John Boyd is tired.

He's tired of having meetings with members of Congress. Tired of trying to talk with the Obama administration and the president himself. Tired of hearing people say that they sympathize with his effort to fight widespread and longtime discrimination by the federal government against the nation's black farmers.

But more importantly, he's tired of attending another funeral of an elderly black farmer, knowing full well that the man and woman never had the satisfaction of seeing the federal government honor its word and fund the $1.15 billion settlement stemming from a decades-long discrimination fight.

The settlement announcement between Boyd's group, the National Black Farmers Association, and the Obama administration stipulated that the money was to be paid by March 31, but Congress went on a recess without acting on the request.

This week, in between funerals of his dying membership, Boyd visited with the officials working with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, as well as President Obama, hoping someone would show some leadership and make the settlement a possibility.

Boyd even pushed the administration to grant the money on an emergency basis, but was told they would not support that effort, which would allow them to circumvent the congressional pay/go rules.

Yet all that has transpired is talk, but no action.

This whole battle began when a North Carolina charged that the U.S. Department of Agriculture had for decades denied service and equitable loans to African- American farmers compared with whites. The class-action lawsuit initially was settled by the Clinton administration, known as Pigford I, but not all claims met the original deadline. The second settlement, known as Pigford II, is the current case.

It's understandable that Congress doesn't want to add more to the growing U.S. deficit, but what about the enormous opportunities denied to these black farmers for years by the same federal government? These men and women weren't asking for a handout. They were using their own hands to till land, grow crops, provide a way of life to send their children to college, and grow and prosper like every American. But it was clear racism that denied them of that opportunity. Thousands of dollars were provided for white farmers to build and grow, and if they received any money at all, hundreds were thrown their way.

This generation of Americans, when confronted with the past sins of racism, often remark that slavery and Jim Crow was so long ago. But we are talking about men and women who have fought a racist system in the last 20 to 30 years. They are the victims of racism, so why should Congress continue to deprive them by not setting the money aside?

Again, had the USDA not systematically denied them the opportunities afforded to white farmers, had they treated all farmers the same way, this generation of Americans wouldn't have to be paying for the sins of the past.

But we are. And instead of ignoring their plight, Congress should say, "Enough is enough. We did wrong by them years ago. And it's time that we make it right."

No one will ever know the pain and agony of trying to eke out a living as a farmer, only to witness the loss of the land your parents and grandparents fought to keep in the family. But this continuing mistreatment of black farmers is shameful.

Every American, no matter their skin color, should demand that Congress stop playing games. How do you pay for it? Killing a few of those precious earmarks is a good start.

No more press releases. No more meetings. No more talk. All these men and women want is fairness. They didn't get it years ago, and surely deserve it now.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Roland Martin. Roland S. Martin, a CNN political analyst, is a nationally syndicated columnist and author of "Listening to the Spirit Within: 50 Perspectives on Faith," and the new book, "The First: President Barack Obama's Road to the White House." He is a commentator for TV One Cable Network and host of a Sunday morning news show.

By: Mary Mitchell

I owe black farmers a real debt of gratitude. Having come North to Chicago from Mississippi as a toddler, I have only vague recollections of farming.

I remember the biting bugs, the black dirt and the white balls of cotton plants that composed the workplace for poor people who sharecropped for a living.

I'm thankful that my parents fled the white-owned farms as soon as they could scrape up a train ticket North because it meant I was spared the ordeal of dragging a cotton sack.

But the black migration also meant black farmers who were left behind in places like Mississippi, Georgia, and Alabama had to do this back-breaking labor in a racist environment.

Farmers like Tim Pigford of North Carolina toughed it out.

In a 1999 profile by the Wall Street Journal, Pigford said officials at the U.S. Department of Agriculture had repeatedly sabotaged his efforts by delaying approval of operating loans until well into the planting season.

A USDA county lending committee also denied Pigford ownership loans.

"I didn't need anyone coming up to me and calling me 'nigger' to know what's going on. They didn't want a black man owning more than 40 acres and a mule," Pigford told the Wall Street Journal.

In 1995, on Pigford's 20th wedding anniversary, his house was seized by federal marshals.

Pigford is one of the original plaintiffs of what is known as the black farmers lawsuit.

Despite being subjected to blatant discrimination that made it impossible for black farmers to prosper like white farmers, these farmers fought to stay on the land.

Pigford's battle started in 1984.

By the time anyone would listen, Pigford estimates he had been to Washington 120 times trying to settle his complaints.

Last week, the Obama administration announced the settlement of a class-action lawsuit filed by black farmers against the federal agency.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said the settlement will bring to an end a "sordid chapter" at the USDA and "usher in a new era."

"There is also a major effort here within USDA to make sure we are doing what we need to do to avoid discrimination in hiring and promotion decisions," Vilsack said. "We are doing a very detailed review within USDA to reduce civil rights complaints."

The settlement affirms a 1999 agreement, known as the Pigford settlement, in which the federal government agreed to compensate black farmers for decades of discrimination.

In a written statement, President Obama urged "swift resolution" of the issue and applauded the USDA for bringing these "long-ignored claims of African-American farmers to a rightful conclusion."

Congress will have to approve the $1.25 billion settlement. Farmers who file on a so-called fast-track could receive up to $50,000. Others who file a more extensive claim could be compensated up to $250,000.

It is likely a coincidence that the settlement was announced during Black History Month.

As a U.S. senator from Illinois, Obama played a key role in getting $100 million for black farmers in the 2008 Farm Bill.

Vilsack noted that resolving the discrimination claims was a priority for both the president and for U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder.

Even so, this would be a good time to inform a younger generation about the contributions black farmers have made.

It would truly be disheartening if this settlement were to be dirtied up by Obama's critics.

This is not reparations.

But given the bitterness that has blinded some members of Congress, expect some ugly rhetoric.

Try not to take it personally. Most likely, many of the farmers who once desired to play a role in shaping America's food system have fled the fields, just as my parents did many years ago.

Today, whites operate more than 72,000 Illinois farms. The number of black farmers in Illinois is pegged at less than one in 1,000.

There's no way to make up for the harm that was done to black farmers because there is no real way to compensate people for killing their dream.

But we cannot move on until we fully address our past wrongs.

Hopefully, a portion of the money awarded for this lawsuit will allow the children of these black farmers to pursue a new dream.

The discussion about the effectiveness and relevance of the Rooney Rule -- and whether Washington and Seattle drove armored trucks through its plate-glass window -- has been entertaining and enlightening the past two weeks.

The rule, which requires teams to interview at least one minority candidate before hiring a head coach or general manager, was adopted in 2003 with the hope of seeing more African-Americans hired as head coaches. Until six years ago, there had only been five in the league's modern history. Former commissioner Paul Tagliabue was hopeful that by expanding the search, owners would come across qualified minority candidates who might have been overlooked otherwise.

Yet Washington hired Bruce Allen within 48 hours of firing GM Vinny Cerrato. It also named Mike Shanahan, who had been linked to the club for months, head coach within two days of Jim Zorn's ouster. The Seahawks were only slightly less disingenuous; they waited three whole days before hiring Pete Carroll to replace the fired Jim Mora.

But give Seattle credit: At least it waited until after Mora was gone to fulfill the Rooney Rule requirement. Washington reportedly "interviewed" assistant coach Jerry Gray before telling Zorn he would be fired at the end of the season.

Commissioner Roger Goodell told the media last weekend that both franchises complied with the Rooney Rule. I wasn't there, so I have no idea if he said it with a straight face. But even if the teams followed the rule in a letter-of-the-law sense, they clearly violated the spirit of the rule. That got me wondering: Is the Rooney Rule still relevant or necessary?

Since the rule's adoption, seven African-American head coaches have been hired: Marvin Lewis in Cincinnati, Lovie Smith in Chicago, Romeo Crennel in Cleveland, Mike Tomlin in Pittsburgh, Jim Caldwell in Indianapolis, Raheem Morris in Tampa Bay, and Mike Singletary in San Francisco. They follow in the footsteps of modern-era predecessors Art Shell, Denny Green, Tony Dungy, Ray Rhodes and Herm Edwards.

"I would hope we're at the point where the Rooney Rule is not necessary," said Dungy, the former Colts coach and current NBC analyst. "But even if we are, there still some good things, some benefits that come from it. The biggest thing it has done, to me, is slow down the process and encourage people to look at a broad spectrum and interview a lot of different guys. That helps everyone. It helps the person who ended up getting the job, and it helps the person who was looking."

Dungy acknowledges there always will be franchises that clumsily side-step the rule or brazenly stiff-arm it, adding: "It's hard to legislate practice."

I am conflicted by the Rooney. The intent of it is good, but the execution is flawed. Perhaps the league could require a mandatory blackout on hirings for one week after a coach or general manager is fired. But that isn't going to stop "sham" interviews. And truthfully, if an owner knows he wants to hire an established, big-name coach, why should he have to sit through "interviews" that have no chance of changing his mind.

For the most part, the rule's biggest impact has been with organizations whose owners aren't known for spending extravagantly on head coaches, or with franchises that are in some form of financial crisis. For instance: Lewis went to the Bengals, Smith to the Bears and Tomlin to the Steelers. None of those organizations has a reputation for breaking a bank for its coaches.

Morris got his job with the Bucs, you could argue, because ownership was facing financial hardships. It still owed at least $20 million to coach Jon Gruden and the aforementioned Allen after firing them, and its outside investments, particularly in a European soccer team, reportedly was a financial drain on the Glazer family. Singletary received his break only after working half a season as the interim coach, following the firing of Mike Nolan.

Says Dungy: "Those frugal people, a lot of times, are old-time football people, so maybe the two go hand in hand. Maybe it's not that they're being frugal but thinking about football, as opposed to slash and dash. What's going to give me the best value? If I take the time to explore, maybe I will find someone who is really, really good. Maybe I could make a more informed decision. That was part of [Dan] Rooney's experience when he hired Mike [Tomlin]."

And therein lies the rub. The league can legislate as much as it wants, but franchises will always find a way to get around the rules -- particularly if Goodell isn't going to take as forceful a stance as Tagliabue did. Tagliabue once fined the Lions $200,000 for violating the Rooney Rule before hiring Steve Mariucci and threatened stiffer penalties if there were another offense.

Maybe the Redskins and the Seahawks were in compliance technically, but the Gray interview was a sham -- even if team, league and Fritz Pollard Alliance officials say otherwise. The Fritz Pollard Alliance was founded to promote the advancement of minority coaches and executives, and chairman John Wooten, whom I respect, says everything was on the up-and-up in both cases. Sorry, but there is too much circumstantial evidence to the contrary.

"I realize that the rule is not for everybody," Dungy says. "But it does help people that are truly looking and searching. If you have a closed mind and you decide before the process starts that this is the only guy I want, or I'm going to hire one of these two guys, then the rules that you have in place don't matter. But if you have an open mind and you say, 'Yeah, I really like Mike Shanahan and I think I'm going to hire him, but I'm going to interview some people and I'm going to hire the best person -- I think it's Mike Shanahan -- but I'm going to interview three or four people and figure it out,' then the rule helps you. I think it helped Dan Rooney because I don't think he went in with the thought process of hiring Mike Tomlin. Is the rule outdated? I don't know. But slowing down the process is good."

By: Steven Butler

This is a sad story. I am father of three sons. I can only imagine the emptyness this has left for this young man's family. I travel to New Orleans for work quite often. I have to say Katrina was a minor storm compared to the storm for the people in the crime infested communities. Some of the people have no way out. Katrina forced many of the citizens of New Orleans out, but in the case of James McKenzie his storm came and left him dead in an abandon house. I truly believe Katrina was a blessing for so many people who did not return to New Orleans. I have read the success stories in the Star Telegram of those families relocated to the DFW area. They have given their kids a chance and started better lives. James McKenzie is a victim of Katrina, but his Katrina walks around with his pants sagging and his cap turned backwards. His Katrina doesn't affect all races only those of African American Community between the ages of 15-24. Kirk Franklin sings a song called " The Storm is Over Now", but it's only the beginning of the storm for many of our young black men throughout American with the declining rates of young black men seeking higher education and soaring rates of these young men going to prison. We must wrap our arms around this generation to save the future of the Black Man in America if not the STORM WILL CONTINUE.

By: Daryl K. Washington

Let me start out by saying what Michael Vick did was wrong. But did he deserve to forfeit $130 million dollars, serve time in prison and upon his release be suspended for another four games? ABSOLUTELY NOT. What Martha Stewart, Rick Pitino, Michael Phelps, Marv Albert and others did was equally wrong. What's the difference? They were allowed to return to their prospective profession with plenty of support from their peers, fans and the Media without the forfeiture of millions of dollars. Michael Phelps recently received the ESPY's Male Athlete of the Year despite being caught with drugs on TAPE.

I'm somewhat confused why we only heard from individuals like Terrell Owens and a few of Vick's former Atlanta teammates during Vick's attempted return to the NFL. It often amazes me how so many athletes who have had to struggle to get to the point they are sit so idle as many of our Black Athletes are unfairly convicted and punished by the media, fans, team owners, criminal justice system and now the new NFL Commissioner, Roger Goodell.

Is it because they are afraid that if they took a stance against the many injustices that occur each and every day they would sacrifice the millions they make each year? Or, have the owners prohibited them from taking a political stance? Whatever the reason, the time is now for them to be a supporter of something besides self. I'm so happy that Martin Luther King, Thurgood Marshall, Rosa Parks, Muhammad Ali, Jim Brown and others were willing to sacrifice it all for the betterment of our society. Every Black Athlete should follow the lead of Tony Dungy as he stands side by side with Michael Vick upon his return to work.

Each day, I receive letters from individuals who have been victimized by the criminal justice system. So many of these individuals are innocent African Americans males who don't have the platform and resources to get their stories out. They would give the coats of their backs to cheer for one of the successful athletes but would our Black athletes do the same for them? Each and every day the cameras are placed into the face of so many influential and successful African American athletes yet I can count the times they've seized that moment to sacrifice the attention that is placed on them to take a stance against racial injustices. So many of our African American kids idolize these athletes yet I've not seen a public service announcement from our athletes to stop the violence in cities like Chicago and New Orleans.

I'm the first to say that we have many athletes who give back to the communities on a daily basis. However, money, although great, is not the solution to every problem. We need our African American athletes to demand that our athletes are not unfairly punished for simply making a mistake. We need our athletes to take a stance against the racial injustices occurring each day. There is no one in this world who can make me believe Donte' Stallworth was intentionally trying to kill 59-year-old crane operator Mario Reyes the morning of March 14 in Miami. In fact, the criminal justice system did not think so as reflected in his sentence. However, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell decided Donte’ Stallworth’s football punishment should last much longer than his 24 days in jail and cost him much more than the financial settlement he reached with the family. Stallworth was suspended without pay Thursday for the entire season. He is barred from team activities until he is reinstated after the Super Bowl. Despite that, Stallworth had the class to make the following statement: “Regardless of the length of my suspension, I will carry the burden of Mr. Reyes’ death for the rest of my life,” Stallworth said. “I urge NFL fans not to judge NFL players or me based on my tragic lapse in judgment. I am a good person who did a bad thing. I will use the period of my suspension to reflect, fulfill my obligations, and use this experience to make a positive impact on the lives of those who look up to NFL players.”

What happened to Donte' Stallworth and Michael Vick could happen to anyone. When Kobe Bryant was falsely accused of raping a lady in Colorado we had to listen to this on talk radio and on the news each and every day until the matter was settled. We heard about it so much until most people started to believe it. Some even stated that he should be banned from basketball. He was booed in every city he played in and treated poorly by the media, female advocacy groups and did not receive much support in the media from his peers. However, just recently a woman filed a similar lawsuit accusing Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger of rape. Despite the seriousness of the charges, this is what was said about the incident: The Steelers and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said they were looking into the allegations against Roethlisberger. Goodell went on to say that "I don't know enough of the details, but it's a civil lawsuit. It's something that we obviously will look into."

Not one mention of suspension pending the investigations of the serious allegations. I have not seen one female advocacy group come forward protesting the commissioner's decision to allow Roethlisberger to play despite these serious allegations. This is what we've come to, the rights of ladies, when they are allegedly violated by non African American athletes, are not as important as the rights of dogs. I'm a huge supporter of Roethlisberger and believe he should not be prosecuted in the media for something he may have not done; however, the same support that is given to white athletes should be given to black athletes who are largely responsible for the billions of dollars generated in our economy each year.

The fans and media call athletes and entertainers like Terrell Owens and Snoop Dogg selfish and strange. I say thanks to the two of them for having the courage to support others during their struggles. Never judge someone because you can one day be in a similar position that Vick was in. I will say to our Black athletes who fail to take a stance against the racial injustices to remember the great lyrics written by the late Michael Jackson in his song entitled "Man in the Mirror." Michael stated in the song that "I'm gonna make a change, for once in my life. It's gonna feel real good, gonna make a difference Gonna make it right... "As I, turn up the collar on my favorite winter coat, This wind is blowin' my mind. I see the kids in the street, with not enough to eat. Who am I, to be blind? Pretending not to see their needs. A summer's disregard, a broken bottle top And a one man's soul. They follow each other on the wind ya' know 'Cause they got nowhere to go. That's why I want you to know "I'm starting with the man in the mirror, I'm asking him to change his ways."

Daryl K. Washington is an attorney specializing in complex Commercial Litigation, Business Transactions and Sports and Entertainment Law. Daryl utilizes his experience as a former certified contract advisor with the National Football League to serve as a consultant to athletes in their selection of an agent to represent them in contract negotiations. If you have any questions, you can email Daryl at dwashington@dwashlawfirm.com or call him at 214-880-4883.