If you are a white male farmer who has received EQUIP funds from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the feds may have been costing you dollars.

A recent piece from the Wall Street Journal editorial board states women and minority farmers have been getting a better deal than most white male farmers.

USDA Favoritism

Adam Faust, a Calumet country Wisconsin dairy farmer, determined that he had been harmed by USDA programs that offered race or sexual preferences when it came to allocating financial benefits. This was not only true with EQUIP payments for conservation benefits, but also for the Dairy Margin Coverage Program that is used to cover fluctuations in milk prices.

In the case of the milk program, USDA charged him a fee that wasn’t required by dairymen who USDA designated as “socially disadvantaged.” Plus, Faust received a smaller program guarantee when he refinanced the loan than would have been given to women or minority farmers.

When Faust applied for EQUIP funds to develop a manure storage system, he found he would receive a lower payment than “socially disadvantaged” farmers.

Constitution Violation

In June of 2005 with the help of the Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, Faust sued USDA. The lawsuit stated these programs violated the Constitution’s equal protection clause.

Soon after the lawsuit was filed, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins eliminated nearly 145 DEI programs in the department. And recently, the federal government’s Office of Legal Counsel ruled the agency can stop enforcing “socially disadvantaged” preferences in federal statutes.

So it’s likely many no-tillers and others were “shafted” by USDA when  it came to qualifying for EQUIP funds.