discuss initiating changes within USDA that will bring about systemic change.

On the strength of the Black vote....we gave you the White House. In turn, you give us Tom Vilsack. This is not the justice we voted for.

We are eager to discuss these matters and more with you. We look forward to meeting you very soon. These issues should not be ignored and addressed immediately by your administration.

Respectfully,

Lawrence Lucas
President Emeritus, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Representative, Justice for Black Farmers Group
LawrLCL@aol.com
856-910-2399

Conflicts of Interest: USDA and Equity Commission?

For about ten years I was an appointed member of the Texas State Board of Examiners of Marriage and Family Therapists. During some of that time, I was either the appointee to attend or a voted upon Member at Large of the Association of Marriage and Family Regulatory Boards. 

In both of those arenas, MFT was important. In both of those, public protection was crucially important.

At the same time, I was a member (still am) of the Association for Marriage and Family Therapy and Texas Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. Expansion of the discipline is important here. 

Are they related? Certainly. Are they in different domains? Absolutely. 

Ethical standards and conflicts of interest were terribly important to us. Such matters were linked to a successful practice in marriage and family therapy, or losing the license to practice marriage and family therapy. 

That brings me to the USDA and its Equity Commission. The Equity Commission was established by the authority of the President of the US in his Executive Order relative to equity. 

The Justice for Black Farmers Group has argued in many places and on various occasions that this commission is unnecessary and costly. The $10M to underwrite it comes from section 1006 of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. Section 1005 was explicitly designed to provide debt cancellation for socially disadantaged farmers and ranchers until the white farmer lawsuits starting rolling out, now about 12 or 13 of them. Section 1006 was designed to provide administrative support for these farmers and to provide debt cancellation as well. 

We have argued that we have enough commissions and reports. To name a few, the 1982 US Commission on Civil Rights, the Civil Rights Action Team Report of 1997, the Jackson Lewis Report of 2011, the D. J. Miller Report of 1999, and one of my favorites the OIG Report on the Office of Civil Rights, released in September, 2021. They all say the same thing: the USDA has a history of malfeasance in dealing with Black farmers and advantaging white farmers. 

The latest investigative report by Francis etal, "How the Government Helped White Farmers Steal Black Farmland," was just released last week in the New Republic. 

But these are only tangentially the point. 

The point is conflicts of interest. 

This USDA document defines conflict and interest and an apparent conflict of interest. Here is the definition of the appearance of a conflict of interest: "A situation in which it could reasonably be concluded that an employee's private interest is in conflict with the employee's Government duties and responsibilities, even though there may not actually be such a conflict." 

Here is the definition of a conflict of interest: "A situation in which a Federal employee's private interest conflicts with the full, fair, and impartial performance of Government duties and responsibilities. In other words, a situation in which a Federal employee's private interest, usually of an economic nature, conflicts with his or her Government duties and responsibilities. Conflict-of-interest statutes are contained in Chapter 11, Sections 202-209 and 216 of Title 18 U.S. Code."

The Equity Commission and the subcommittee on Agriculture have 28 members total. Of those 28 members, 8 of them and their organizations have received substantial funding from the USDA. Last year, the USDA released a list of 20 groups,  "Cooperative Agreement Organizations," and none of these groups had to apply for any funding. There is no indication of accountability and transparency in these groups and the $75M that they received. What we know is that none of the groups that signed on to our letter of criticism of the USDA and Tom Vilsack received any of those dollars. 

It is true that within the Equity Commission's FAQ, that having received funding is not within and of itself a conflict of interest, according to the USDA. It goes on to add this sentence, however: "All Equity Commission members who are ultimately appointed must comply with ethics requirements and mitigate any conflicts of interest."

Sounds like a conflict of interest to me.  I give you a nice chunk of change, upwards of $2.5M, then I appoint you, or rather I pursue you, to serve on an Equity Commission that is designed to create equity within services and programs of an entity that is well known for discriminating against minority farmers, and I want you to help me. I've helped you, so now I want you to help me. 

BTW, the helper here is Secretary Thomas Vilsack who has a horrendous record of civil rights at the USDA. How do I know, you ask? Just look at this brutal piece of investigative reporting by Rosenberg and Stucki from 2019. The title speaks for itself, but within the article are five myths of the Vilsack administration. I know several of the folks interviewed. I would trust them with my life. 

So, is there a conflict of interest if my organization received several million dollars via a Cooperative Agreement, one in which I did not have to apply for the funding, and serving on the Equity Commission? Maybe not legally, but I think it smells mighty fishy. Mighty fishy. Awfully fishy. 

Equity: Federal Government and the USDA

Shortly after President Biden was inauguarated he issued a formal, presidential executive order, "Executive Order on Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government," signed January 20, 2021. This was an effort I applauded. 

Shortly thereafter, the USDA under the leadership of Secretary Tom Vilsack, announced the intention to establish an Equity Commission, ostensibly to root out inequities in the Department. While the USDA can be applauded for acknowledging decades of systemic racism and its determination to root it out of the system, the folks that I hang with were not impressed. I was not impressed. We were totally unimpressed. 

"Why were we not impressed?" you might ask. Good question. An Equity Commission is being set up to assess what we already know, to find solutions to questions that we already know. And, we know that the USDA knows. The USDA has done internal investigations for decades, and external investigations have been conducted for decades, so what will an Equity Commission find that has not already been found and announced before? Good question. 

What documents do we have access to that buttress our opinion? Here they are, and they have been listed in a variety of communications that we've had with the USDA and even with the White House: the 1965 Civil Rights commission report, the 1982 Civil Rights commission report, the 1997 Civil Rights Action Team Report, the 1997 Civil Rights Implementation Team Report, the D. J. Miller Report of 1996, the Jackson-Lewis Report of 2011, the Office of the Inspector General Report of 2021, and many, many more. 

The Equity Commission will present its findings in 2023 or 2024. In the meantime, how many Black farmers will die? How many have to die while the Commission is studying what we already know to be the case? I think this is a shell game. I think this is an unnecessary kicking the can down the road game. 

Here is what I wrote for an investigative reporter: "It is notable that President Biden is focusing upon equity across the federal government. It is also significant that Secretary Tom Vilsack is appointing an Equity Commission and a subcommittee for Agriculture; however, I am not optimistic about their relevance nor their abilities to contribute to change within the department. It has taken an inordinate amount of time to put it together. Its work will not be forthcoming until 2024. In the meantime, how many more Black farmers will have lost their land?

The USDA has a long and storied history of examining itself via both internal and external investigations. Numerous reviews are available: the 1965 document on Civil Rights; the 1982 document on Civil Rights; the D. J. Miller Report of 1996; the Civil Rights Action Team Report of 1997; the Civil Rights Implementation Team Report of 1997; the Jackson-Lewis Report of 2011; and many more from the GAO and the OIG.

 It is my opinion that the Equity Commission will find only that which has been found before. It find once more that gross disparities have existed for decades between Black farmers, other farmers of color, and white farmers in terms of programs and services.  It is also my opinion that the real truth of the matter is whether or not the secretary will give the Commission the freedom to do its work and then to bring about the systemic change that has been needed for decades. I am not optimistic about these matters given the history of the USDA.

 At best, some findings will be published. At worst, they will be placed in a filing cabinet and lost until the next report and commission."

Committee members and subcommittee members, please tell the truth and tell the truth quickly. Do not let the Secretary perform some slight of hand. We are watching. We are waiting. We will continue to hold Secretary Vilsack accountable. We will continue to let President Biden know of the liabilities of his appointee. The USDA has been guilty of malfeasance for decades. That's what our documentary is all about: Blackfarmersinsearchofjusticefilm.com. 

Good luck with your work, and as you do, start with the list that we've generated in previous communications with Vilsack and the president. We will be more than happy to share them and others with you. 

Equity Commission members: 

 

Arturo S. Rodriguez, California

Hazell Reed, Arkansas

Toni Stanger-McLaughlin, Washington

Derrick Johnson, Mississippi

Ronald Rainey, Arkansas

Mireya Loza, District of Columbia

Charles Rawls, Virginia

Shorlette Ammons, North Carolina

Poppy Sias-Hernandez, Michigan

Todd Corley, Ohio

Yvonne Lee, California

Elizabeth Lower-Basch, Virginia

Shirley Sherrod, Georgia

Ertharin Cousin, Illinois

Rick Smith, Missouri

           

The new agriculture subcommittee members are:

 

Shari Rogge-Fidler, Illinois

Savonala Horne, North Carolina

Alexis Racelis, Texas

Gina Eubanks, Louisiana

Michelle Hughes, Virginia

Kari Jo Lawrence, South Dakota

PJ Haynie III, Virginia

Russell Redding, Pennsylvania

Janssen Hang, Minnesota

Erica Lomeli Corcoran, California

Sarah Vogel, North Dakota

Gary Matteson, New Hampshire

Jennie Stephens, South Carolina

More details can be found at: www.usda.gov/equity-commission.

Cease and Desist on the Foreclosures: The Ball is in Your Court, Mr. Vilsack

We are living in curious times. Sometimes the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Sometimes that lack of information is part of a sadistic plan. Sometimes it's incompetence. 

Under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, section 1005 lined out $4B in debt relief to a group known as Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers, a designation that has been around since 1990. Section 1006 prescribed $1.01B for outreach, training, education, technical assistance, grants, and loans as well as other matters. 

Then, the white farmers across the country decided the the designation of "Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers," or 2501 of the 1990 Farm Bill, was unconstitutional. Their lawsuits, some 13 of them at last glance, stopped in its tracks the effort to relieve the indebtedness of historically mistreated farmers. In a recent post on this page, I jumped into the USDA data base and showed how the first six white litigants, including the ag commissioner of the State of Texas, benefited via three pots of money to the tune of over $523,000 and that the counties of those six litigants benefitted to the tune of $1.2B+. They are claiming reverse discrimination when the stats point out how white farmers have always had the upper hand in terms of subsidies, coronavirus relief funds, and the bailout from Trump's failed tariff war with China. 

Provisions of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 were rewritten in the Reconciliation Bill of 2021 such that even white farmers, who have not been historically mistreated, would also receive debt relief. Whites gain advantages off of Black suffering is the way folks say it with whom I hang out. 

Earlier this year a moratorium was placed on debt collections and foreclosures. You can read that release here. 

But now, while we are waiting for the Senate to work its magic on the Reconciliation Bill, and as we wait to see what Manchin out of West Virginia is going to do, several egregious things are happening at the county level. Farms are being foreclosed on, loans are being accelerated, liens are being placed on crops, and other acts of malfeasance. For instance, a Black farmer has loans to plant and harvest his peanut and cotton crops. He owes the USDA some money and knows that he'll find debt relief around the corner, or at least he hopes so. 

In a magic slight of hand, the company buying the Black farmer's crop has placed a lien on it. This is apparently at the request of the local county office. My questions are several. What right was it of this company to know what the farmer owed? What collaborative gig was set up such that the FSA gets the first dibs on the farmer's money. Did the farmer know about this possibility? The local county office has in some way, shape, or form, realized that this particular grain company is going to process that particular farmer's particular crop and found a way to put a lien on. This means that once the farmer has had his crop sold, the money will go not to him, but to the FSA and put against the loan. This smells like a rat. 

So, there is a moratorium. It reads like this: if you  have a direct loan, the USDA will work with you and will not foreclose on you. The USDA will not accelerate your loans. See the final sentence in Senator Reverend Warnock's letter to Secretary Vilsack below. He is quoting USDA that there will be no adverse actions taken upon any farmer who does not make payments while the debt relief thing is being resolved. There you have it. What USDA said in DC, a local FSA office can undermine. How much sense does that make? Who's guarding the hen house? A bunch of foxes? You know what I mean. 

But then, here comes the foreclosure notice, here comes the loan acceleration notice, here comes the lien on your crops. Here comes all manner of things that the USDA said would not happen. Those decisions are being made at the county level. 

We have advised various Senators as to these shenanigans. One of those Senators has written a strong letter to Secretary Vilsack to call off his dogs. Here is what Senator Reverend Warnock writes: 

"In March 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act into law. This legislation includes targeted debt relief payments aimed at remedying USDA’s well-documented history of racial discrimination. As USDA prepared to implement this legislation, it told eligible farmers that they would not be subject to punishment for failing to make payments on forgivable debts. On a public-facing website regarding the American Rescue Plan Act debt relief payments, USDA states “USDA is not taking any adverse actions on any eligible borrower who does not make payments” on Farm Service Agency direct loans or farm storage facility loans." This letter was signed on December 10, 2021. 

We are also in the process of gathering data across the country. We want to know whether or not this is happening just to Black farmers, and in what counties, and in what states. We want to know what other acts of malfeasance are being done to them. The data is being collected as we speak. 

A lot of people are mad. A lot of people have every right in the world not to trust the USDA. These actions justify that anger and mistrust, if we ever needed more justifications. 

White people, even white employees of the USDA, want to believe these types of actions are sporadic. Wrong. Remember the words, "systemic racism," "systemic discrimination," the system is at fault and the people who stand there with their hands in their pockets. 

And we don't. Plain and simple. Period. Full stop. Period. 

Dear Secretary Vilsack, July 16, 2021

July 16, 2021

Secretary Thomas Vilsack
Attention: Chief of Staff, Katherine Ferguson
                 Director, FSA, Zach Ducheneaux
                 Senior Advisor, Dewayne Goldmon
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, DC 20250

Secretary Vilsack:

We wish to acknowledge the meeting with you and your staff on May 28 which included Katherine Ferguson, Dewayne Goldmon, Monica Rainge, and the Office of General Counsel.

We had hoped that meeting would be the first of an ongoing series of meetings between you, your staff, and representatives from the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees and the Justice for Black Farmers Group.  While we have not heard from your office regarding a follow-up with us, we will continue to persist on behalf of people who are important to us, Black farmers and employees of USDA.

Frankly, at that meeting, we were dismayed, frustrated, and disappointed by several things: we were not informed as to the length of the meeting; we were informed of the mode of technology at the last minute; the shift in confusing technology which proved problematic for some of our rural farmers; we did not have sufficient time to ask our questions nor have our questions answered; and misleading information was provided by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights.

We have long advocated for major changes to be made within USDA. Six months into your administration as Secretary, our concerns remain the same. Therein lies our challenges and, hopefully, many opportunities for you and your staff to partner with us to create change within USDA on behalf of minority farmers, especially Black farmers and USDA employees.

Therefore, we respectfully request that you and your staff meet with us expeditiously. We prefer a Zoom-type call. We also request that the meeting last not less than an hour and a half.

We anticipate a speedy and early response to our request.

Respectfully,

Lawrence Lucas, President Emeritus
USDA Coalition of Minority Employees
Representative, Justice for Black Farmers Group
www.agcoalition.org
LawrLCL@aol.com
856-910-2399

For That We Will Work and Pray

Dear Lord:

These are troubling days

In which we live and move

And find ourselves engrossed

And trying hard to prove

The righteousness of our cause

To bring justice to this land

And still we find before us

Power gotten out of hand. 

There are those who dwell in their positions

Whose offices are opulent and such

While we are wayfaring pilgrims

Forced to live without so much.

The wealthy, powerful people are white

They farm thousands and thousands of acres

Their tractors are new and shiny

Their leaders are too often deal breakers. 

We saw them on the screen

Technology brings us all together

They lied to our very faces

To the truth we ourselves are tethered. 

Who do they think we are

Some mindless uninformed folks

Who do not know what there is to know

Buying in to their contrived created hoax?

No, we are wise and informed

They will surely someday see

We will speak the truth again and again

Watch it set us all free.

From the lies the deception

The machinations to steal the land

We will push for change here and now

And thwart their heinous plan.

There is that one small town

A man and his friend where they farmed

The bank the dealership and the office

Meant to do them a lot of harm.

Pay day some day

A phrase I've heard quite often

Is perhaps soon to come true

And blows will be somehow softened. 

We will rise in glory

We will celebrate the day

When all of God's children are respected

For that we will work and pray.

Amen 

A Revealing Roundtable Discussion

Last night on blogtalk radio, a significant conversation was held. You can listen to that hour and a half conversation here. There were five significant persons on the radio. To follow the conversation, I imagined that there was a large, round table in the middle of the room. Sitting on one side of the table was Lawrence Lucas, President Emeritus, USDA Coalition of Minority Employees, and Representative, Justice for Black Farmers Group. Marti Oakley is the host of the show which is sponsored by Marcel Reid and the National Whistleblowers Association. 

Sitting around the table were Kathryn Joyce, Bryce Stucki, and Nate Rosenberg, author of "The 'Machine That Eats Up Black Farmland'" that was recently published. And, Emma Scott and Nate Rosenberg who along with others recently published the Harvard Brief, "Supporting Civil Rights at USDA: Opportunities to Reform the USDA Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights." Other authors of the Harvard Brief are  Emily Broad Leib, Ava Cilia, and Merve Ciplak, all from the Food Law and Policy Clinic, Harvard Law School. 

You'll notice that Nate Rosenberg is author of both the popular level article and the academic article. 

These professionals were led in a roundtable type of discussion by Lawrence Lucas. I could imagine sitting there. Topics included the history of the Office of Civil Rights at USDA, how it is supposed to operate and how it in fact operates. Stories were told of named and un-named insiders who told tragic stories of how civil rights complaints are handled. One former employee provided a detailed description of how employees within a department that is supposed to protect the rights of those who work at USDA and those who are recipients of services are supposed to be treated. 

Gross mistreatment is an understatement. Not only did this panel review the literature and policies of USDA's Office of Civil Rights, they also interviewed Black farmers. 

Stories merge into a cohesive whole of 1) nobody cares, 2) all pretend to care, 3) people are shuffled here and there, 4) OCR is a dumping ground for disgruntled employees, and 5) Black farmers are treated with malfeasance. 

Lawsuits are coming as white farmers are screaming "discrimination" against Senator Warnock's bills, famously known as 1005 and 1006 within the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 which President Biden signed into law recently. 

White farmers have been treated very, very well. See my "Dear White People" post from recent days here on the blog. 

This is one of the best interviews I've ever heard on this program. It's an hour and a half long, but would be well worth the investment of time and energy. 

Harvard, A Call for USDA to Reform Office Focused on Civil Rights

 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT: Kyra Sanborn, ksanborn@law.harvard.edu, (617) 496-1507

Harvard Food Law & Policy Clinic Calls on USDA to Reform Office Focused on Civil Rights

Cambridge, MA (April 19, 2021) – The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) history of discrimination and inefficacy in addressing civil rights complaints is well-documented, yet little has been done to significantly reform agency operations that enable harmful practices to persist. With the Biden Administration’s renewed attention toward equity, the Harvard Law School Food Law and Policy Clinic published an Issue Brief calling for a change.

Supporting Civil Rights at USDA: Opportunities to Reform the USDA Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights (OASCR) documents the agency’s past struggles with establishing an effective civil rights accountability system and offers specific recommendations on ways OASCR–the office responsible for leading and overseeing USDA’s civil rights programs–could manage the complaint process moving forward. The Issue Brief offers feasible actions USDA could take without any additional action by Congress, including ensuring division between OASCR and USDA’s Office of General Counsel, establishing a civil rights ombudsperson and new oversight mechanisms, and devoting resources to improve the investigation and effective processing of civil rights complaints. It also provides an overview of OASCR’s civil rights complaint process and summarizes several decades of the office’s shortcomings.

“OASCR’s capacity to redress instances of discrimination and civil rights complaints has proven to be ineffective time and time again,” said Emily Broad Leib, Professor of Law at Harvard Law School and Faculty Director of the Food Law and Policy Clinic. “This lack of oversight and accountability has real, devastating consequences that contribute toward the growing disparities in our agricultural and food systems, disparities that have a disproportionate impact on Black and Brown producers, as well as on racial and gender equity in the treatment of USDA’s own employees. We hope that USDA seizes the current opportunity to reform OASCR and better support populations that have been historically and routinely marginalized.”

Despite studies, reports, and recommendations made by federal oversight bodies and outside organizations, OASCR has continuously fallen short in protecting USDA employees and constituents against gender, racial, and ethnic discrimination. The shortcomings are accompanied by a history of lawsuits that have cost taxpayers billions of dollars over the years, and lending and programmatic discrimination that have resulted in millions of acres of Black land loss. 

“There is a clear link between USDA’s history of discrimination and the current state of Black farmers and land ownership in the U.S.,” said Nathan Rosenberg, a Visiting Scholar with the Food Law and Policy Clinic. “USDA has systematically denied loans and foreclosed on Black farmers and landowners, covered up the data that illustrates disparities, and failed to respond when complaints are raised.”

“This Issue Brief is a breath of fresh air and confirms the problems that Black farmers and USDA employees have spoken up about for decades,” said Lawrence Lucas, President Emeritus of the USDA Coalition of Minority Employees and Representative for the Justice for Black Farmers Group. “The Brief sets a benchmark for those who hope to say that civil rights at USDA is on the mend.”

“The change in Presidential Administration and renewed focus on equity in federal programs provides an opportunity for USDA to affirm its commitment to civil rights,” said Emma Scott, a Clinical Instructor at the Food Law and Policy Clinic. “With new leadership and advisors in place, a stated commitment to addressing equity at USDA, and a new influx of funding from the American Rescue Plan to support farmers of color, USDA is at a pivotal point for ensuring that OASCR provides effective civil rights enforcement and accountability for the agency.”

###

About the Harvard Law School Food Law and Policy Clinic (FLPC)
The Harvard Law School Food Law and Policy Clinic serves partner organizations and communities in the U.S. and around the world by providing guidance on cutting-edge food system issues, while engaging law students in the practice of food law and policy. FLPC is committed to advancing a cross-sector, multi-disciplinary and inclusive approach to its work, building partnerships with academic institutions, government agencies, non-profit organizations, private sector actors, and civil society with expertise in public health, the environment, and the economy. FLPC’s work focuses on increasing access to healthy foods, supporting sustainable and equitable food production, reducing waste of healthy, wholesome food, and promoting community-led food system change. Learn more at: https://www.chlpi.org/food-law-and-policy/.