The Congressional Pen our US House of Representatives and the “Peoples Department” - USDA

Dear Members of the House Agriculture Committee and their American constituents

We, The Beginning Farmers Coalition (TBFC), write with urgency and a clear sense of purpose about the fundamental role of the Department of Agriculture (USDA) in shaping a just and productive national food system.

The primary instrument of federal support—the Congressional Pen, through appropriation—has long allocated resources to the USDA in ways that, in practice, often privilege well-connected, well-capitalized interests.

For decades, marginalized communities and small- to mid-scale producers across all 50 states and six U.S. territories have faced barriers to meaningful access. Programs intended to uplift, diversify, and democratize farming have, at times, operated as gatekeepers, masking inequality behind bureaucratic complexity, stringent eligibility criteria, and capital requirements that many aspiring farmers simply cannot meet.

This inequity is not incidental. It is systemic. When funding decisions are made with insufficient emphasis on inclusivity, the USDA’s mission—to support all producers who feed and service our citizens—becomes selective rather than universal.

The consequences are not only moral but practical: a farm sector that lacks diversity in ownership and perspective, a rural economy that remains underdeveloped, and a national food system less resilient to shocks. If the public dollars entrusted to the USDA are to fulfill their promise, they must be deployed with deliberate and enforceable safeguards that ensure opportunity is accessible to all aspiring farmers, ranchers, and value-add businesses, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, immigration status, disability, geography, or wealth.

Foremost, the Congressional Pen must be used to promote broad-based inclusion, not to entrench advantage. The presumption should be that competitive access, rather than historical allocations or “set-asides,” governs program eligibility. We propose that set-asides—such as dedicating a fixed percentage of funding to marginalized groups—must be replaced or accompanied by transparent, merit- and need-based criteria that are consistently applied across programs. The goal is to ensure a level playing field where all producers have a fair path to participate, innovate, and scale. Programs should be designed so that language barriers, capital gaps, and startup uncertainties do not bar entry. The cost of entry—fees, documentation, required collateral, and technical jargon—must be minimized or, where appropriate, subsidized, with robust support help desks, multilingual guidance, and accessible technical assistance.

To achieve real equity, strong and continuous oversight by the House Agriculture Committee is indispensable. Oversight must verify that appropriated funds are reaching the intended beneficiaries and that outcomes reflect broad participation. We request the Committee to condition USDA funding on rigorous reporting, including disaggregated data by race, ethnicity, gender, disability status, geography, and farm size, so progress toward inclusivity can be measured and corrected. Oversight should also examine the efficiency and effectiveness of programs—whether they reduce entry barriers, foster sustainable farming practices, and support local supply chains that benefit diverse communities. If a program fails to deliver inclusive outcomes, funding should not be perpetuated simply because it exists on a spreadsheet; it must be restructured, redesigned, or, if necessary, sunsetted.

The problem is not only whether programs exist, but whether producers can qualify to participate. Eligibility criteria—credit scores, collateral, operating histories, or complex certifications—often favor established farmers and well-resourced corporations. Yet agriculture thrives on new ideas, small-scale experimentation, and community-based approaches.

Marginalized producers—including Black, Indigenous, and people of color; immigrant and refugee farmers; women-led operations; veterans; and farmers with limited access to capital—bring essential perspectives and resilience to the national food system.

When the system excludes these voices, we lose not only equity but innovation, regional responsiveness, and food sovereignty. A policy framework that places entry costs at a barrier heightens the risk of market consolidation, dependence on a few large players, and a fragile agricultural ecosystem.

TBFC advocates for concrete improvements in how USDA programs are funded and administered to expand opportunity.

Key recommendations include:


Mandatory outreach and application assistance: Programs should be accompanied by robust, multilingual outreach and dedicated personnel to guide applicants through the process, clarifying eligibility, requirements, and timelines.

Streamlined application processes: Simplify forms, reduce redundant documentation, and offer one-stop portals that integrate data sharing across relevant agencies to minimize friction for new entrants.

Flexible workforce and technical assistance: Provide sustained technical assistance (training, business planning, mentorship) to emerging farmers, so that readiness is built before funding decisions are made, not after.

Accessible financing: Where credit is necessary, create non-traditional financing options, guaranteed loans, and micro-grant opportunities that accommodate smaller-scale operations and start-ups without compromising program integrity.

Local and regional considerations: Tailor program design to reflect regional agricultural systems, climate conditions, and market opportunities, ensuring that local context informs eligibility and funding priorities.

Accountability and sunset provisions: Establish clear performance metrics tied to inclusivity, with regular sunset and redesign reviews to prevent mission creep and to realign resources with evolving needs.

Equity must extend beyond access to funding; it must permeate program design. Language access, cultural relevance, and community partnerships are essential. Programs should support BIPOC, immigrant, and women-led farms by recognizing the unique barriers they face—land access, lease arrangements, inheritance patterns, and capital access—and by offering targeted assistance to overcome them. We also recognize the importance of data privacy and community consent when collecting information from marginalized groups. Data collection should be transparent, with protections to prevent misuse and unintended discrimination, and participation should be voluntary where appropriate.

The House Agriculture Committee, endowed with the power of oversight and appropriations, can—through principled action—redefine how taxpayer dollars buoy agriculture across our diverse nation. We urge the Committee to codify a standard of equitable access in all programs and to require quarterly public reporting on progress toward inclusion. We envision a USDA that not only distributes funds but also demonstrates measurable improvement in the participation of marginalized producers. Such a shift would strengthen rural economies, diversify the agricultural landscape, and fortify national food security against shocks, supply chain disruptions, and climate-related risks.

In closing, the Congressional Pen is not a tool of narrow advantage; it is a stewardship mandate. The funds we entrust to the USDA must be allocated and overseen in ways that reflect the democratic values of opportunity and fairness.

Marginalized communities should not be relegated to the margins of opportunity or the margins of the policy debate. They belong at the center of our agricultural future—at work on small farms, in cooperative models, and within diversified value chains that feed families and communities across the country. The House Agriculture Committee has the authority and the obligation to ensure that all producers and businesses who feed and service our citizens have equal footing when it comes to public resources and a fair chance to contribute to a resilient, vibrant, and just agricultural sector.

We respectfully request that the Committee adopt a framework of transparent oversight, inclusive access, and continuous improvement for USDA funding. By doing so, you will honor the promise of American democracy and the practical imperative of a robust, equitable, and sustainable food system for all.

Sincerely,

The Beginning Farmers Coalition (TBFC)