Lawyers seek hearing on denial of USDA discrimination claims
August 13, 2015 |11:59 PM
Lawyers for female and Hispanic farmers who filed discrimination cases against the Agriculture Department are hoping a federal judge will grant them a hearing on whether USDA and a firm it hired followed proper procedure when denying most of the claims that were filed.
The cases of female and Hispanic farmers against USDA for discrimination, mostly over denial of loans that were granted to white male farmers, go back many years.
The female and Hispanic farmers asked the federal court for class-action status, which had been granted to black and Native American farmers, but the court declined, which meant that each one has had to sue USDA individually.
The cases lingered during the George W. Bush administration, but Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack made settlement of all four discrimination cases a high priority. The Obama administration set up a voluntary alternative dispute resolution process for the Hispanic and female farmers that was supposed to make filing the cases relatively simple.
USDA hired Epiq Systems, an independent firm, to adjudicate the claims.
On June 8 the Justice Department filed a status report on the cases with the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia.
That report said that as of May 22, the claims administrator had received 53,803 claims and approved 3,210, (including claims filed by 2,504 female farmers and 706 Hispanic farmers), resulting in more than $200 million in cash awards, forgiveness by USDA of eligible farm loan debt, and tax relief.
But the report also said that the adjudicator had denied 18,953 claims, including 10,361 claims that were denied due to fraud concerns, and 7,901 claims on merit.
On June 11, the lawyers for the female and Hispanic farmers filed a motion with U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, who has overseen the cases, asking the court to require USDA to provide additional information regarding the standards applied by its claims administrator and to hold a hearing on the matter.
Walton has not responded to the motion, but Alison Andersen, a lawyer with Arent Fox who represents the female plaintiffs, told The Hagstrom Report today that the lawyers and plaintiffs are still “hopeful the judge will address their motion quickly.”
Meanwhile, Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., wrote Vilsack on Friday that the “treatment that women farmers have received under the claims process is deeply troubling,” that the success rate for claims has been “unconscionably low,” and asking for an explanation.
DeLauro and Eshoo asked Vilsack a long series of questions about the process, many of which were similar to the lawyers’ court filing.
The lawyers, DeLauro and Eshoo noted that the success rate of the claims had been only 6 percent and that the government had pledged $1.3 billion for cash awards to the Hispanic and female farmers.
Andersen also said that “Arent Fox welcomes the inquiry of the congresswomen, as we are troubled by the results of the claim program, and believe that these are important questions to ask USDA. Many of our clients and other female farmers are seeking answers to the same questions the congresswomen have raised.”
In response to DeLauro‘s and Eshoo’s public release of the letter, Matt Herrick, Vilsack’s communication director, issued a statement saying “USDA has been committed to ensuring the integrity and impartiality of this claims process. A neutral, third party oversaw all aspects of the process to make certain that it is fair and equitable, and made all claim decisions. USDA had no role in adjudicating the claims.”
Herrick added, “The department engaged in extensive outreach with public meetings, paid advertising, and many other efforts throughout the country to help ensure there was widespread awareness of this process and that all those who desired to participate had ample opportunity to do so.”
But Phillip Fraas, a lawyer for several hundred of the Hispanic farmers, told The Hagstrom Report today that the large number of denials raises questions “about how good was the notification process?”
Fraas added that even for those Hispanic farmers whose claims have been approved, the process of receiving the money has been slow. Less than 20 percent of his clients whose claims have been approved have been paid, he said.
Herrick also said, “Epiq Systems reached determinations independently of USDA, which was an essential component of the structure put in place to protect the interests of both the claimants and the taxpayers in a fair, unbiased, and expert evaluation of each claim. As a result, their decisions are final and binding and not subject to review or modification by USDA.”
Many of the 53,000 claims “were incomplete, ineligible under the framework rules, or were not filed by or on behalf of female or Hispanic claimants,” Herrick said.
Of the 53,000, Herrick said, 4,581 were Hispanic claims, 30,772 were non-Hispanic female claims and 18,412 claims did not indicate either gender or ethnicity.
Herrick also noted that the USDA Inspector General Phyllis Fong is conducting a performance audit of the Hispanic and female farmers’ claim resolution process.
A spokesman for Fong confirmed today that the office is conducting an audit “to determine if the claims review process is adequate and functioning as prescribed, and to ensure that funds are distributed only to eligible applicants,” but the audit report is not expected to be issued until this fall.
In his statement, Herrick also said, “The USDA under the Obama administration has made it a priority to build a new era for civil rights at USDA and ensure that all customers and employees are treated fairly, no matter their race, color, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, disability or age. Over the past six years, we have corrected past errors, learned from mistakes, and charted a stronger path for the future where all Americans are treated with dignity and respect.”
The cases of female and Hispanic farmers against USDA for discrimination, mostly over denial of loans that were granted to white male farmers, go back many years.
The female and Hispanic farmers asked the federal court for class-action status, which had been granted to black and Native American farmers, but the court declined, which meant that each one has had to sue USDA individually.
The cases lingered during the George W. Bush administration, but Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack made settlement of all four discrimination cases a high priority. The Obama administration set up a voluntary alternative dispute resolution process for the Hispanic and female farmers that was supposed to make filing the cases relatively simple.
USDA hired Epiq Systems, an independent firm, to adjudicate the claims.
On June 8 the Justice Department filed a status report on the cases with the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia.
That report said that as of May 22, the claims administrator had received 53,803 claims and approved 3,210, (including claims filed by 2,504 female farmers and 706 Hispanic farmers), resulting in more than $200 million in cash awards, forgiveness by USDA of eligible farm loan debt, and tax relief.
But the report also said that the adjudicator had denied 18,953 claims, including 10,361 claims that were denied due to fraud concerns, and 7,901 claims on merit.
On June 11, the lawyers for the female and Hispanic farmers filed a motion with U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton, who has overseen the cases, asking the court to require USDA to provide additional information regarding the standards applied by its claims administrator and to hold a hearing on the matter.
Walton has not responded to the motion, but Alison Andersen, a lawyer with Arent Fox who represents the female plaintiffs, told The Hagstrom Report today that the lawyers and plaintiffs are still “hopeful the judge will address their motion quickly.”
Meanwhile, Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and Anna Eshoo, D-Calif., wrote Vilsack on Friday that the “treatment that women farmers have received under the claims process is deeply troubling,” that the success rate for claims has been “unconscionably low,” and asking for an explanation.
DeLauro and Eshoo asked Vilsack a long series of questions about the process, many of which were similar to the lawyers’ court filing.
The lawyers, DeLauro and Eshoo noted that the success rate of the claims had been only 6 percent and that the government had pledged $1.3 billion for cash awards to the Hispanic and female farmers.
Andersen also said that “Arent Fox welcomes the inquiry of the congresswomen, as we are troubled by the results of the claim program, and believe that these are important questions to ask USDA. Many of our clients and other female farmers are seeking answers to the same questions the congresswomen have raised.”
In response to DeLauro‘s and Eshoo’s public release of the letter, Matt Herrick, Vilsack’s communication director, issued a statement saying “USDA has been committed to ensuring the integrity and impartiality of this claims process. A neutral, third party oversaw all aspects of the process to make certain that it is fair and equitable, and made all claim decisions. USDA had no role in adjudicating the claims.”
Herrick added, “The department engaged in extensive outreach with public meetings, paid advertising, and many other efforts throughout the country to help ensure there was widespread awareness of this process and that all those who desired to participate had ample opportunity to do so.”
But Phillip Fraas, a lawyer for several hundred of the Hispanic farmers, told The Hagstrom Report today that the large number of denials raises questions “about how good was the notification process?”
Fraas added that even for those Hispanic farmers whose claims have been approved, the process of receiving the money has been slow. Less than 20 percent of his clients whose claims have been approved have been paid, he said.
Herrick also said, “Epiq Systems reached determinations independently of USDA, which was an essential component of the structure put in place to protect the interests of both the claimants and the taxpayers in a fair, unbiased, and expert evaluation of each claim. As a result, their decisions are final and binding and not subject to review or modification by USDA.”
Many of the 53,000 claims “were incomplete, ineligible under the framework rules, or were not filed by or on behalf of female or Hispanic claimants,” Herrick said.
Of the 53,000, Herrick said, 4,581 were Hispanic claims, 30,772 were non-Hispanic female claims and 18,412 claims did not indicate either gender or ethnicity.
Herrick also noted that the USDA Inspector General Phyllis Fong is conducting a performance audit of the Hispanic and female farmers’ claim resolution process.
A spokesman for Fong confirmed today that the office is conducting an audit “to determine if the claims review process is adequate and functioning as prescribed, and to ensure that funds are distributed only to eligible applicants,” but the audit report is not expected to be issued until this fall.
In his statement, Herrick also said, “The USDA under the Obama administration has made it a priority to build a new era for civil rights at USDA and ensure that all customers and employees are treated fairly, no matter their race, color, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, religion, disability or age. Over the past six years, we have corrected past errors, learned from mistakes, and charted a stronger path for the future where all Americans are treated with dignity and respect.”
