CRAT and its implications

I've been reading the CRAT. Yes, that's right, the CRAT, "Civil Rights at the United States Department of Agriculture: A Report by the Civil Rights Action Team." Published in February, 1997, it is a hefty document, one that is dry and tedious to read.

However, for me it was one more reminder of the nature of things. What the authors put on the page via summary flew at me via faces, places, memories, and stories of those whose lives and experiences form the backdrop of this summary report. It's an indicting report. And, from all appearances, we're not doing much better in 2007 than we were in 1997. Sad but true.

Agriculture Secretary Glickman saw the extraordinary outpouring of complaints of discrimination both within the USDA by its employees and from the outside in the lives and stories of farmers, especially "socially disadvantaged" farmers, African American, American Indians, Hispanic Americans, and women farmers. So, he decided to hold listening sessions around the country. At twelve listening sessions in eleven cities from Albany, GA, to Memphis, TN, to Window Rock, AZ, to Salina, CA, the team heard consistent stories of discriminatory practices, absence of accountability, lack of commitment to Civil Rights, lack of diversity on county committees, gross inequities in the treatment of minorities in FSA programs, lack of responsiveness to complaints, and the list goes on and on, and on and on.

Later there was a Civil Rights Implementation Team whose task it was to implement the 92 recommendations. Then, there was the Office of General Counsel's assessment of improvements. Not a pretty picture.

Next up will be more specific complaints that the CRAT folks heard. Again, not a pretty picture.

I've heard it exclaimed, "This surely can't be happening in America. We're beyond that."

Sorry, family and friends, but we're not.