Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

Long Wait Could End Soon for Black Farmers in Discrimination Case

1 year ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size
Willie Adams has been waiting for more than 10 years. But his wait could be almost over.
Adams is one of more than 70,000 black farmers who still haven't received their share of money from the 1999 United States Department of Agriculture discrimination-lawsuit settlement, in which a federal judge ruled that the USDA was guilty of decades of loan and subsidy practices that favored white farmers over blacks.
The $1.15 billion in funding – the second part of what's known as the Pigford settlement – was approved by the House this year, but has been repeatedly stripped from larger spending bills in the Senate. The measure could be brought up this week as part of a stand-alone unanimous consent bill. Under the unanimous consent rule, a bill is considered passed if no senator objects.
Black farmers
John Boyd, the president of the Black Farmers Association, said the action represents "long-overdue justice for nearly 80,000 black farmers who, spiritually and mentally, have really given up on the federal government ever treating them right."
In previous votes against bills that included the Pigford settlement funding, Republican senators expressed concerns about the settlement money adding to the deficit.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is pushing the Senate to approve the funding.
"We have tried to pass funding for these settlements several times and each time Republicans object," a spokesman from Reid's office said Monday. "We expect to ask consent to do so again later today. The bill that we expect to ask consent on will be fully paid for."
That means the money will be off-set by cuts elsewhere in the national budget.
Boyd said he thinks the delay in funding appropriation is the result of "political games that are being played in Capitol Hill."
"This is a group of poor black farmers who don't have the money to defend themselves. We don't have high-power lobby firms," he said. "We don't have the money to contribute to congressional campaigns the way [others] do."
Boyd said he has been fighting for equality for black American farmers for 26 years, and that the aging farmers named in the case are running out of time.
"I've been to more funerals this year than I've been to in my life," Boyd said. "This year I've seen a lot of black farmers pass. A lot of black farmers who were waiting for justice, waiting for their settlement, have died."
Adams, a fourth-generation farmer in Greene County, Ga., is in his 60s. He said he needs the settlement money to help him save his farm, which has been in his family since his grandfather bought it in 1938 under President Franklin D. Roosevelt's economic New Deal.
Adams wants to use his settlement money to make the shift into organic farming.
"I'll keep struggling, keep trying to keep my head above water as best I can," he said. "This is a heritage; the land is a heritage. I'm not just speaking for myself. I'm speaking for farmers across the country. I've spoken to a lot of [them], and land that is being lost could be saved if the [bill passes]."
The funding has an Aug. 13 deadline, and Congress goes into recess at the end of this week. That deadline has already been extended twice.
The 1999 settlement, under the Clinton administration, responded to the class-action lawsuit of a North Carolina farmer, Timothy Pigford, against then USDA Secretary Dan Glickman. Because of late claim files and concerns about the structure of the settlement, the case was reopened under the Obama administration. Attorney General Eric Holder and U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced the second settlement, for $1.25 billion, early this year.
Boyd said he is tired of the process, but optimistic that the long wait will come to an end for farmers like Adams.
"That's what America means. If something is wrong, we try to fix it," he said. "It's not a Democratic issue; it's not a Republican issue. It's an issue of right or wrong. After six tries [this year], I'm hopeful the Senate will do the right thing."
Filed Under: Race Issues

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

3 Comments

Filter by:
ettu

These farmers were already given over $1 billion.........now they want more than another $1 billion. When is enough, enough?

August 03 2010 at 3:06 PM Report abuse +5 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to ettu's comment
Ali Grimes

How did the number grow over 55,000 people plus since 1999? Something is wrong here!

August 24 2010 at 5:17 PM Report abuse +6 rate up rate down Reply
mmlowe

HAD they treated ALL farmers equally, we would NOT be here.

August 03 2010 at 2:21 PM Report abuse -4 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to mmlowe's comment
heritagemarcorp

The Dept. of Agriculture shows that only 39,000 Black Farmers were registered with the Dept. of Agriculture, but over 70,000 applied for money! There is definitely something questionable about this case! It grew after Obama got involved...

September 05 2010 at 9:49 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
tara*

So the senate can refuse to pay a legal settlement by citing deficit concerns? Would that work in the private sector too? I mean, if I am sued, then agree to a settlement, should I be allowed to renege on that agreement because I don't want to go into debt to settle it? That whole line of reasoning on the part of the senate is ludicrous. Yes, it will add to the deficit, but then so did the pay raises they all gave themselves this year. I didn't see anyone get up and say how they should skip their own pay raise because the deficit it too high already. They made those on social security do that, but not them. Now, they want to renege on their own settlement? That's just wrong.

August 03 2010 at 3:07 AM Report abuse +9 rate up rate down Reply

Follow Politics Daily

  • Comics
robert-and-donna-trussell
CHAOS THEORY
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>