|
|
|
|
|
A History of Dedicated ActionIn late 1996, a series of protests by a group of black farmers based in Virginia gained national press attention. The USDA admitted past discrimination and responded with a program of listening and action. The final results are yet to be tested on the scales of long overdue justice for communities with very special connections to the land, whose contributions to the society and the economy are often gravely disregarded. The continent's first farmers - the indigenous people-are struggling to make agriculture an economic base once more despite their virtual exclusion from USDA programs. The African American producers who were enslaved and forced to become the labor force that undergirded the US economy in its early years are facing extinction - not because they lack any farming skills, but because of unfair treatment. The Latino and Asian farmers and farmworkers who have come as immigrants to supply the labor that is essential to our fresh food supply have been denied their human dignity, their health and any access to the land. The past decade of efforts to address minority farm loss began in the many places facing similar problems. The list of groups mentioned below - most of whom are founders, members and supporters of the Rural Coalition - is representative, though not exhaustively so, of the tremendous effort mobilized to achieve equity and preserve the minority and small farm base in the U.S. We hope all of these dedicated actions will be recognized and included as the Rural Coalition and others work to document this important history, and invite you to share what you know. This specific article was prepared from the recent writings of David Harris of the Land Loss Prevention Project (with our thanks-) and Lorette Picciano, the RC Director. The information it contains has many sources and origins in the shared work of many years. We dedicate this section to all who have made these important contributions. In 1990, minority farm organizations spent a full year walking the halls of Congress in support of the first comprehensive legislation ever to address minority farm issues. Events included a Congressional hearing, and a special conference which included a legislative breakfast in the Senate office building. As Senator Wyche Fowler (D-GA) stood on the Senate floor to offer the Minority Farmers Rights Bill as an amendment to the 1990 Farm bill, many advocates stood aside, speaking to Senators as they went by. Inside, the US Department of Agriculture fought hard to weaken provisions of the bill, and Senator Fowler's staff came out and reviewed each proposal with the groups gathered. Finally, Senator Fowler said "no more" and set the bill for a vote. It passed, 98-0. Despite this victory and the great hopes of the groups who labored so hard, many of the gains were eroded during the House-Senate conference on the bill. This time, the advocates were left outside, and the USDA once again worked to water down what had been passed. Minority farmers were left with only a handful of provisions secured through the efforts of Rep. Mike Espy (D-MS). No funds were requested by the administration or provided by Congress to fund the programs. By September 1992, the Federation of Southern Cooperatives spearheaded a massive caravan of minority and Indian farmers from locations in the Southeast to Washington. Rev. Jesse Jackson addressed the group on the Capitol steps. They called upon Congress and the Administration to "sign the check" and allocate the $10 million dollars that was authorized as the only real federal response to the disappearance of minority producers. After marching to the USDA, they were greeted by 5 armed guards posted at the entrance. During the 12 years of the Reagan-Bush administration, no secretary of agriculture had agreed to meet with the groups. A spokesperson for then Secretary Edward Madigan came out and negotiated, finally allowing a few representatives inside. A few months later, Arkansas governor Bill Clinton was elected President, and Rep. Mike Espy was installed as the Secretary of Agriculture. Only then did it become clear how difficult it would be to change an entrenched bureaucracy which was often hostile to minority producers, and which worked to support the very businesses which most exploited farmworkers. Meetings with the Secretary Espy, and later, Secretary Dan Glickman, were frequent and groups were more able to meet with the staff of the Department. But progress remained slow and internal opposition heavy. The existence of discriminatory practices was strongly denied at many levels. Groups lobbied hard on the 1994 USDA Reorganization Act, now with the support of the Congressional Black Caucus members - Eva Clayton of NC, Sanford Bishop of GA, Earl Hilliard of AL and Bennie Thompson of MS, who now served on the House Agriculture Committee, and in collaboration with then Rep. Kika de la Garza and others, provided increased leadership within Congress. A key issue was the under representation of minority producers within the massive system which allocated the resources and outreach of the department. One small provision was passed. In June 1995, the Office of Civil Rights enforcement of USDA cooperated with the Rural Coalition to conduct the first ever forum which included wide representation from the many minority and low income constituents of the Department. Held at Window Rock, capitol of the Navajo Nation, nearly 20 staff members of the USDA spoke, but also listened and held dialogues with constituents they had never met before. The staff members heard a great deal of anger for mistreatment of producers, and a longer-term dialogue was informally begun. Though the interchanges were tentative and preliminary, both the USDA and the minority constituents learned a little more about what each had to offer. The first concrete outcome of that dialogue was the creation of an outreach division within the Farm Services Agency, and shortly thereafter, a training for minority farm groups to increase minority farm representation on county committees. As the charts below show, there were slight improvements in representation in the latest election. However, the system still has many flaws. Even where black farmers turned out in great numbers, they still failed to gain much representation. The dialogue on longer-term solutions to what constitutes a lack of access to the programs of the department continues today and was included in the latest Civil Rights probe. During January, the members of the Rural Coalition turned out hundreds of farmers and other rural constituents at the 12 listening sessions held by the Department. They sensed that maybe this time the Department will really listen, and really change. To date, what is most clear is that the challenge remains awesome, and the restoration of the minority land base and the inclusion of all limited resource farmers and farmworkers as real participants in the agriculture system will require additional years of fortitude, cooperation and political action. Recent History The Rural Advancement Fund has worked for over 50 years with minority farm owners and sharecroppers, and the Federation of Southern Cooperatives/ Land Assistance Fund for almost 30 years, itself emerging from the civil rights and the cooperative movements. Both organizations were among the founding members of the Rural Coalition in 1978. One objective for establishing the Coalition was to address the issue comprehensively, in a way no single organization could. The American Indian Movement was another key player. Over the years, new organizations formed and joined the Coalition and its members to lead the campaign for a federal response to the injustices faced by minority producers. Groups like the Land Loss Prevention Project, the Arkansas Land and Farm Development Corporation and the Intertribal Agriculture Council(IAC) became early and active participants in the advocacy work, which began in the early 1980's. The IAC itself grew out of a study initiated by members of the Rural Coalition, led by Mary Lee Johns who then worked with the American Friends Service Committee, and became a critical link among the 84 tribes which comprise its membership. The religious community, especially the Presbyterian Hunger Program, the United Methodist Board of Church and Society, Global Ministries, and the Women's Division; the Lutheran Church in America, the United Church Board for Homeland Ministries and Office of Church in Society, the Episcopal Church, the United States Catholic Conference, the National Catholic Rural Life Council, to name a few, supported and participated in the work. Interreligious entities, notably the National and State Councils of Churches, which stood with farm families during the agriculture crisis in the 1980's, and Interfaith Action for Economic Justice, helped support and coordinate advocacy work. The Rural Church Network continues that effort today. Foundations including Willie Nelson's Farm Aid, and also the Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation helped sustain the many groups working on the issues. In addition to the Land Loss Prevention Project, the only public interest law firm founded specifically to address minority farm loss, the Farmers Legal Action group was also created to provide legal services for small farmers especially on credit issues. The progressive farm movement, especially the National Family Farm Coalition, Prairiefire Rural Action, the National Farmers Union, contributed steadfast support at the policy level throughout the struggle. More recently, the Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture, with 560 groups who have signed on, including many of the above organizations, made minority farm and farmworker advocacy a top priority. The Civil Rights community, especially the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights Under Law, and the National Bar Association Association also offered their support, and these were among the nearly 200 signers of a statement of support for minority farmers rights during the 1990 farm bill campaign. In recent years, a new generation of groups sprung up and joined the effort, including the Concerned Citizens of Tillery (NC), the American Indian Opportunities Industrial Center, the Hmong National Development Corporation and associated Hmong Farmer Organizations, the Rural Development Center of the Association of Community Based Education, the Washington Association of Minority Entrepreneurs; the latter of which are both working to help Latino communities enter farming as producers. The farmworker members of the Rural Coalition have also become active in the work. And most recently, the Virginia-based National Black Farmers Association, which garnered the press attention to the ongoing cases of discrimination their members were facing, has helped spark renewed USDA and Congressional attention to the injustices minority producers face. Litigation and Administrative Advocacy There have been many efforts over the years to address the problems - using litigation, administrative advocacy, and legislative advocacy. In 1980, a Legal Services office filed an administrative complaint on behalf of four black farmers in Hertford and Gates Counties, North Carolina claiming numerous civil rights violations. The Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) within USDA conducted an extensive investigation that confirmed violations of equal opportunity laws and failures to inform black farmers of services available to them. Although completed in July, 1980, the complaining farmers did not receive the OEO report until October, 1981, after submitting a Freedom of Information Act request. A supplemental administrative complaint alleging retaliation was filed in February, 1981. Despite findings of massive discrimination by OEO investigators, OEO issued a report finding, with one minor exception, no racial discrimination against the four black farmers who complained. As the Legal Services office was preparing to file an action in federal court, the effort was derailed by a hostile investigation initiated at the request of the FmHA State Director and a United States Senator from the state. In November, 1987, the Land Loss Prevention Project (LLPP), the Farmers' Legal Action Group (FLAG), and several Legal Services offices filed an Administrative Complaint with USDA on behalf of North Carolina minority farmers, along with several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. USDA claimed that the attorneys must prove that the complaining farmers met class action requirements before USDA would address the Administrative Complaint and claimed the requested documents did not exist. The collaborating organizations decided to pursue community education efforts and prepare to file a lawsuit in federal court. In October, 1989, FLAG, LLPP along with the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, the Rural Coalition, religious organizations and the National Family Farm Coalition, engaged in a nationwide effort to address discrimination and neglect against minority farmers by FmHA. The strategy included legal representation, community education, attorney training, federal policy advocacy to reform farm credit laws, and federal national class action litigation to reform FmHA. In February, 1990, LLPP and FLAG filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with USDA to obtain evidence necessary to prove discrimination and neglect to the court and to the Congress. USDA did not respond and in July, 1990, FLAG and LLPP filed a lawsuit against FmHA and USDA. In 1991, after persistent litigation, FmHA delivered over 50,000 pages of documents. Many documents showed past practices of discrimination and consistent failures by FmHA and USDA to address the problems. With the delivery of the documents and settlement of the attorneys' fees issue, the FOIA litigation was dismissed. The USDA Civil Rights probe initiated in late 1996 is only beginning to uncover the level of blatant disregard for the rights of producers, the failure to properly investigate and track legitimate complaints, the tendency to protect those who violate the rights of USDA clients and more. The Department is moving forward to settle pending cases, though it is hampered from doing so by the failure of its leadership to find and allocate the resources needed to accomplish those long overdue acts of injustice, and to assure they do not occur again. Legislative Effort Legislative efforts in the US Congress began as far back as 1985, when the Farm bill, at the behest of Rep. Edolphus Townes of Brooklyn, NY, then the lone advocate of minority producers, added a vague reference to supporting funding in "substantially current amounts" for an administrative program created by the Reagan Administration allocated salary and expense funds internal to USDA to support outreach efforts by the 1890 Historically Black Land Grant Universities, and the Federation of Southern Cooperatives and the Arkansas Land and Farm Development Corporation. In 1987, the Rural Coalition, the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, the National Family Farm Coalition and various national religious groups were able to secure language in the Farm Credit Act1 , which made additional FmHA ownership loan funds available to minority farmers, established target participation rates to track how loan funds were allocated by county, and defined "socially disadvantaged farmers." As a result, counties had incentives to loan funds to minority farmers, and the funds have been fully committed in each year since, with improved access by minority farmers. However, recent legislative reductions in USDA direct loan funds and the transfer of most federal aid to guarantee loans made by banks have once more eroded credit available for minority producers. Banks have rarely dealt with minority producers. Another provision gave preference to minority farmers for the purchase of USDA-held inventory properties, although those preferences were rescinded and provided to beginning farmers in later legislation. The centerpiece of the legislative strategy was the 1990 Minority Farmers' Rights Act2 , originally drafted by Land Loss Prevention Program , the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, FLAG, Interfaith Action for Economic Justice, the Rural Coalition, the Arkansas Land and Farm Development Corporation, the Rural Advancement Fund, the Intertribal Agriculture Council, and introduced by then Congressman Mike Espy (D. Miss.) and then Senator Wyche Fowler (D-GA). Advocates testified before the House Committee on Government Operations, Subcommittee on Government Information, Justice, and Agriculture, detailing the need for congressional intervention into these problems. Congress incorporated parts of the Minority Farmers' Rights Bill into the 1990 Farm Bill, but not enough to fully address the problems. The Outreach and Technical Assistance Program for Minority Farmers was established in Section 2501 of that bill (see related article), and the Indian Reservation Extension Agent Program was also authorized to provide at long last services on reservations to Indian Producers. Working with the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, the Rural Coalition and its minority farm members, LLPP drafted a complete new Minority Farmers Rights Bill for the 1995 Farm bill debate. Again, a legislative climate hostile to these set of issues led to a strategy of trying to maintain the few programs which did exist for minority producers, and to continue to work administratively for change. In the 1994 Department of Agriculture Reorganization Act, advocates were able to secure language allowing community based organizations representing minority farmers to nominate eligible producers to the reorganized FSA County Committees. Congress agreed to commission a General Accounting Office report on the subject, which was due February 1, 1995. The report was finally released on January 24, 1997, after the USDA Civil Rights probe was in fully underway. Recent work by the Rural Coalition and its members indicates very low voter turnouts in these elections (Between 5 and 15% in one state, and routinely around 10% elsewhere, and increasing only when there were viable minority candidates on the ballot) and a high rate of disqualified ballots (Up to 25% in some areas). RC's efforts to provide minority farmers with the rules, regulations and tools to inform their constituency of their rights has increased minority nominations and turnout, but the 1996 election results have still shown little improvement in representation. The groups continue to collaborate to protect Outreach Program for Minority Farmers which now funds 28 community-based organizations and educational institutions. The program was moved from Farmers Home Administration during reorganization to the Farm Services Agency, and was recently relocated once more to the Natural Resources and Conservation Service. Efforts now concentrate on assuring that a larger commitment of funds for this program are allocated from the Fund for Rural America, and that all community-based organizations have the chance to compete for funds. On November 27, 1997 FSA Administrator Grant Buntrock admitted past discrimination by the agency. The National Black farmers Association rallied several times at the Department, and a class action was certified in federal court relating to several credit discrimination cases where discrimination was found, but never remedied. In December, 1997, and Sec. Glickman assigned NRCS Deputy Chief Pearlie Reed to head a civil rights task force to conduct a complete audit of civil rights compliance in employment and services. See related story on USDA Civil Rights Action Team Report. New Article: USDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION TEAM REPORT In December 1996, Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman appointed "a team of USDA leaders to take a hard look at the issues and make strong recommendations for change."3 After twelve listening sessions around the nation and receipt of many documents, the Civil Rights Action Team issued a report in February 1997. The report noted "Despite the fact that discrimination in program delivery and employment has been documented and discussed, it continues to exist to a large degree unabated." The report makes 92 recommendations for change - "[t]o realize the Secretary's goal that every USDA customer and employee be treated fairly and to finally solve the persistent problems ..." The findings of Civil Rights report are neither new nor unexpected - they validate concerns minority farm organizations have voiced for many years. For the first time, a USDA openly acknowledges the critical role of community-based organizations as partners in reaching underserved or wrongly treated clients. It builds on work of the the Rural Coalition, and its member organizations this past fall to address minority under representation on county committees, including the September training in Washington, DC and the field organizing efforts that followed, by detailing the abuses and rampant lack of accountability of the county committee system. It recommends restitution for those who have been harmed. And albeit briefly, it touches on the huge, almost tacitly unmentionable and shamefully treated sector within the agriculture "family," the 4.5 million farmworkers who work the land and harvest the food on our tables. "One of the most neglected customer communities," the report noted, "... was the farmworker community [who believe] USDA has almost completely failed to acknowledge its responsibilities for addressing the needs ..." Other findings included:
The team further notes that "limited funding cannot be an adequate excuse" for underserving minority customers, but that increased funding and targeting of resources could improve services and "demonstrate the Department's commitment to serving their needs." Other sections of the report dealt with employment practices and the finding that USDA ranked 52 out of 56 federal agencies in its workforce diversity. A final section articulates sentiment that the civil rights system is dysfunctional, has been continually reorganized, lacks accountability and expertise, and "(o)n top of all this...(a)s of January 1997 there were 31 EEO complaints against the Departmental civil rights offices." The Office of General Counsel has no minorities working on civil rights and no minority senior executives, and employs one black male and one black female at the GS-15 managerial level, representing 6.9 % of that sector. The report recommends extensive changes in the civil rights system, including setting measurable goals, and clear leadership and accountability. An outreach office to coordinate extensive department wide outreach, and cooperation with community-based groups are recommended. Timelines are set for resolution of employee and customer complaints, a provision is made for compensation to farmers, and the creation of a minority farm registry is proposed. A farmworker initiative and increased funds for pesticide training programs are proposed. Full funding for the Section 2501 Minority Farm Outreach program is recommended, as is allocation of one third of all Fund for Rural American monies. An increase of funds for the new EQUIP environmental incentives program from $200 million to $300 million is proposed, with the increase targeted to minority producers. And, the report recommends making all county employees federal workers accountable to the Secretary, and increasing minority representation on county committees by appointment of minorities with voting power. The CRAT team asserts that "Fundamental change will not be easy." Though even the full implementation of the 92 recommendations not begin to fully restore what has been lost, the work is only now beginning. As the CRAT team noted "failure to change will mean that minority farmers continue towards extinction: USDA will continue to underutilize a significant portion of its employees; the Department's liability for discrimination complaints of all kinds will continue to increase; and perhaps most importantly, USDA will not accomplish its mission." The Future On February 28, Secretary Glickman hired Civil Rights Action Team Chief as the Acting Assistant Secretary of Administration, charged also with implementation of the report. New leadership has been set in place and the Civil Rights Office has new leadership following reorganization. The Office of General Counsel has created a new civil rights division reporting directly to the General Counsel. Two dozen USDA employee teams are working to implement the various sections of the report, although community-based groups have been excluded from that process. On March 19, the House Agriculture Committee held its first-ever hearing on civil rights within Agriculture. In April, black farmers led another demonstration, and the Congressional Black Caucus held a full hearing on the progress of Civil Rights implementation. A Congressional staff briefing was held by advocacy groups on the appropriations issues related to civil rights. A roundtable with the secretary is scheduled for June 10 with community based groups and a similar session is expected with farmworker groups. At the same time, the many community organizations who have struggle for years with these issues are recognizing that in addition to advocacy, they must at the same time be more active in direct economic development. These groups have had far less access to credit due to all the problems outlined above. But the stakes have been against them in all they have labored to do. Marketing initiatives are starting. The Intertribal Agriculture Council has worked to have a special seal approved for Indian Agriculture. Groups on the west coast have helped farmworkers enter agriculture. In Fresno, California, over 1200 Hmong farmers have collaborated to enter agriculture over the past 12 years with little assistance from USDA. Farmer and farmworker groups are beginning to collaborate and reaching out to work with other communities in international trade. Employee organizations of the USDA have now joined the Rural Coalition and become crucial players in identifying and promoting our shared goals. They have helped assure that the Civil Rights Implementation Teams listen to and value the expertise and input of community-based groups. There is a still the determination and hope that small-scale and minority farmers are the future basis for economic development in communities around the nation. At the 1997 Assembly of the Rural Coalition, we will be looking at new levels of cooperation to achieve these goals and build a better and more viable and sustainable future for all rural people and their communities.
|
||