New Farm Bill Bans Race and Sex Criteria in USDA Programs: What It Means for Loans and Crop Insurance

The “No Discrimination in Farm Programs Act” is short and to the point: it mandates that the Secretary of Agriculture must stop using criteria based on race or sex when making decisions about a huge chunk of federal farm support programs. The bill requires that these programs be administered based on “fairness, equal opportunity, and merit” instead.

The Fine Print: Which Programs Are We Talking About?

This isn’t just about one small grant program. This bill casts a wide net, affecting nearly every major financial lifeline the USDA offers. If you’re a farmer, rancher, or anyone involved in agriculture, this touches your bottom line. Specifically, it applies to crucial programs like the Federal Crop Insurance program, which protects your farm from natural disasters, and various indemnity payment programs (SEC. 2).

It also hits all the big conservation efforts, including the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) and the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program, which often provide payments for environmental stewardship. Furthermore, all farm loan programs—the ones that help new farmers buy land or existing ones cover operating costs—are included, along with pandemic assistance funds that helped producers weather the COVID-19 crisis. Basically, if the USDA is cutting a check or guaranteeing a loan, this new rule applies.

The Policy Shift: Merit vs. Equity

On the surface, requiring decisions to be based on “merit” and “equal opportunity” sounds like a simple win for fairness. The goal is to ensure that everyone, regardless of demographic background, competes on a level playing field for federal support. For a farmer who felt they were overlooked because of specific diversity targets, this could be seen as leveling the field and focusing only on the quality of their application or their need.

However, this is where policy gets complicated. Over the last few decades, the USDA has faced significant criticism and lawsuits regarding systemic discrimination against minority farmers—Black, Indigenous, and women farmers, for example—who historically struggled to access loans and aid. Some existing USDA policies and programs have used race or sex criteria specifically to address these historical inequities and ensure that historically marginalized groups finally get equitable access to resources.

The Real-World Impact: Who Feels the Change?

If this bill passes, the USDA would no longer be able to use race or sex as a factor, even if the intent was to remedy past discrimination or target historically underserved communities. For a young woman trying to start a farm, or a minority producer who relies on targeted outreach and specific programs designed to overcome systemic barriers, this change could make accessing capital and resources harder. It effectively removes a tool that was used to measure and enforce equity in program distribution.

Take, for instance, a farm loan program. Under the new rule, the USDA can no longer have specific goals or set-asides based on race or sex, even if data shows that these groups are still disproportionately denied loans compared to others. The decisions must only be based on the application’s “merit.” The challenge here is that “merit” in a system with historical bias often ends up reinforcing the status quo, even if unintentionally. The bill aims for colorblind administration, but critics argue that you can’t achieve true fairness without addressing the structural disadvantages that still exist in the system.