« | »

Senate OKs $4.5B For Blacks And Indians

From a jubilant New York Times:

Senate Approves Payment of Black Farmers’ Claims

By ASHLEY SOUTHALL
November 19, 2010

WASHINGTON — The Senate on Friday approved $4.55 billion to settle longstanding charges that the federal government had denied or underpaid aid to black farmers and mismanaged trust funds for American Indians.

The bill sets aside $1.15 billion to resolve racial bias claims brought by black farmers against the Agriculture Department and $3.4 billion to pay claims stemming from the Department of the Interior’s handling of American Indian trust funds.

Lest we forget, this is all about ‘loans’ these farmers were supposedly denied because the evil Ronald Reagan closed the USDA’s ‘civil rights’ division.

The Senate approved the measure by unanimous consent on Friday evening and sent it to the House. Similar measures have passed the House twice, and President Obama has said he would sign the bill into law… 

The black farmers’ case is an outgrowth of Pigford v. Glickman, a federal class-action lawsuit originally settled in 1999. The Obama administration agreed in February to provide a second round of damages to people who were denied earlier payment because they had missed the deadlines for filing.

And never mind that the Pigford giveaway started with a mere 400 black farmers, but was soon ratcheted up to 72,705 ‘farmers.’

The bountiful Mr. Obama has decided to give another 70,000 ‘black farmers’ $50,000 a piece, which adds up to just another $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars.

The American Indian case, Cobell v. Salazar, was settled in December after more than 13 years of litigation. The settlement creates a $1.4 billion trust fund and a $60 million scholarship fund. It also provides $2 billion for the federal government to repurchase tribal lands sold to individuals in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The House has approved money for both settlements twice this year — first in a war supplemental bill, then in a tax extenders bill — but the financing was stripped in the Senate over concerns about spending and lawyers’ fees in the American Indian settlement. Until Friday, Republicans had thwarted several attempts made by Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, to consider the measure on its own

The lame ducks’ final ‘thank you’ to the American people.

Shortly after the bill passed, Mr. Reid said he was “heartened” that both parties had been able to reach a deal.

“This issue has been of great importance to me, and I am pleased these long-suffering Americans can now receive the closure that they deserve,” Mr. Reid said.

Members of the National Congress of American Indians, a group that advocates for tribal interests, said they were encouraged by the vote…

They were also encouraged by the quick return they got on their votes for Mr. Reid back on November 2nd.

This article was posted by Steve on Sunday, November 21st, 2010. Comments are currently closed.

16 Responses to “Senate OKs $4.5B For Blacks And Indians”

  1. Mithrandir says:

    The donkeys keep getting the handouts don’t they? The 26 Billion to teacher voters, now the 4.6 Billion for black and indian voters.

    Time for Republicans to shut off the spigot to donkey voters. Let them holler about racism and children, and all that other crap. You want money for donkey voters, well, you should have voted Democrat.

  2. Papa Louie says:

    If these farmers can get billions for being denied loans, how much will farmers in California get for being denied water? And how much will minorities get in the future for being denied home loans today just because they don’t have the means to pay back the loans?

    As government leans further to the left, the number of victims in society approaches infinity. That’s why the utopia that the left dreams about can never be sustained in the real world. They can always find more “good causes” than there is money to pay for them. In a leftist utopia the ruling class always exempts themselves from the labor and shared sacrifice of the common people. They praise and reward moochers, which results in more of them. But they despise, regulate, and punish producers, which results in fewer of them. And like a tapeworm in the bowels of society, the governing elite grow bigger and fatter by the day, sucking the nutrients out of the economy until, at last, their starving host becomes too weak to feed them anymore. Then they are left to wonder, too late, why they bit the hand that fed them.

  3. platypus says:

    Distasteful as the hidden pork in this “settlement” is, it was good to put this to bed before it got any worse. In any event, the GOP can use it as a politcal ad by pointing out that the dems could have done it anytime in the last two years but they waited until the elections terrified them into doing it during lame duck so the GOP couldn’t get credit for doing it in 2011.

    Whether the GOP would have done it or not is meaningless since we will never know. A judicial settlement is the only way the 2011 House can be forced to pay so the vote to authorize the funding won’t even cause grief with the tea party.

    Thanks, donkeykongs – you guys are all heart.

  4. Chuckk says:

    Deplicate comment. Delete

  5. Chuckk says:

    70,000 votes are 70,000 votes. Who cares how much they cost and who paid for them.

  6. Chuckk says:

    I was denied a library card. How much can I get and who do I sue?

  7. skclewis says:

    A little off topic, but relevant with Obalmy agreeing to sign. If it is ever proven that our resident child-in-chief is not a natural born U.S. citizen (and therefore not legally president), would that not make all the laws, decrees, etc. he has signed become nullified? And if so, would Congress then have to re-present all the legislation? Given the currently elected Congress I don’t think any of it would pass. On the down-side, if Obalmy is illegally president, then we are stuck with Joe Brainless. Just a few thoughts for the wonderous minds of S&L to ponder.

    • David says:

      Or what if Obama was born in Hawaii but his body was later taken over by reptile aliens who planned 9-11 and faked the moon landing? WHAT THEN!

    • meldremar says:

      A little off topic, but NOT relevant with skclewis agreeing to sign a marriage license, April 2, 2001. If it is ever proven that our resident child-in-husbandry is not a cheater who abandoned me, his wife, and disappeared in Jan. ’08, would that not make all the laws, decrees, etc. skclewis has signed become nullified? NO, not nullified, but still very much in force. On the down-side, if skclewis is illegally abandoning his wife w/a high mortgage and bills that is in skclewis’ name only, then we are stuck with skclewis Brainless. By the way, Mr. SKC Lewis, Our home is up for a foreclosure sale on Dec. 15, 2010 at the Grand Rapids, Michigan Courthouse at 10 a.m, leaving me and my son homeless and my 22 y.o. daughter volunteering deployment to Afghanistan just so she can help us….My Son doesn’t make enough to keep our home….to rent an apt. takes 3x’s our gross income….He doesn’t make that, nor does my daughter, nor do I…..Just a few thoughts for the wonderous minds of S&L to ponder.

    • meldremar says:

      Oh, by the way Mr. SKC Lewis, in order to stop foreclosure proceedings, you owe the bank $6,519.91, but this has risen, since Aug/Sept/Oct/Nov and now Dec’s mortgage payments were not made. Too the only way, we can remedy this problem, you need to come home, go into the bank w/me and get this taken care of asap! I mean, it’s been over 5 years since you walked out on us or talked to us. Man up! What you are doing and have done to us, isn’t God like, it’s childish. And if it takes me to post on this website, then so be it. I’m an exhausted and worn out 52 y.o. w/a heart problem, fibromyalgia which is constant muscle pain brought on by over active nerves and now a herniated chipped disc in my lower right back. I’ve been emailing you the last 5 years and I’m falling apart, each day I awaken, sad, not knowing what’s going to happen to me. You are my husband and I’m your responsibility. You are 59.5 and it’s time to face your demons. We need closure.

  8. Chase says:

    Quick, where best to set up my Hummer Dealership?

    Perhaps it should be a Cadillac lot?

  9. canary says:

    The bountiful Mr. Obama has decided to give another 70,000 ‘black farmers’ $50,000 a piece.

    That’s enough for a home. Michelle will spend hers on a green house so the slave children can grow
    herbs, and spices.

  10. BigOil says:

    Nice to see Congress is finding creative ways to dole out reparations without having to legislate against the will of about 80% of the country.

    This reparations covers about 0.2% of the black population, so the Democrats have a ways to go. Next we should see black college students that were denied loans, black business owners that were denied loans from the Small Business Administration….

    Also don’t forget there is another Democrat constituency group in line at the trough to get a big payoff here – the trial lawyers.

  11. Right of the People says:

    I think I’ll change my name legally to John Running Sore and claim Native American status so I can get in on the payday.

  12. Petronius says:

    Some of us may remember the farm credit crisis of the Reagan years. The farm credit crisis was similar in its origin to the subprime mortgage crisis of 2008-present. During the Carter Administration of the late 1970s, the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) adopted an easy credit policy for high risk farmers. It was essentially a subsidized credit program, with cheap loans for farmers subsidized at the expense of taxpayers.

    Farmers took advantage of the loans; they invested heavily in new machinery and bought more land, driving up farm prices. In 1981, shortly after Reagan took office, the bubble burst and farmland values crashed. Farm products also brought lower prices in the market due to the overplanting that resulted from the expansionary program of the 1970s. Farmers couldn’t pay their mortgages nor their equipment loans.

    As a result of these government subsidized credit programs, and the resulting boom and bust, about half the farmers in the corn belt were either insolvent or poised on the brink of bankruptcy. Private agricultural banks throughout the Midwest were bankrupted and failed. The demand for government relief, in the form of more easy credit to see farmers through the crisis, grew stronger than ever.

    This aspect of the farm crisis was dramatized in the successful 1984 movie “Country” which starred Jessica Lange, Sam Shepard, and Wilford Brimley. The movie showed that the government under the heartless Reagan had cut off the family’s credit and then foreclosed on their farm. The farm crisis was also brought to public attention by Willie Nelson’s Farm Aid concerts, the first of which was held at Champaign-Urbana in 1985.

    In response to the crisis, Reagan declared a moratorium on farm foreclosures and reorganized and disciplined the FmHA and other Federal farm credit programs at the Department of Agriculture. The farm crisis was eventually stabilized following the passage of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987.

    The end of the government’s easy credit program affected all farmers across the board, but especially small farmers who were operating on thin margins. The vast majority of these farmers were whites. According to the census returns, black farmers numbered fewer than 40,000. Yet following Pigford v Glickman, we find that somehow over 70,000 black farmers were apparently denied government loans. And we are asked to believe that these denials had nothing to do with the curtailment of easy credit for all farmers, but instead were motivated in each case purely by anti-black racial discrimination.

    The lesson of Pigford v Glickman and its progeny seems to be this : that once a government welfare program or subsidy has been established, it may not thereafter be curtailed or withdrawn without payment of reparations to nonwhites. And that the poor taxpayers are stuck in a lose-lose situation.

  13. Voice of Reason says:

    Wasn’t racist Shirley Sherrod one of the major black recipients?


« Front Page | To Top
« | »