URBAN AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT

By Diane Johnston

Vol. 1, No. 6, 1979, pp. 26

“…they were ready to face the odds and fight for what they fervently believe in — the future of the family farmer.” That was how Atlanta Journal reporter Charles Seabrook described the atmosphere surrounding the American Agricultural Movement’s (AAM) tractorcade to the nation’s capitol this January. It was the farmers’ second trip to Washington to protest what they felt were unjustly low farm incomes. En route in January, the Southern contingent of the AAM stopped by the Southern Regional Council’s office to hold a press briefing for the Atlanta media. It was an attempt on their part to help the media understand their complaints and to offer them an opportunity to explain their position relative to the rest of the nation as consumers.

Those present included Alvin Jenkins of Colorado, one of the AAM’s four founders, and Tommy Kersey of Unadilla, Georgia. Kersey is considered to be the head of the Georgia Agricultural Movement. They were accompanied by a handful of other AAM members, from Alabama, Texas, and even Montana.

During the two-hour press session, the farmers presented their grievances. Basing their case on the need to preserve the family farm, they explained what they felt is happening to traditional agriculture today.

The small farms, according to the Movement, are being taken over and bought out by large conglomerates. These “agribusinesses” can raise food prices beyond the consumers’ control, while small farmers can help moderate prices, the representatives of the group told those present. They explained that it is the middleman: the food processor/distributor, who is raising the nation’s food bills. The farmers called upon consumers to join together with farmers to combat the unnecessary inflation that occurs between the time the produce leaves the farm and when it is purchased by the consumer.

The AAM also called for increased income to farmers. Objecting to their stereotyped “country hick” image, they said they have a right to own other commodities, just as American city or suburban dwellers do. But with current low farm incomes, and high land and machinery costs, the farmers say it is difficult to make ends meet, much less have extra money left over to spend on leisure activities.

Alvin Jenkins explained that with the current land and equipment inflation rates, his college-age son could start a farm, and with working more than eight hours a day, seven days a week, without a vacation, he would still never break even. At the same time, Jenkins’ daughter could get a forty-hour a week job in a professional field, get three weeks’ vacation and bring in a sizable income. Jenkins explained that this is very disheartening for the farmer who would like to see his offspring carry on the family tradition.

The farmers also suggested that, with 70 percent of America’s farm families deriving some income from off-farm sources, higher farm incomes would have another benefit. With better farm profits, off-farm workers could quit their jobs and return to the farm, thus opening job opportunities for others. Conversely, if farm prices continue their current trends, rural families will be forced to leave their land and emigrate to the cities. There, the AAM says, they will find themselves unemployed, with little else to do but join the Welfare rolls.

The American Agricultural Movement representatives outlined their plan to increase farmers’ wages. In addition to eliminating the middleman, the AAM calls for the Carter Administration to raise the price floor on American farm goods. Wearied by the speculative nature of the American agricultural market, they demanded that the Government “Get the Boom and Bust out of food prices, especially wheat products!’

Throughout the briefing, the farm group made reference to a need to return to “parity” or 90 percent of parity. This ambiguous term refers loosely to the buying power of a farmer’s goods, relative to the prices of other commodities. Essentially, parity would mean that whatever commodities could be purchased with the income from a bushel of wheat in the years 19101914, the same number of goods should be purchasable at today’s wheat prices. To do so, wheat prices should be raised to meet other commodity prices, the AAM says.

American Agriculture also emphasized the necessity of breaking down international tariff barriers. With a world-wide free market system, American farmers would have a larger, more stable demand for their products. Food could be offered to needy foreign countries at more reasonable rates, while American farmers would enjoy higher, more dependable profits for their goods.

After departing the SRC office, the delegation joined the other farmers on their tractorcade to Washington, D.C. The long trek, characterized by cold weather conditions, breakdowns, delays at toll roads and slow traveling, brought an angry group of farmers to the Capitol the week of February 5. Bad weather and poor public relations made for grim results. Displays of violence and the estimated $2 million damage done to the Mall will probably only hurt their cause. Secretary of Agriculture Bob Bergland gave the farmers a very unsympathetic reception, echoing the Carter Administration’s recent policy of cutbacks.

Perhaps by 1980, the group will have organized enough to lobby more effectively. Meanwhile, the future of the small farmer, and perhaps the American Agricultural Movement, remains uncertain.

EDUCATION: The Issue of Desegregation

By Diane Johnston

Vol. 1, No. 7, 1979, pp. 25

During a lively discussion on education at SRC’s recent Annual Meeting, panelist Jean Fairfax, director of education programs for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, remarked, “There is a lot more to the Brown case than school desegregation. It got us off the back of the bus into Colony Square.”

Fairfax’s comment characterizes the main issues addressed at the session, which began with Assistant Attorney General Drew 5. Days III outlining the complexities of the desegregation issues as he sees them from the Justice Department.

Days pointed out that desegregation goes beyond simply joining Black and White children in the classroom, and includes fair employment practices so that the faculty, as well as the student body, is integrated. Desegregation also covers discrimination by sex, and against the handicapped. He explained that too little has been done by the Justice Department and HEW in terms of coordinating their activities. As a result, Days said, there are currently about 250 discrimination cases pending, many without attorneys.

Director of the Southeast public education program for the American Friends Service Committee, Winifred Green, spoke next of the unfinished business of the last three decades. “The breakthroughs of 1964 and ’65 were clear-cut,” she said, “but today, equity is more complex,” She pointed out that migrants, bilingual students, the handicapped, school drop-outs and female students must be considered when dealing with educational equity.

Green warned against unfair but subtle practices that can keep disadvantaged students back. She cited the practice of “sidetracking” children who are labelled “not ready” for the first grade. These children are often lumped into a special class and kept from advancement in regular grades.

Attacking political and educational leaders who set policy, Green said there is too much educational rhetoric and not enough action. She further criticized lethargic law enforcement agencies. She called individuals and groups like the Southern Regional Council to investigate problems and to demand continued action.

“Don’t turn your backs on these issues,” Green cautioned, “just because they are hard to understand, less visible than they were in the sixties, or because they’re hard to work with. We must all work for changes.”

Jean Fairfax concluded the formal presentation by addressing the issues of higher education. “Initially,” she began, “it was a major victory to achieve individual access for highly motivated Black students into higher education. Today, that is inadequate. Now we have to work on including Blacks as a group into the whole system.”

Fairfax showed the successes and failures of desegregation in higher education. For example, the numbers of full-time Black undergraduates in post-secondary education are increasing, as are the percentages of Blacks enrolled in predominantly White institutions. Also up are the numbers of 20-34-year-old Blacks enrolled as fulltime students.

Fairfax emphasized, however, that these gains may be unstable. She cited a decrease in Black enrollments in Virginia, questioning the possible ill effects of the minimum competency exams offered there. She also found discouraging figures in the distribution of Black students in the total school system. In some states, she pointed out, nearly half of the Black students enroll in only 2-year institutions and community colleges. The numbers of Blacks at so-called “flagship” institutions (large state universities, such as the University of Georgia at Athens), are not substantially increased. “We have to eliminate the disparities,” she said.

Fairfax questioned the adequacy of remedial programs, financial aid, and the effects of attitudes towards minorities. She also expressed concern over disproportionately low enrollment and graduation of minorities in certain key fields such as engineering, the sciences (including medicine, dentistry, and veterinary medicine), and law.

Fairfax argued, too, that universities and colleges, just as any large corporations, should be required to honor equal opportunity and fair employment laws. Black faculty members are not being hired at flagship institutions nor the smaller community colleges. For example, she said, except for a junior college in Atlanta, there are no Black presidents at predominantly White institutions in the South.

According to the NAACP leader, there is a need for a new perspective on an old problem: the role of the traditional Black institution in integration. Currently, HEW guidelines are supposed to encourage and enhance these schools with financial support; HEW certainly advises against closing or downgrading them. Fairfax, however, points out that in order to maintain and/or upgrade Black colleges, money has to be taken from funds designated for the mostlyWhite flagship institutions. She is concerned that we cannot have both since HEW appears unwilling to go that far.

During a question-and-answer period, the panelists entertained inquiries from the audience. Professor Bell Wiley of Emory University who moderated concluded the session.

Diane Johnston, a senior at Emory, recently completed an internship in the publications department at Southern Regional Council.