[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 68 (Tuesday, May 5, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5131-S5132]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mrs. Hagan):
  S. 972. A bill to amend the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 
2008 to provide funding for successful claimants following a 
determination on the merits of Pigford claims related to racial 
discrimination by the Department of Agriculture, to the Committee on 
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I want to first start off by thanking 
the Senate and in particular the Senate Agriculture Committee for 
addressing a new cause of action in Federal court for those African-
American farmers who may have been discriminated against and who were 
denied entry in the Pigford v. Glickman Consent Decree. The Food, 
Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 including a provision entitled 
Determination on Merits of Pigford Claims.
  For those who do not know, the Consent Decree was a settlement that 
resulted from a class action lawsuit initiated by a class of African-
American farmers who had for decades been discriminated against by the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture in the administration of its FSA loan 
program. The discriminatory treatment was well-documented by both the 
USDA's own Inspector General and an internal task force appointed by 
then USDA Secretary Glickman.
  We had some unanticipated consequences in the Consent Decree's 
implementation. There was denial of approximately 77,000 African-
American farmers into the Decree even though these farmers filed 
petitions by the late-claim deadline. More than half of these late-
claim petitioners didn't even know about the Consent Decree. The Court 
said the lack of notice was not a sufficient reason to allow them into 
the Consent Decree. Thus, these individuals were denied entry and their 
discrimination complaints went unresolved. This was not a fair outcome 
for farmers or those attempting to farm at that time.
  The farm bill did the right thing by allowing late filers to have 
their claims heard and judged on the merits. These farmers deserve 
justice and at least the opportunity to have their claims heard.
  Unfortunately, it has been very difficult to determine how many of 
the 77,000 actually have valid claims. Lots of different folks have 
lots of different calculations. Either way, it's likely to be 
expensive. Because of the budget constraints, the Farm Bill only could 
put $100 million towards the endeavor.
  I think we can and must do better than that. That is why today I am 
introducing bipartisan legislation with Senator Hagan of North 
Carolina. This bill will make 3 changes to the farm bill. First it will 
allow the claimants to access the $100 million already appropriated in 
the farm bill, but once that is expended gain access to the Department 
of Treasury permanent appropriated judgment fund. Second, it will allow 
reasonable attorney fees, administrative costs, and expenses to be paid 
from the judgment fund in accordance with the 1999 consent decree. 
Finally, it includes a section making fraud related to claims a 
criminal offense with punishment of a fine or up to 5 years in prison 
or both.
  The claimants, who were able to timely file, were allowed access to 
the judgment fund and so it makes sense that we treat these new 
claimants the exact same way. The Department of Justice was treating 
the $100 million included in the farm bill as a cap, but Congress 
simply viewed it as a down payment to rectify the damage done.
  The farm bill we passed last year does one thing right. It focuses a 
considerable amount of resources on new and beginning farmers and 
ranchers. Well, many of the Pigford claimants were in that same boat 20 
years ago. It is time to rectify that.
  The farm bill has simply opened up the door so that claims can be 
heard. If a person brings a claim and can not meet the burden of proof, 
then no award will be given. However, we know USDA has admitted that 
the discrimination occurred, and now we are obligated to do our best in 
getting those that deserve it, some relief. That is why I am 
introducing this legislation with Senator Hagan and I urge my 
colleagues to support the bill. It is time to make these claimants 
right and move forward into a new era of civil rights at the Department 
of Agriculture.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 972

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. FUNDING FOR PIGFORD CLAIMS.

       Section 14012 of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 
     2008 (122 Stat. 2209; Public Law 110-246) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
       ``(c) Criminal Penalties.--
       ``(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person to--
       ``(A) knowingly execute, or attempt to execute, a scheme or 
     artifice to defraud, or obtain money or property from any 
     person by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, 
     representations, or promises, relating to the eligibility or 
     ability of a person to--
       ``(i) file a civil action relating to a Pigford claim;
       ``(ii) submit a late-filing request under section 5(g) of 
     the consent decree;
       ``(iii) obtain a determination on the merits of a Pigford 
     claim; or
       ``(iv) recover damages or other relief relating to a 
     Pigford claim; and
       ``(B) for the purpose of executing the scheme or artifice 
     or attempting so to do, or obtaining the money or property--
       ``(i) place or deposit, or cause to be placed or deposited, 
     any matter or thing to be sent or delivered by the Postal 
     Service or any private or commercial interstate carrier;
       ``(ii) take or receive any matter or thing sent or 
     delivered by the Postal Service or any private or commercial 
     interstate carrier;
       ``(iii) knowingly cause to be delivered by the Postal 
     Service or any private or commercial interstate carrier any 
     matter or thing according to the direction on the matter or 
     thing, or at the place at which the matter or thing is 
     directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is 
     addressed; or
       ``(iv) transmit, or cause to be transmitted, any writings, 
     signs, signals, pictures, or sounds by means of wire, radio, 
     or television communication in interstate or foreign 
     commerce.
       ``(2) Penalty.--Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall 
     be fined under title 18,

[[Page S5132]]

     United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or 
     both.''; and
       (2) in subsection (i), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Permanent judgment appropriation.--
       ``(A) In general.--After the expenditure of all funds made 
     available under paragraph (1), any additional payments or 
     debt relief in satisfaction of claims against the United 
     States under subsection (b) and for any actions under 
     subsection (f) or (g) shall be paid from amounts appropriated 
     under section 1304 of title 31, United States Code.
       ``(B) Authorization of certain expenses.--Reasonable 
     attorney's fees, administrative costs, and expenses described 
     in section 14(a) of the consent decree and related to 
     adjudicating the merits of claims brought under subsection 
     (b), (f), or (g) shall be paid from amounts appropriated 
     under section 1304 of title 31, United States Code.
       ``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--In addition to any 
     other funds made available under this subsection, there are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out this section.''.
                                 ______