We of the Black Farmers and Agriculturist Association assert:

1. Since 1910 the U.S. government used tax payers’ money through policies and programs of the
USDA to steal Black people’s land and give it to the children of their former slavemasters from
whom these Black people had bought the land.

2. Under the Reagan administration in 1983 the U.S. government closed down the Civil Rights
Division of the USDA even after having the results of the February 1982 report by the U.S.
Commission on Civil Rights entitled, "The Decline of Black Farming in America", thereby
increasing the loss of land from 1983 through 1997.

3. The out of court settlement of the Pigford vs. Glickman class action lawsuit was a conspiracy
by the USDA, U.S. Justice Department and Class Counsel to further eliminate the Black farmers, hide
the injustice done to these farmers from the public, and then lie about how satisfied these
farmers were with the fake settlement.

4. The same lawyers that were used to sell out the Black farmers and deny them true reparations
are preparing to pull a similar scam on 40 or more million Black people in America.

5. There is a conspiracy to reduce the black population in America and around the world by
limiting access to land and feeding them slow poisons.

The vast majority of black people live on concrete. However, at the turn of the century there
were over 9 million black people with almost 1 million of them being Black farmers owning over 13
million acres of farm land. By 1995 we numbered over 40 million and owned less than 2.5 million
acres of farmland. We are losing land at a rate of over 1,000 acres per day. In 1910 each black
person could be fed off of 1.44 acres of land owned by Black people, while in 1995 each black
person would have to live off of .0625 acres of land or about 2700 square feet. A modest home
covers 1400 square feet. On the other hand each white person in America has two acres (almost two
football fields) of farmland to live off of. Let me put it another way. Each white farmer is
responsible for feeding 200 people while each Black farmer would have to feed 2,222 people if 40
million Black people had to depend on Black farmers. On top of the shortage of Black farmers is the
fact that their average age is 62.

The report was denied by the USDA to exist as the Black farmers in 1998 pursued a lawsuit
against the USDA. Without the evidence that this report could have produced the farmers and their
lawyers were left with trying to prove discrimination without hard statistical evidence. The
lawsuit process led to an out of court settlement signed in April of 1999 which did not include
admission by the USDA that it had discriminated against Black farmers. Therefore each member of the
"class" had to prove discrimination all over again without the benefits of the D. J.
Miller report or the power of discovery which would have allowed them to go into USDA records on
"similarly situated white farmers" to show disparity in treatment.

To get a feel for the economic losses faced by Black farmers due to discrimination we can use
Georgia as an example. The average Black farmer in Georgia in 1978 owned 150 acres of land. At
today’s prices ($1,673 per acre) that represents $250,950 in terms of land, buildings and
equipment. It was just that, land, buildings and equipment, that was confiscated from them with the
help of the USDA. Therefore, $250,000 per farmer could be considered a reasonable settlement. So on
a national basis, $7 billion would be closer to what was taken from these 30,000 or more farmers.
Actually in 1978 there

were over 30,000 Black farmers in the US who owned land. We don’t know how many there are now
because the Census of Agriculture conveniently stopped defining farmers according to race in the
early ’80’s.

The Black Farmers and Agriculturists Association (BFAA) asked Sam Taylor, a Black farmer
advocate, to develop a lawsuit against the USDA particularly to stop farm foreclosures by the USDA,
to eliminate debt which in many cases were not legitimately applied to the farmers’ records and
to restore stolen land to these farmers. Since he could not practice law in D.C., he presented a
"good" white "jerry-curled" lawyer, Alexander Pires, to the Black farmers to
work on their behalf. November 5, 1998 the Black farmers read the consent decree and realized
immediately that they had been sold out. A figure of $50,000 was determined to be a just settlement
to each farmer who could "prove" discrimination.

Al Pires got Black lawyers to go around the country and pump up this out of court settlement
and throw dispersions on the very farmers who started the process. Al Pires even called the
president of one of our Historically Black Colleges to have them stop giving the Black farmers a place
to meet on campus to organize against the Consent Decree that he wrote. 

The Black farmers filled
Federal Court on the March 4, 1999 "Fairness Hearing" of the Pigford v. Glickman Consent
Decree to voice their objections to the wording and provisions of the settlement. However, Judge
Paul Friedman signed this Consent Decree on April 14,1999 over these objections by the farmers and
the lead plaintiff, Tim Pigford, who begged the judge to throw it out. However, Judge Friedman
sided with the government and Class Counsel making the Consent Decree a binding agreement.

The result has been that over 40 percent of the class members in the Black farmers’ lawsuit
against the USDA have been denied. Only $8 million in debt relief has been forgiven of the over
$500 million that was forecasted. Only $500 million of the promised $2.5 billion has been dispensed
to the claimants. No stolen land has been returned to the Black farmers. Most of the farmers that
went in Track "B" have been offered pennies on the dollars of damages caused by the USDA
and Alexander Pires is proclaimed as some type of hero.

Of the few farmers who receive the $50,000, most still have substantial debt to the USDA and
therefore will have to give up any money they receive; their state taxes will increase and put them
in a bind; they have someone else who has a judgment against them and they won’t be able to get
the money; or they are in bankruptcy and the money goes to the court to pay old debts. While the
Pigford v. Glickman Consent Decree was supposed to provide debt relief almost no one is receiving
such relief, so the $50,000 is virtually of no help to the farmer.

The Adjudicators are denying people who got into the Class on time on the premises of "you
misspelled the name of the ‘similarly situated white farmer’"; we find no record of you in the
county you named; or your claim sounds too much like the others that have prevailed.

According to BFAA president, Gary Grant, "THE WHOLE THING IS A SHAM!! Most of the people
who received the $50,000 fit one profile: those no longer in farming; having no record at USDA;
owning no land; and owing no debt to USDA. All others are catching holy hell (pardon my language)
in getting through a process that was to be ‘as simple as tying your shoe.’"

For more information on the Black farmers’ ongoing struggle visit our websites:

Black Farmers and Agriculturists Association: http://www.coax.net/people/lwf/bfaa.htm