Building Bridges

Blog


Racism at the US Department of Agriculture
*The Real Story of Racism at the USDA*

Chris Kromm, Facing South: "'It's an astonishing development given the
history of race relations at the USDA, an agency whose own Commission on
Small Farms admitted in 1998 that 'the history of discrimination at the US
Department of Agriculture ... is well-documented' - not against white
farmers, but African-American, Native American and other minorities who were
pushed off their land by decades of racially-biased laws and practices."

http://www.truth-out.org/the-real-story-racism-usda61637

The Real Story of Racism at the USDA

Thursday 22 July 2010

by: Chris Kromm*
*<http://www.southernstudies.org/2010/07/the-real-story-of-racism-at-usda.html>

It's an astonishing development given the history of race relations at the
USDA, an agency whose own Commission on Small Farms
admitted<in">http://www.ewg.org/node/8479>in 1998 that "the history of
discrimination at the U.S. Department of
Agriculture ... is well-documented" -- not against white farmers, but
African-American, Native American and other minorities who were pushed off
their land by decades of racially-biased laws and practices.

It's also a black eye for President Obama and Secretary of Agriculture Tom
Vilsack, who signaled a desire to atone for the USDA's checkered past,
including pushing for funding of a historic $1.15 billion settlement that
would help thousands of African American farmers but now faces bitter
resistance from Senate Republicans.

*Forced Off the Land*

Any discussion about race and the USDA has to start with the crisis of black
land loss. Although the U.S. government never followed through on its
promise to freed slaves of "40 acres and a mule," African-Americans were
able to establish a foothold in Southern agriculture. Black land
ownership peaked
in 1910 <http://www.federationsoutherncoop.com/landloss.htm>, when 218,000
African-American farmers had an ownership stake in 15 million acres of land.

By 1992, those numbers had dwindled to 2.3 million acres held by 18,000
black farmers. And that wasn't just because farming was declining as a way
of life: Blacks were being pushed off the land in vastly disproportionate
numbers. In 1920, one of out seven U.S. farms were
black-run<http://www.federationsoutherncoop.com/landloss.htm>;
by 1992, African-Americans operated one out of 100 farms.

The USDA isn't to blame for all of that decline, but the agency created by
President Lincoln in 1862 as the "people's department" did little to stem
the tide -- and in many cases, made the situation worse.

After decades of criticism and an upsurge in activism by African-American
farmers, the USDA hosted a series of "listening sessions" in the 1990s,
which added to a growing body of evidence of systematic
discrimination<http://www.colorlines.com/archives/2009/01/the_last_plantation.html>
:

Black farmers tell stories of USDA officials -- especially local loan
authorities in all-white county committees in the South -- spitting on them,
throwing their loan applications in the trash and illegally denying them
loans. This happened for decades, through at least the 1990s. When the
USDA's local offices did approve loans to Black farmers, they were often
supervised (farmers couldn't spend the borrowed money without receiving
item-by-item authorization from the USDA) or late (and in farming, timing is
everything). Meanwhile, white farmers were receiving unsupervised, on-time
loans. Many say egregious discrimination by local loan officials persists
today.

Among those concluding that such racial bias persisted were the USDA's own
researchers: In the mid-1990s, they released a
report<http://nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RS20430.pdf> [pdf]
which,
analyzing data from 1990 to 1995, found "minorities received less than their
fair share of USDA money for crop payments, disaster payments, and loans."

Adding insult to injury, when African-American and other minority farmers
filed complaints, the USDA did little to address them. In 1983, President
Reagan pushed through budget cuts that eliminated the USDA Office of Civil
Rights -- and officials admitted they "simply threw discrimination
complaints in the trash without ever responding to or investigating them"
until 1996, when the office re-opened. Even when there were findings of
discrimination, they often went unpaid -- and those that did often came too
late, since the farm had already been foreclosed.

In 1997, a USDA Civil Rights Team found the agency's system for handling
civil rights complaints was still in
shambles<[pdf">http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/rc99038.pdf>[pdf]: the agency
was disorganized, the process for handling complaints
about program benefits was "a failure," and the process for handling
employment discrimination claims was "untimely and unresponsive."

A follow-up report <http://www.gao.gov/archive/1999/rc99038.pdf> [pdf] by
the GAO in 1999 found 44 percent of program discrimination cases, and 64
percent of employment discrimination cases, had been backclogged for over a
year.

*Taking USDA Discrimination to Court*

It was against this backdrop that in 1997, a group of black farmers led by
Tim Pigford of North Carolina filed a class action lawsuit against the USDA.
In all 22,000 farmers were granted access to the lawsuit, and in 1999 the
government admitted wrongdoing and agreed to a $2.3 billion
settlement<http://www.colorlines.com/archives/2009/01/the_last_plantation.html>--
the largest civil rights settlement in history.

But African-American farmers had misgivings with the *Pigford* settlement.
For one, only farmers discriminated against between 1981 and 1996 could join
the lawsuit. Second, the settlement forced farmers to take one of two
options: Track A, to receive an immediate $50,000 cash payout, or Track B,
the promise of a larger amount if more extensive documentation was provided
-- a challenge given that many farmers didn't keep records.

Many farmers who joined the lawsuit were also denied payment: By one
estimate, nine out of 10
farmers<who">http://www.colorlines.com/archives/2009/01/the_last_plantation.html>who
sought restitution under Pigford were denied. The Bush Department of
Justice spent 56,000 office hours and $12 million contesting farmers'
claims; many farmers feel their cases were dismissed on technicalities.

*The Politics Behind the Sherrod Affair*

Shortly after coming into office, President Obama and his chief at the
Department of Agriculture, Iowa's Tom Vilsack, signaled a change in
direction at USDA. Vilsack declared "A New Civil Rights Era at
USDA<http://www.ascr.usda.gov/>,"
and stepped-up handling of civil rights claims in the agency.

This year, Vilsack and the USDA also responded to concerns over handling of
the Pigford case, agreeing to a historic second
settlement<http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61H5XD20100218>--
known as
*Pigford II* -- in April that would deliver another $1.25 billion to farmers
who were excluded from the first case. As Vilsack
declared<http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61H5XD20100218>:


We have worked hard to address USDA's checkered past so we can get to the
business of helping farmers succeed. The agreement reached today is an
important milestone in putting these discriminatory claims behind us for
good.

But the *Pigford II* case was very much still alive when right-wing media
outlets went after Shirley Sherrod this week. Sherrod herself had received
$150,000 from the USDA last year as part of the original Pigford lawsuit,
which has been bitterly opposed by Republicans and conservative media.

The settlement is also now a major political battle in Congress: President
Obama had put aside<$1.15">http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-22/obama-administration-apologizes-offers-official-job.html>$1.15
billion in May to cover
*Pigford II* cases, which the House later approved. But Republicans stripped
the money out of their bills, leaving the supplemental spending now being
debated in the Senate<as">http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-22/obama-administration-apologizes-offers-official-job.html>as
the final option to appropriate the funding.

Given the stakes of the *Pigford II* decision -- which again affirms the
present-day consequences of decades of racial discrimination -- and the
sharp partisan battle over spending in Congress, black farmer advocates
don't think the attacks on Sherrod this week are a coincidence.

And given the history of racial discrimination at USDA, they can't help but
note the hypocrisy. As Gary Grant, president of the 20,000-strong Black
Farmers & Agriculturalists Association, said in a
statement<[pdf">http://www.bfaa-us.org/uploads/1/8/0/5/1805891/shirley_sherrod_and_usda_discrimination.pdf>[pdf]:

The statement from Tom Vilsack, Secretary of Agriculture, that USDA does not
"tolerate" racial discrimination is a complete lie. Talk to almost any
family member of a black farmer or check out ... the government's
documentation of how USDA employees, on the local and federal level
discriminated against black farmers, in particular. And nothing was ever
done to penalize the all white officials bent on destroying a society of
black farmers across the nation: not one firing, not one charge brought, and
not one pension lost. Yet at the first erroneous offering by a conservative
blogger that a black woman from USDA might have discriminated, she is
immediately forced to resign.

Which begs the question: Where was the Republican and conservative concern
over USDA "racism" before this week's swiftboating of Shirley Sherrod?
 
systemic racism in the U.S. criminal justice system

Fourteen examples of systemic racism in the U.S. criminal justice system

Criminal Justice, Featured — By Bill Quigley on July 26, 2010 at 9:40 am

The biggest crime in the U.S. criminal justice system is that it is a race-based institution where African-Americans are directly targeted and punished in a much more aggressive way than white people.

Saying the US criminal system is racist may be politically controversial in some circles. But the facts are overwhelming. No real debate about that. Below I set out numerous examples of these facts.

The question is – are these facts the mistakes of an otherwise good system, or are they evidence that the racist criminal justice system is working exactly as intended? Is the US criminal justice system operated to marginalize and control millions of African Americans?

Information on race is available for each step of the criminal justice system – from the use of drugs, police stops, arrests, getting out on bail, legal representation, jury selection, trial, sentencing, prison, parole and freedom. Look what these facts show.

One. The US has seen a surge in arrests and putting people in jail over the last four decades. Most of the reason is the war on drugs. Yet whites and blacks engage in drug offenses, possession and sales, at roughly comparable rates – according to a report on race and drug enforcement published by Human Rights Watch in May 2008. While African Americans comprise 13% of the US population and 14% of monthly drug users they are 37% of the people arrested for drug offenses – according to 2009 Congressional testimony by Marc Mauer of The Sentencing Project.

Two. The police stop blacks and Latinos at rates that are much higher than whites. In New York City, where people of color make up about half of the population, 80% of the NYPD stops were of blacks and Latinos. When whites were stopped, only 8% were frisked. When blacks and Latinos are stopped 85% were frisked according to information provided by the NYPD. The same is true most other places as well. In a California study, the ACLU found blacks are three times more likely to be stopped than whites.

Three. Since 1970, drug arrests have skyrocketed rising from 320,000 to close to 1.6 million according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics of the U.S. Department of Justice.
African Americans are arrested for drug offenses at rates 2 to 11 times higher than the rate for whites – according to a May 2009 report on disparity in drug arrests by Human Rights Watch.

Four. Once arrested, blacks are more likely to remain in prison awaiting trial than whites. For example, the New York state division of criminal justice did a 1995 review of disparities in processing felony arrests and found that in some parts of New York blacks are 33% more likely to be detained awaiting felony trials than whites facing felony trials.

Five. Once arrested, 80% of the people in the criminal justice system get a public defender for their lawyer. Race plays a big role here as well. Stop in any urban courtroom and look a the color of the people who are waiting for public defenders. Despite often heroic efforts by public defenders the system gives them much more work and much less money than the prosecution. The American Bar Association, not a radical bunch, reviewed the US public defender system in 2004 and concluded “All too often, defendants plead guilty, even if they are innocent, without really understanding their legal rights or what is occurring…The fundamental right to a lawyer that America assumes applies to everyone accused of criminal conduct effectively does not exist in practice for countless people across the US.”

Six. African Americans are frequently illegally excluded from criminal jury service according to a June 2010 study released by the Equal Justice Initiative. For example in Houston County, Alabama, 8 out of 10 African Americans qualified for jury service have been struck by prosecutors from serving on death penalty cases.

Seven. Trials are rare. Only 3 to 5 percent of criminal cases go to trial – the rest are plea bargained. Most African Americans defendants never get a trial. Most plea bargains consist of promise of a longer sentence if a person exercises their constitutional right to trial. As a result, people caught up in the system, as the American Bar Association points out, plead guilty even when innocent. Why? As one young man told me recently, “Who wouldn’t rather do three years for a crime they didn’t commit than risk twenty-five years for a crime they didn’t do?”

Eight. The U.S. Sentencing Commission reported in March 2010 that in the federal system black offenders receive sentences that are 10% longer than white offenders for the same crimes. Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project reports African Americans are 21% more likely to receive mandatory minimum sentences than white defendants and 20% more like to be sentenced to prison than white drug defendants.

Nine. The longer the sentence, the more likely it is that non-white people will be the ones getting it. A July 2009 report by the Sentencing Project found that two-thirds of the people in the US with life sentences are non-white. In New York, it is 83%.

Ten. As a result, African Americans, who are 13% of the population and 14% of drug users, are not only 37% of the people arrested for drugs but 56% of the people in state prisons for drug offenses. Marc Mauer May 2009 Congressional Testimony for The Sentencing Project.

Eleven. The US Bureau of Justice Statistics concludes that the chance of a black male born in 2001 of going to jail is 32% or 1 in three. Latino males have a 17% chance and white males have a 6% chance. Thus black boys are five times and Latino boys nearly three times as likely as white boys to go to jail.

Twelve. So, while African American juvenile youth is but 16% of the population, they are 28% of juvenile arrests, 37% of the youth in juvenile jails and 58% of the youth sent to adult prisons. 2009 Criminal Justice Primer, The Sentencing Project.

Thirteen. Remember that the US leads the world in putting our own people into jail and prison. The New York Times reported in 2008 that the US has five percent of the world’s population but a quarter of the world’s prisoners, over 2.3 million people behind bars, dwarfing other nations. The US rate of incarceration is five to eight times higher than other highly developed countries and black males are the largest percentage of inmates according to ABC News.

Fourteen. Even when released from prison, race continues to dominate. A study by Professor Devah Pager of the University of Wisconsin found that 17% of white job applicants with criminal records received call backs from employers while only 5% of black job applicants with criminal records received call backs. Race is so prominent in that study that whites with criminal records actually received better treatment than blacks without criminal records!

So, what conclusions do these facts lead to? The criminal justice system, from start to finish, is seriously racist.

Professor Michelle Alexander concludes that it is no coincidence that the criminal justice system ramped up its processing of African Americans just as the Jim Crow laws enforced since the age of slavery ended. Her book, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness sees these facts as evidence of the new way the US has decided to control African Americans – a racialized system of social control. The stigma of criminality functions in much the same way as Jim Crow – creating legal boundaries between them and us, allowing legal discrimination against them, removing the right to vote from millions, and essentially warehousing a disposable population of unwanted people. She calls it a new caste system.

Poor whites and people of other ethnicity are also subjected to this system of social control. Because if poor whites or others get out of line, they will be given the worst possible treatment, they will be treated just like poor blacks.

Other critics like Professor Dylan Rodriguez see the criminal justice system as a key part of what he calls the domestic war on the marginalized. Because of globalization, he argues in his book Forced Passages, there is an excess of people in the US and elsewhere. “These people”, whether they are in Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib or US jails and prisons, are not productive, are not needed, are not wanted and are not really entitled to the same human rights as the productive ones. They must be controlled and dominated for the safety of the productive. They must be intimidated into accepting their inferiority or they must be removed from the society of the productive.

This domestic war relies on the same technology that the US uses internationally. More and more we see the militarization of this country’s police. Likewise, the goals of the US justice system are the same as the US war on terror – domination and control by capture, immobilization, punishment and liquidation.

What to do?

Martin Luther King Jr., said we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. A radical approach to the US criminal justice system means we must go to the root of the problem. Not reform. Not better beds in better prisons. We are not called to only trim the leaves or prune the branches, but rip up this unjust system by its roots.

We are all entitled to safety. That is a human right everyone has a right to expect. But do we really think that continuing with a deeply racist system leading the world in incarcerating our children is making us safer?

It is time for every person interested in justice and safety to join in and dismantle this racist system. Should the US decriminalize drugs like marijuana? Should prisons be abolished? Should we expand the use of restorative justice? Can we create fair educational, medical and employment systems? All these questions and many more have to be seriously explored. Join a group like INCITE, Critical Resistance, the Center for Community Alternatives, Thousand Kites, or the California Prison Moratorium and work on it. As Professor Alexander says “Nothing short of a major social movement can dismantle this new caste system.”

 
Sherrod case -- Obama invites dialgoue on race
By Mimi Hall, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — President Obama said Thursday that all Americans should spend more time talking about a sensitive subject that he has addressed only sparingly since he took office: race.

In a speech to the National Urban League and on the ABC daytime talk show The View, the president talked about race relations in the context of the controversy surrounding the recent firing of Agriculture Department employee Shirley Sherrod.

Sherrod's own comments about race were misconstrued after a snippet of a 43-minute speech she gave to the NAACP was posted last week on the conservative blog biggovernment.com. The clip made Sherrod, who is black, appear racist as she recounted a time when she purposefully didn't give a white farmer the help he needed. The whole speech reveals that she was using the anecdote as part of a broader story about racial reconciliation.

 

The day after she was fired, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack apologized for taking action based on just the edited video and offered Sherrod a new job. She has not said whether she'll take it. She announced Thursday that she will sue the blogger, Andrew Breitbart, who posted the video.

In the midst of the controversy last week, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs called it "one of those teachable moments" but said he didn't necessarily think Obama would be the teacher.

The president claimed that mantle Thursday.

Despite great progress on race relations, "we were reminded this past week that we still got work to do when it comes to promoting the values of fairness and equality and mutual understanding that must bind us together as a nation," Obama told the Urban League, a 100-year-old civil rights group, which was meeting in Washington.

Obama said there's no need to have "a bunch of academic symposia or fancy commissions or panels" on race. Instead, "we should all make more of an effort to discuss with one another, in a truthful and mature and responsible way, the divides that still exist, the discrimination that's still out there, the prejudices that still hold us back."

Obama said those conversations should be held not on cable TV but "around kitchen tables and water coolers and church basements and in our schools and with our kids all across the country."

On The View, Obama said:

•There is a "reptilian side of our brain" that causes people to be cautious "if somebody looks different or sounds different."

•African Americans are "sort of a mongrel people," when asked why he identifies himself as black rather than of mixed race, given that his mother was white. "We're all kinds of mixed up," he added. "That's actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it."

•What's most important when it comes to race is "how you treat people."

 

Obama urges a dialogue on race after Sherrod case

USA Today - July 30, 2010

WASHINGTON — President Obama said Thursday that all Americans should spend more time talking about a sensitive subject that he has addressed only sparingly since he took office: race.

http://bit.ly/bDiSDX

 
Our Divisive President   
By Pat Cadell and Doug Schoen  
Wall Street Journal - July 28, 2010
  
Barack Obama promised a new era of post-partisanship. In office, he's played racial politics and further split the country along class and party lines. 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703700904575391553798363586.html

 
Asheville Teachers and Parents meet for fun June 29

Tuesday June 29th 4 pm

Carrier Park

(Amboy Road by the French Broad River)

Teachers and Parents from Asheville City Schools are invited

to meet and play sand Volleyball

Food, Fun and Excitement

(potluck event, but don't let lack of time to prepare food keep you away)

Call: 215-2650 for more information

 

 
“The Beloved Community: African-Americans, Jews and the Civil Rights Struggle

Congregation Beth Israel’s

Men’s Club and Social Action Committee

present

Carol Rogoff Hallstrom

“The Beloved Community: African-Americans,

Jews and the Civil Rights Struggle”

Ms. Hallstrom began her career as a Field Secretary

with the Student Non-Violent Coordinating

Committee (SNCC) in southwest Mississippi during

the civil rights movement in the 1960s, in the struggle

to end Jim Crow and discriminatory, segregationist

practices. She will share some of her experiences of

the Civil Rights struggle, and insights gained into the

politicized dynamics of human identity and

relationship.

Sunday June 13 at 10:15 am

Epicurean Matzah Brei brunch ($5/person)

Carol Rogoff Hallstrom is a public interest attorney and community activist who

has worked in the fields of civil rights, police-community relations, immigration,

human relations and diversity education/training for more than 30 years as a notfor-

profit organization executive. During the past 10 years Ms. Hallstrom was in

federal service as a Community Relations Officer with the US Dept of Justice,

Immigration & Naturalization Service and then with the Dept of Homeland

Security, US Citizenship & Immigration Services, from which she retired in 2009.

RSVP please for brunch to Lee Avishai, Beth Israel office, at 252-8431

 
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next > End >>

Page 1 of 8

Contribute

Join us in building bridges
within our community.

Together we can
overcome racism.


Upcoming Events

Next session

of Building Bridges

September 14, 2010

Asheville Middle School

Resources

Center for Diversity Education

YMI Cultural Center
Celebrating African American Arts and Heritage

United Way ABC
United Way of Asheville Buncombe County

NAACP
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People