Posted on 02/25/2009 5:12:13 AM PST by chambley1
ALBANY, Ga. -- Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has announced he intends to place civil rights front and center at USDA, including calling on Congress to elevate the position of assistant secretary for administration to the undersecretary level and making sure civil rights get as much attention as other program areas headed by undersecretaries.
He also said USDA will hire a consulting firm to work with agency offices to make sure procedures are fair to minorities and women.
"Some folks refer to USDA as the last plantation, and it has a pretty poor history of taking care of people of color," said Vilsack, appearing Saturday before an annual Georgia farmers' conference sponsored by the Federation of Southern Cooperatives and the Land Assistance Fund.
Both organizations help black farmers retain land and stay in business.
Vilsack said the current post of assistant secretary for civil rights will remain, but that official would work closely with the assistant secretary for administration. He also noted that outside consultants are needed to handle the farmers' claims that USDA employees are discriminating against them. When some farmers present said that such practices are still a problem with Farm Service Agency county office employees, Vilsack indicated the consultants would also work with county employees, who are paid by USDA but employed by local farmer committees. "You've got outright bias and discrimination. Also you've got good people who don't even know that they're discriminating," said Vilsack. "It's necessary to begin the process of re-educating people."
A USDA spokesman said on Monday that decisions about how the consulting firm would work had not been made, but stressed action needs to be taken.
USDA's civil rights problems go back to the 1930s, when farm programs were set up. Black farmers argued that USDA's southern offices, staffed mostly by whites, denied them loans and farm program payments. In 1999, USDA settled a class-action suit, Pigford v. Glickman, that ordered payments to the plaintiffs. In the 2008 farm bill, Congress also included a provision, known as Pigford II, allowing black farmers who filed cases after a deadline set in 1999 to revive those cases. The bill included $100 million to settle those cases as well as a provision to allow additional appropriations if that money is used up. Native American, Hispanic and women farmers have also filed cases in federal court charging that USDA discriminated against them. Those cases are still pending.
Another nail in the coffin of the idea that the dems/libs are not all about race. EVERYTHING is about race with these people. They don’t look at their fellow citizens as Americans, they see them by their skin color, and what benefit they give them politically.
Probably wants to institute the Mugabe plan for taking care of people of color.
“He also said USDA will hire a consulting firm to work with agency offices to make sure procedures are fair to minorities and women.”
Hmmm...any guesses which minority congressperson’s child/spouse runs this “consulting” firm?
Gee, and all this time I thought the USDA was about ensuring a plentiful food supply and ensuring the quality of the foods sold? Little did I know it’s primary job was to hand out money to minorities.
That’s the only plan I can think of that would involve the USDA in civil rights. It is the manifestation of the Marxist agenda.
Now the United States of America will soon start the journey down a new road. The road leads to the creation of the United States of Zimbabwe.
Bureaucrats, armed with the deadliest weapon of all, the CLIPBOARD and BALL POINT PEN, will roam the land, dictating the daily tasks of the very farmers who have made the USA the most productive country in history. Instead of spending time and effort in the growing of crops, the farmer will be required to spend that time filling out forms, proving that he is following regulation #14K,sub9,para3 etc.
There are other lands that were once considered “BREADBASKETS” of their geographical areas that now wallow in famine, famines created by the government bureacracy doing what it does oh! so efficiently...mess up everything it touches.
There is a wry saying that a Lawyer armed with his brief case can steal more than a man merely armed with a gun.
There is a newer saying that a bureaucrat armed with a clip-board can do more damage than a winter storm.
Does this mean Chocolate Milk must come from White Cows as well?
Is this a joke? Hiring consultants? After getting jacked with Porkulus?? Let me be the first-”Worst President Ever..”
And we wonder why we’re going broke.
There was a reason why he was called Governor Ballsack back in Iowa. This guy is a complete moron.
Elections have consequences. They will install these creeps into every crevice of the government. Remember back when we were complaining about Clinton people infest State, CIA, Justice.. Now we’ll have to deal with Obamunists in every other aspect of government. Obama said this was going to happen and it is.
Please, when you meet someone that proudly voted for Paul or stayed home because they didn’t care for McCain very much, blame them for this.
A good post for the Bear pic?
“Farmer! This field is not diverse. It only has red tomatoes in it.!”
“And WHY do you persist in only harvesting WHITE milk?”
Veggies of Color! Unite!
These people are stupid goofs.
And we are stupid to continue to fund them.
Albany use to be such a beautiful city. It’s gone downhill and it’s such a shame.
That sentence always scares the bat snot out of me
What ever happened to giving the job to the most qualified person?
It would be demeaning to the person hired who knows he or she was hired because of his/her “minority” status.
No wonder this Country is going down the tubes.
How long will it be before the white farmers get kicked off of their land?
Exactly. He forgot to add that someone’s family members or friends will most likely be running it for outlandish financial charges.
Vilsack? More like Vilesack, or Sh!tsack. WTF does CIVIL RIGHTS have to do with F$$$ing FARMING??? What am I missing here??
Hello Captain,
I am glad there are other Patriots on this site, who will step up and tale it like it is in America with this tyrant at the helm.
I post often in my views to others on the FR, but many are to scared or timid to state the facts of what is happening in America.
I commend you on your true and accurate post of things to come in America.
Respectfully,
NSNR
how does he justify Civil Rights as a primary focus of USDA?
I don’t get it.
Affirmative Action Re Deux coming into play and all you honkies best not apply!!!!
This is just another form of reparations to get back at Whitey via the communist obamunists SOP.
Sho Nuff,
NSNR
It’s basically a case of “me too.” Someone wants to get noticed and waves the hand and says, “Hey, I just love civil rights. Hey look at me, look at me. I’m down with the struggle too. Pat me on the head ‘cause I’m a good little liberal.”
I've seen that sentence used in the context of churches, governments, and corporations ... it ALWAYS ends badly.
Need I add that it was likely that these discriminating offices were staffed by white DEMOCRATS?
USDA’s civil rights problems go back to the 1930s,
Dems some OLD farmers!
I am not beleiveing that denying loans etc is “racist” in these days and times. I know there was some dust-up a couple years ago and a consent agreement signed.
But come on.
I suppose it COULD be but its about as likely as planting corn and watching peas come up.
It MAY have more to do with not being qualified.
Anyone who thinks about going into farming today is nuts. It may never have been as simple as watching it grow, but with the USDA and the Environmental wackos running around it is mission impossible.
First: "Qualified minorities" will be provided loans (no need to pay the money back) or outright grants to purchase farmland.
Second: The owners will be told which crops not to plant and will be given subsidies for not planting them.
[snip] Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has announced he intends to place civil rights front and center at USDA... He also said USDA will hire a consulting firm to work with agency offices to make sure procedures are fair to minorities and women... Vilsack, appearing Saturday before an annual Georgia farmers’ conference sponsored by the Federation of Southern Cooperatives and the Land Assistance Fund. Both organizations help black farmers retain land and stay in business. [end]
...meanwhile...
Drought Adds to Hardships in California
New York Times | February 21, 2009 | Jesse McKinley
Posted on 02/22/2009 6:03:40 PM PST by Lorianne
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2191664/posts
good luck with secession in these agricultural red states....
Quite simply, right after they kill me.
The Pigford case was tantamount to reparations under the Clinton Administration. FORTY ACRES AND A MULE.” JUDGE PAUL L. FRIEDMAN BEGAN HIS 1999 decision...
The Pigford consent decree basically establishes a two-track dispute resolution mechanism for those seeking relief.
The most widely-used option — Track A — provides
a monetary settlement of $50,000 plus relief in the form of loan forgiveness and offsets of tax liability. Track A claimants had to present substantial evidence (i.e., a reasonable basis for finding that discrimination happened) that claimant owned or leased, or attempted to own or lease, farm land;claimant applied for a specific credit transaction at a USDA county office during the applicable period; the loan was denied, provided late, approved for a lesser amount than requested, encumbered by restrictive conditions, or USDA failed to provide appropriate loan service, and such treatment was less favorable than that accorded specifically identified, similarly situated white
farmers; and the USDA’s treatment of the loan application led to economic damage to the class member. Total relief granted under Plan A as of Sept 2008: $ 990,387,660
Alternatively, class participants could seek a larger, tailored payment by showing evidence of greater damages under a Track B claim. Track B claimants had to prove their
claims and actual damages by a preponderance of the evidence (i.e., it is more likely than not that their claim is valid). The documentation to support such a claim and the amount of relief are reviewed by a third party arbitrator, who makes a binding decision. The consent decree also provided injunctive relief, primarily in the form of priority consideration for loans and purchases, and technical assistance in filling out forms. Finally, plaintiffs were permitted to withdraw from the class and pursue their individual cases in federal court or through the USDA administrative process.
Source: http://www.pigfordmonitor.org/stats/
http://www.pigfordmonitor.org/updates/update04.pdf
Few would argue that there haven’t been instances of discrimination within USDA agencies in the past. But with so many groups leveling the charge and telling essentially the same story (late FSA loans resulting in late planting and poor yields, bad book-keeping, failure to disclose loan options or new programs properly, etc.), the overriding charge should perhaps shift from discrimination to simple bureaucratic ineptitude.
USDA’s settlement with black farmers
Jun 8, 2001 David Bennett, Delta Farm Press
http://deltafarmpress.com/mag/farming_usdas_settlement_black/
...Pigford was filed on behalf of black farmers alone for a specific time period and, most importantly, the political climate was ripe for the charges.
In 1994, Dan Glickman was named secretary of agriculture, replacing black Mississippian Mike Espy.
Two years later, a group of black farmers assembled outside the White House gates to protest racism within USDA. The national media covered the assemblage and aired the group’s charges.
Shortly thereafter, following a quick investigation, Glickman said that the charges were indeed true: the agency he’d looked after for two years was shot through with racism.
No evidence of the found racism was offered. Instead, several things took place. First, Glickman created a Civil Rights Action Team (CRAT). Then, in January 1997, an 11-stop, coast-to-coast jaunt (termed a “listening tour”) was scheduled. According to reports, the tour was well-attended, and the 11-member CRAT did plenty of note-taking.
The touring personnel eventually returned to Washington, D.C., and CRAT began blaming USDA’s Civil Rights Division (CRD) as having been derelict. That charge was proven true when it was discovered that over 900 discrimination complaints were waiting to be handled by CRD. This was largely due, CRAT claimed, to perpetual reorganization within the office.
CRAT wanted action and Glickman accepted the findings and recommendations of the team. First, the 900-plus discrimination complaints were quickly reviewed (at a cost of millions of dollars). Reportedly, only a handful were found to hold discrimination-proving potential. That was, apparently, enough for Glickman and colleagues to start looking for cover.
Still, no one — not USDA, not the attorneys, not black farmers — had a clue that with these original USDA actions a seed was being planted. That seed would soon bloom into a demon flower.
The federal statute of limitations for discrimination claims is two years. The black caucus pushed legislation through Congress that opened the window of discrimination complaints to include anything between Jan. 1, 1981, and Dec. 31, 1996. The waiver was passed as an amendment to the (fiscal year) 1999 agriculture appropriations bill.
Cowed by mounting criticism from black politicians and a well-executed public relations push by class counsel and black farmer organizations, USDA folded.
While steady criticism of USDA had originally come from black farmers and attorneys, once the decree was signed, a torrent of venom was unleashed by many outside the suit. Was any of this true? If discrimination hadn’t been definitively proven, why settle? Why not just go to trial? And, most pertinent: why agree to such a flawed document in the first place?
In retrospect, the last question is the most haunting.
Regardless, class counsel needed suit members. Criss-crossing the country, attorneys held meetings everywhere. Meanwhile, USDA spent over $400,000 taking out ads on the settlement in a variety of print media and on television. The push was on.
According to one Delta farmer who attended class-counsel meetings, attorneys promised “easy money quick. They wanted as many names on the signup sheet as possible. They did a great job selling this thing. I’d be surprised if more than a few farmers walked out without signing up. You know, $50,000 and debts getting forgiven ain’t nothing to sneeze at. Who wouldn’t want a piece of that?”
Who indeed? And that’s why a group of claimants originally estimated to number some 2,500 when the decree came down has swelled to around 22,000. And just offstage, waiting for Friedman’s next big announcement, are an additional 50,000 people clamoring for a piece of the USDA settlement pie.
There were early signs that USDA had agreed to a terribly flawed settlement. Just a few months into the signup, even claimants say they had trepidation about how the case was being handled.
“There are legitimate cases of discrimination. People don’t want to hear that, but it happens, man. There’s no doubt about that. But when you open up this suit like they did, people are gonna come out of the woodwork. There’s no doubt there’s been fraud. Anyone who says that ain’t happening doesn’t know human nature. But the fraud slows things down and (taints) those of us with legitimate claims,” says a black farmer.
the key word in the second criteria is “claim.” A claimant doesn’t need a shred of evidence beyond a spoken sentence or two.
The third criteria is hardly an impediment to fraud. In fact, it’s practically an invitation to it. If no record exists of a complaint being filed, a claimant need only have one of three things:
A statement from a non-family member stating the claimant filed such a complaint.
A statement from a non-family member that they were in earshot when USDA personnel were told of a complaint by the claimant.
Copies of a letter to a government official (state or federal) stating the claimant has been discriminated against.
Obviously, any bogus claimant can find an accomplice to corroborate his story or back-date a letter or two. This, apparently, never occurred to Mr. Glickman or his colleagues.
USDA apparently didn’t anticipate a problem arising from USDA recordkeeping. The agency keeps records on unsuccessful loans for only three years. As Pigford was open to complaints from 1981 to 1997, FSA had no records prior to 1994 to combat discrimination claims.
“Surely Glickman and the lawyers up there knew that (FSA) had to take (claimants’) word as truth prior to 1994. They had to have known we didn’t have those records,” says a current FSA employee.
FSA, however, keeps records of successful loans for up to 30 years. This, say black farmers Delta Farm Press has spoken with, means fraudulent claims are paid quicker because FSA has less to fight with.
No one made them agree on that settlement. They try and blame everybody else for how it’s turned out, but no one was holding a gun to (Glickman’s) head when he signed the thing.”
Ladle some blame out for Congress, too, says another current FSA employee. “During the 1980s, getting money appropriated for the loan programs on time was a constant irritant. It wasn’t that we weren’t doing our job, it was that there just wasn’t any money to disperse. That falls on Congress.
“Then during the 1990s, Congress appropriated money on time but our personnel and resources were drastically cut back. Either way, farmers are hurt and FSA gets slapped around. That’s not right.”
“Racism has nothing to do with 99.9 percent of late checks and stupid regulations. White farmers’ checks are late, too.
“And here’s the other thing, if Glickman was right and there really were a bunch of racists at USDA, what happened to them? Has anyone asked about that? Do you think they’re still on the job? No one seems to know, and Glickman isn’t around to ask.”
Even black caucus leader Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., in comments about the white farmer lawsuit against USDA, has said, “I can see little difference in the way black farmers were treated in Pigford and what has happened to the farmers in this suit… I believe (the white farmers’ lawsuit) has the potential to be larger than the black farmers’ suit once word gets out.”
If Thompson is correct, then discrimination isn’t the crowning problem at USDA. Instead, a solid argument can be made that the major problem at USDA is foolish leadership overseeing an antiquated system. Whatever the case, it needs fixing.
Why is the USDA even giving out grants? Another department to abolish. The market will fill the void.
“........overriding charge should perhaps shift from discrimination to simple bureaucratic ineptitude.”
The Pigford case is the grandest fraud ever laden upon the USDA and American taxpayers.
The vast majority of the class never intended to farm in the first place.
It’s perpetuated to this point because non-minority USDA employees that dare speak out about how much a fraud it is are smeared as racists and have their careers and reputations ruined.
There’s a myriad of ambulance chasing minority law firms chasing down non farmers to join the class and overnight they become downtrotten black Tom Joad’s seeking relief for something that never prevailed in the first place.
This is nothing more than back door reparations.
The good people at the USDA Farm Service Agency know this is a fraud, have let the reputation of their otherwise prudent agency be dragged in the mud because of it and are simply remaining quiet while knowing full well those that slop and the Pigford trough of free handouts, for the most part, don’t know the difference bewteen a furrow and hoe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.