The problems which Senate bill 4808 is designed come remedy have been, and also still are, unsatisfactory in plenty of cases. No one deserve to deny the the prices of numerous farm commodities have been out of line through the general price level for several years. No one can fail to want every ideal step required to assure to farming a just and also secure location in our economic scheme. Reasonable and constructive law to that end would be thoroughly justified and also would have the hearty assistance of every who have actually the understanding of the country at heart. The an obstacle with this details measure is that it is no framed to assist farmers as a whole, and also it is, furthermore, calculated to injure fairly than promote the basic public welfare.

You are watching: Mcnary-haugen farm relief bill

It is axiomatic that progress is made through building on the an excellent foundations that already exist. For numerous years—indeed, from prior to the job of modern-day agricultural science—balanced and also diversified farming has actually been related to by kind farmers and also scientists together the safeguard of ours agriculture. The bill under factor to consider throws this aside as of no consequence. It says in impact that all the farming scientists and all the reasoning farmers the the last fifty years space wrong, the what us ought to execute is no to encourage diversified agriculture but instead put a premium top top one-crop farming. The measure up discriminates definitely versus products which consist of what has been universally considered a regimen of for sure farming. The invoice upholds as ideals of American farming the guys who grow cotton, corn, rice, swine, tobacco, or wheat, and also nothing else. These are to be provided special favors in ~ the price of the farmer who has actually toiled for years to build up a constructive farming companies to include a selection of crops and also live stock the shall, so much as possible, be safe, and keep the soil, the farmer"s chief asset, fertile and also productive.

The bill singles the end a couple of products, chiefly sectional, and proposes come raise the price of those nevertheless of the reality that thousands of various other farmers would certainly be straight penalized. If this is a true farm-relief measure, why does it leave the end the producer of beef, cattle, sheep, dairy products products, poultry products, potatoes, hay, fruit, vegetables, oats, barley, rye, flax and the other important agricultural lines? So much as the farmers together a entirety are concerned, this measure up is no for them. It is for particular groups of farmers in certain sections the the country. Can it be assumed that such legislation could have the sanction of the rank and record of the nation"s farmers? This measure offers specifically because that the payment by the commonwealth board of every losses, costs and charges that packers, millers, cotton spinners, or various other processors who are operating under contract v the board. The contemplates that the packers might be commissioned by the government to purchase hogs sufficient to develop a close to scarcity in this country, slaughter the hogs, market the pork commodities abroad in ~ a loss, and also have their losses, costs and also charges made good out the the pockets of farm yard taxpayers. The millers would certainly be similarly commissioned to run in wheat or corn and also have your losses, costs and charges paid by farm yard taxpayers.

It is around estimated that in this country there are 4,000 millers, end 1,000 meat-packing plants, and about 1,000 yes, really spinners. No one can say absolutely after reading this bill whether each of these involves would be licensed has been granted to obtain a contract v the Government. Definitely no independent problem could proceed in company without one. Each of the organ holding a contract—the efficient and inefficient alike—would it is in reimbursed for all your losses, costs and charges. The seems nearly incredible that the producer of hogs, corn, wheat, rice, tobacco and also cotton need to be available a plan of legislative relief in i beg your pardon the just persons who room guaranteed a profit room the exporters, packers, millers, noodle spinners and also other processors.

Clearly this legislation requires Governmental addressing of prices. It provides the proposed commonwealth board nearly unlimited authority to resolve prices ~ above the designated commodities. This is price fixing, furthermore, on some of the nation"s simple foods and also materials. Nothing is an ext certain than that together price solving would upset the typical exchange relationship existing in the open up market and also that that would lastly have come be expanded to sheathe a multitude of other goods and services. Government price fixing, as soon as started, has actually alike no justice and also no end. The is an economic folly from which this country has every appropriate to it is in spared.

This law proposes, in effect, the Congress shall delegate come a commonwealth Farm Board, nominated through farmers, the strength to fix and collect a tax, called an equalization fee, on details products developed by those farmers. That certainly contemplates a impressive delegation the the counting power. The function of that tax, it might be repeated, is to salary the losses occurs in the disposition the the surplus products in order come raise the price on that part of the products consumed by our very own people. This so-called equalization dues is no a taxation for purposes of revenue in the welcomed sense. That is a taxation for the special benefit of particular groups. As a straight tax on particular of the critical necessaries of life it represents the many vicious form of taxation. The real effect is an employed of the coercive powers of government to the end that certain special groups of farmers and also processors might profit temporarily in ~ the expense of various other farmers and of the ar at large.

The chef objection to the bill is the it would certainly not benefit the farmer. Whatever may be the temporary affect of arbitrary interference, no one deserve to deny that in the long run prices will be administrate by the legislation of supply and also demand. To intend to boost prices and then to keep them ~ above a higher level by way of a arrangement which need to of necessity rise production while decreasing usage is to fly in the challenge of an financial law as well established as any kind of law of nature. Experience shows that high prices in any given year mean greater acreage the following year. This does no necessarily average a larger crop the following year, due to the fact that adverse weather problems may develop a smaller chop on a bigger acreage, yet in the long run a constantly enhancing acreage must of necessity typical a bigger average crop.

Under the economic stimulation of high prices, the noodle acreage increased by 17,000,000 acre in the last five years. Under the proposed plan, as prices are driven up irresistibly by the fabricated demand created by the purchase of the board, the millions of farmers, each exhilaration independently, through no assurance that self-restraint top top his component in the common interest will certainly be attach by a prefer restraint on the part of numerous other people scattered end this tremendous country, will do simply what any one else would perform under the circumstances, plant and grow every they have the right to in stimulate to take it full benefit of a situation which they are afraid is just temporary. This was, that course, recognized by the authors of the measure; and also they proposed initially to counter this propensity by means of the equalization fee to be payment by each producer. But in the present bill the equalization fees is to be paid by only component of the producers.

On the other hand, higher prices will certainly make a reduced consumption. From 1917 to 1925 the per capita consumption of pork enhanced from 55 pounds to 86.3 pounds, yet in the adhering to year, when the price that pork climbed by $3.60 a hundred and the price that beef rose only 40 cents a hundred, the every capita consumption of pork dropped off almost nine pounds.

It is not inconceivable the the consumers would certainly rebel in ~ an arbitrarily high price and also deliberately alleviate their consumption of that particular product, specifically as uncontrolled substitutes would always be available. The reality is that there is no such point as effective partial control. To have efficient control, we would need to have manage of not just one food product but of every substitutes. Enhanced production ~ above the one hand, combination with lessened domestic usage on the other, would mean an enhanced exportable excess to be dumped ~ above the human being market. This subsequently would median a constantly decreasing human being price until the allude was got to where the human being price to be sufficiently short so that, even though raised by our tariff duties, products would flow into this nation in large quantities.

A plank of twelve males are granted almost unlimited regulate of the agricultural industry and also can not just fix the price which the producer of five commodities shall receive for your goods, but can additionally fix the price i beg your pardon the consumer of the country shall pay for these commodities. The plank is intended to obtain higher prices because that the American farmer by removing the excess from the home market and also dumping it overseas at a below-cost price. To perform this, the board is given the government by implication to deal with the domestic price level, one of two people by means of contract which it may make v processors or cooperatives, or by providing for the acquisition of the assets in such quantities as will carry the prices up to the suggest which the board may fix.

Except as it might be restrained by are afraid of international importations, the farm board, created of to represent of producers, is given the strength to fix the price of this necessities the life at any suggest it look at fit. The law fixes no standard, imposes no restrictions, and also requires no regulation of any type of kind. There could be no appeal native the arbitrary decision of this men, who would be under constant pressure from your constituents to push prices as high together possible. To mean moderation under these scenarios is to ignore experience and credit person nature with qualities it does not possess.

It is not so long since the federal government was spending vast sums and also through the department of righteousness exerting every initiative to rest up combinations the were increasing the cost of life to a point conceived to it is in excessive. This bill, if it perfect its purpose, will raise the price the the specified agricultural commodities come the highest feasible point and also in doing so the board will operate without any type of restraints enforced by the anti-trust laws. The giving of any type of such arbitrary strength to a government board is to run counter to our traditions, the approach of ours Government, the soul of ours institutions, and also all ethics of equity.

The bureaucratic difficulties connected are sufficient to wreck the plan. No matter how straightforward an economic conception may be, its applications on a large scale in the modern-day world is attended by unlimited complexities and difficulties. The principle underlying this bill, even if it is fallacious or not, is an easy and basic to state; however no one has actually outlined in definite and also detailed terms how the rule is come be lugged out in practice. How can the plank be expected to lug out after ~ the enactment of the regulation what deserve to not even be defined prior come its passage? In the meanwhile, present channels and methods of distribution and marketing should be serious dislocated. This is even more apparent as soon as we take into factor to consider the difficulty of administering the repertoire of the equalization fee. The bureau says that the fee will have to be accumulated either from the processors or the transportation companies, and also dismisses together impracticable collection at the point of sale. In the case of transportation carriers it points the end the enormous difficulties of collecting the fee in see of the possibility of shipping commodities by unregistered vehicles.

In so far as processors are concerned, it estimates the number at 6,632, without considering the number of factories engaged in the company of canning corn or manufacturing food commodities other than millers. Part conception the the size of the task might be had actually when we take into consideration that if the wheat, the corn and the cotton crops had been under procedure in the year 1925, arsenal would have been compelled from an accumulation of 16,034,466,679 units. The bureau states that it will certainly be impossible to collection the equalization dues in full.

The bill will certainly not succeed in giving a practical an approach of regulating the agricultural surplus, which lies at the heart of the whole problem. In the issue of controlling output, the farmer is in ~ a disadvantage as compared with the manufacturer. The latter is much better able come gauge his market, and in the face of falling prices have the right to reduce production. The farmer, on the other hand, should operate end a longer period of time in creating his crops and is topic to weather conditions and also disturbances in civilization markets which have the right to never be well-known in advance.

In trying to uncover a equipment for this basic problem the the surplus, the current bill uses no constructive suggestion. That seeks just to increase the prices payment by the consumer, through the inevitable an outcome of stimulating production on the component of the farmer and decreasing consumption on the component of the public. It ignores the fact that manufacturing is curbed only by decreased, not increased, prices. In the finish the equalization fee and the entire machinery listed by the bill under consideration will merely aggravate problems which space the cause of the farmer"s present distress.

We must be mindful in do the efforts to help the farmer no to jeopardize the whole agricultural industry by subjecting it to the tyranny of bureaucratic regulation and control. The is what the current bill will do. But, aside from every this, no man have the right to foresee what the result on our financial life will be of disrupting the long-established and delicately readjusted channels the commerce. That it will be far-ranging is undeniable, no one is it beyond the selection of possibility that the existing bill, if enacted into law, will certainly threaten the very basis the our national prosperity, with dislocation, the slowing up of industry, and also the disruption of the farmer"s house market, i m sorry absorbs 90 every cent that his products.

With the restricted number of farm yard cooperatives v whom contracts might be created surplus disposal and also the truth that farm cooperatives are not likely to be involved in meat packing, flour-milling or noodle spinning, that appears particular that the largest part of these contracts need to be made between the board and the processors and also other agencies. It means that the totality contract in swine, because that instance, have to be carried out with the meat packers; the a big part the wheat operations must be carried out through flour millers, wheat exporters and also others. It method that any establishment which has actually such a contract can charge what the likes to our American consumers because it can place the loss from any product unsalable at residence on the farmer or the government by dumping the abroad. In actual working this is a finish guarantee the the revenues of these comes to without restraint or limitation ~ above profiteering against American consumers, of which the farmer self is a very large element. That is not a insurance to the farmer. The implications of this were stated in significant remarks in the minority report the the home Committee on Agriculture, i beg your pardon merits fuller attention 보다 it has been given:

The quiet of the bulk report on this phase of the subject, in check out of its vast circulation in the farming neighborhoods of the country, can be only due to the fact that the proponents of the bill room unwilling the the farmers of the nation shall learn that the is proposed that the equalization fee principle shall be used to guarantee to the packers what they have actually not to be able to gain for themselves—a specific profit indigenous every year"s operation.

The supporters of the invoice at the hearings conceded that it might not run as to animals except under a contract through the packers. That incidentally follows that no packer without a contract might operate v the board. The bill nowhere protects the independent packer. It does provide that there shall it is in no discrimination between cooperative associations. It consists of no like provisions as to processors.

The bill would impose the burden of its support to a big degree top top farmers who would not benefit by it. The products embraced in the arrangement are only about one-third of the complete American farm productions. The farmers who thrive these assets are themselves large consumers of them, and every farmer consumes some of them. There are several million farmer who do not produce any of the designated products, or very small of them, and also they need to pay the premiums ~ above the commodities designated in the bill. In some commodities, such as com and mill feed, the farmer are virtually the single consumers. That is proposed to rise the price the corn and mill feeding to American farmers, and therefore the prices to the dairy and also cattle feeding markets whose commodities are omitted indigenous the bill. Beyond this, it appears that through dumping that American feeds abroad at lower prices 보다 those charged under this arrangement to the American swine, cattle and dairy farmer, we should be straight subsidizing foreign production the pork, dairy, beef and also other pet products in competition v our own farmers in the markets of the world. Us shall send cheap noodle abroad and also sell high cotton at home.

The result of this arrangement will be repeatedly to stimulate American production and to pile up boosting surpluses past the world demand. Us are currently overproducing. It has been claimed that the arrangement would just be provided in the emergency that occasional surplus which above depresses the price. No such limitations are inserted in the bill. However on the various other hand, the definition of excess is the "surplus over residential requirements," and also as us have had such a surplus in many of the products covered in the invoice for fifty years and also will have actually for years to come that means constant action.

It is said that by the automatic rise of the equalization fee to accomplish the enhancing losses on enlarged dumping of raising surplus the there would be restraint top top production. This have the right to prove reliable only after so an excellent an increase in production as will greatly enlarge our exports on every the commodities except cotton. Through such increased surpluses dumped indigenous the United claims on to foreign markets the human being prices will be damaged down and with lock American prices upon which the premium is based will an in similar way be lower to the allude of complete disaster to American farmers. It is impossible to see exactly how this bill have the right to work.

Several of our foreign markets have agriculture of their own to protect and they have laws in pressure which might be applied to dumping and also we may expect reprisals from them against dumping farming products which will even more diminish our international markets.

The bill is essentially a price addressing bill, since in valuable working the board must arrive in some means at the premium price which will certainly be demanded indigenous the American consumer, and it should fix these prices in the contracts at i beg your pardon it will authorize purchase by flour millers, packers, various other manufacturers, and also such cooperatives as may be used, for the board must formulate a basis upon which the board will certainly pay casualty on the fiddle of their surplus.

The current volume of exports of the products designated in the bill is one and one-half exchange rate dollars every annum. A multitude of contracts entailing scores of various grades and qualities and also varieties of commodities with thousands of individuals, both because that raw and also manufactured materials, need to be entered into—practically cost-plus contracts. The monetary volume of this contracts will certainly be additional expanded past even this sum due to the fact that in hogs, for instance, the exports are in the main lard and also bacon, while other parts of the animal are consumed at home, and thus contracting must apparently require cover all hogs, no the export excess alone. Because of this the bill method an enormous structure up the Government administration to let and inspect these billions the dollars the contracts v all your infinite range of terms covering different goods and also their different grades and qualities. In turn, all of the contract of resales through these establishments must it is in examined and checked to recognize the accident made.

Parallel with it one more bureaucracy have to be gathered to collect and distribute the equalization fee. It all calls for an aggregation of administration dominating the fortunes that American farmers, intruding into their affairs and also offering infinite opportunities to fraud and also incapacity. It does no replace any kind of middlemen or manufacturers; it way that thousands of officials are collection to watch them and also the farmer to see that they perform not evade the requirements. Among our obstacles today is the great spread between the farmer and the consumer. All these increased processors" profits and this expense of administration must simply add to this spread without bringing to the farmer any kind of return on together items. In fact, as he is a big consumer he likewise pays this.

While the federal government is not directly buying or selling these commodities, it should under this bill let contracts for others to perform so and name therein the terms upon which they shall buy and also sell. No matter exactly how disguised, this in plain terms is federal government buying and also selling of commodities through agents.

It is proposed the the administration of this setup shall be in the manage of a board whose members space nominated come the president by agricultural organizations for his transmission to the Senate because that confirmation. That appears to be an unconstitutional limitation on the government of the President, but, far much more important 보다 this, I carry out not believe that upon serious consideration the farmer of America would certainly tolerate the criterion of a human body of men chosen solely by one sector who, exhilaration in the name of the Government, chandelier arrange for contracts which identify prices, certain the buying and selling of commodities, the levy of count on that industry, and also pay casualty on foreign dumping of any surplus.

There is no reason why various other industries—copper, coal, lumber, textiles and others—in every occasional an obstacle should not receive the exact same treatment through the Government. Such activity would establish bureaucracy on such a scale regarding dominate not just the financial life but the moral, social and also political future of our people. The quantity of the equalization fees, the method of collection and also disposition of these good sums the money space to be determined by the plank without any kind of effective check or review from the executive or Congress—a delegation of strength under which our form of federal government cannot continue.

No time border is placed upon the contracts which the board might make. Such contracts can easily be because that a ax of years and in some commodities, as, because that example, noodle at the present time, should necessarily be for a considerable period since the excess cannot be disposed of in a solitary year. Throughout the continuance of any kind of such contract, the equalization fee must continue to be levied unless the totality burden that a proceeding operation is to be borne by the producers of the first crop. Consequently the suggestion frequently made the the scheme should be tried, and if it fails be repealed, loses all force.

This tip is faulty in an additional respect, namely, that failure would be demonstrated only by the buildup of a substantial surplus in storage. The discontinuance of operations, if a large supply continued to be in storage, would result in a an extensive depression that price through the surplus being fed into the markets or through fear of that sale.

While the invoice authorizes one appropriation of $250,000,000, it stops working to restrict the contracts of the plank within that sum and also nowhere denies the legal responsibility of the United states for additional sums of money. If the board had started operating in the 1925 cotton chop when prices were roughly 20 cents a pound and also had climate attempted to host up the price on the 1926 chop at a level i beg your pardon induced the picking of the whole crop, the entirety $250,000,000 would have been spent and good commitments beyond that number have been gone into into. The allocation the $100,000,000 to noodle in last year"s bill, add to the said fee of $5 a bale, would have actually been completely exhausted long before the 1926 chop came into the market. And, if the equalization fee must prove unconstitutional or otherwise uncollectible, the Treasury would have been cursed by contract to a legal responsibility to the extent of the totality revolving fund.

Apart native the need of contracting v the packers, the bill confers ~ above the board countless power as to the nature, extent and also duration of contracts with various other processors. The does not even enjoin an lack of "unreasonable" discrimination between them, although it does prohibit "unreasonable" discrimination in between cooperatives. The board would thus possess an absolute strength of life and death over plenty of legitimate company organizations, since none can compete versus a processor enjoy it a contract v the board protecting it versus loss. The board can go unlimitedly right into processing for its very own account, if that so desired. No such unrestricted strength have ever before been conferred upon any type of board.

The insurance allowance proposal amounts to a directly Government covenant to pay to the cooperative associations any kind of loss i beg your pardon they may incur in withholding products from the market—no matter how high the price might go in the meantime. For example, a wheat participating may, in a year that shortage, take wheat from a member top top a day when it is marketing at $2.50 a bushel. Under this bill it might decide to organize it for $3 however be insured that if the market breaks the federal government will salary it the difference between $2.50 and also the price at which the participating actually handle of the wheat. Nothing much more destructive of all orderly processes of trade might be imagined, and nothing an ext unfair come the nonmember that the cooperative, because his equalization fee would certainly be used to pay the losses.

Let us see just how the bill is to be put into operation. This act gives that prior to operations as to any kind of one of these assets shall start it shall be important to acquire an expression native the producer of the commodity with a state convention of together producers. This applies in any type of state whereby not so numerous as 50 every cent of the producers of the details commodity are members of cooperative associations or other organizations. The finest estimate that deserve to be make is the this would use to every state in the Union. I quote indigenous the document with referral to this provision to present that this building was provided to it. The Congressional record of February 11, web page 3602, reads as follows:

Mr. McKellar—Immediately complying with that amendment i offer an additional amendment on instead of of the an elderly Senator from phibìc Carolina (Mr. Simmons), * * *

The vice President—The amendment will certainly be stated.

The chief Clerk—On web page 8, line 16, after words "commodity," insert the following proviso:

Provided, the in any kind of state where not as plenty of as 50 per cent of the producers of the commodity space members of such cooperative associations or various other organizations, one expression native the producers of the commodity shall be obtained through a state convention of such producers, to be called by the head that the department of agriculture of such state, under rules and also regulations prescribed through him.

Mr. Reed that Missouri—Mr. President, will the rules allow an inspection of the Senator from Tennessee in ~ this point? does the critical amendment check out fix that so the if much less than a bulk are in donate of the plan it may be adopted? Is the planned to call a state convention, a decimal of which may be able to attain the an outcome desired?

Mr. McKellar—No.

Mr. Reed of Missouri—Then what does that mean?

Mr. McKellar—It way exactly what it says, the such a convention shall pass on it prior to it is put right into operation.

Page 3605.

Mr. McKellar—I offer an modification on behalf of the senior Senator from phibìc Carolina (Mr. Simmons).

The evil President—The clerk will state the amendment.

Mr. Reed the Missouri—Mr. President, I do not desire to delay the Senate, however I ask for a document vote ~ above these vital amendments. I contact for the yeas and also nays.

The yeas and nays to be ordered, and the chief Clerk conduct to call the roll. * * *

So Mr. McKellar"s amendment was agreed to.

You will keep in mind that is a state convention of the producers and also that the proponent that the amendment said that a minority could not accomplish the result. Usually as soon as there is a convention the is created of delegates selected through producers. This delivery is for a convention of the producers themselves, and also before procedure as to any kind of commodity can be placed into impact there should be together convention called and also held in every state whereby the bulk of the producer of the particular commodity room not members of participating associations or organizations. The extent of this supplication is not minimal as come the amount of the commodity developed in any state. Because that instance, part swine is created in practically every state; some wheat is produced in the majority of all states; some corn is produced in the majority of every states, and, nevertheless of the quantity produced, each together state would have to hold a state convention of every the producers.

If all the producers attended the convention the expense which must be borne by castle individually would certainly be a tremendous addition to the operating cost, and if the bulk of them did not attend the convention the deliberations would not represent the voice the the producers. If such relief together that contemplated by the general setup of this bill were desirable, it would be incredibly unwise to hamper it v this most cumbersome and awkward provision, the compliance with which is make mandatory as a condition criterion to the operation of the law. The is difficult to see how such conventions that producers can ever it is in held. The invoice does not say "delegates," it says "producers," the farmer themselves, and if a bulk of lock must satisfy in state convention, the is totally unworkable.

Corn is a chop that varies between 2,500,000,000 and also 3,000,000,000 bushels every year, and the normal export is an extremely small. The reason, then, for operation this bill on corn would certainly not thrive out that the exportable surplus, yet according come the an interpretation in ar 6 (c) (2) would thrive out that a surplus over the demands for orderly marketing. The marketing of corn would include marketing to a purchaser to feeding to cattle and also hogs, so the a instance might arise wherein there would certainly be a surplus above the requirements for orderly marketing. The act then could be put right into operation as to corn under every the various kinds the agreements. Yet the huge expense of jae won the procedure of these agencies in the corn sector would be fee not against the whole commodity, but against that part of the commodity i beg your pardon is used for milling or processing or that is transported through a usual carrier. This, follow to statistics, amounts only to part 15 or 20 every cent that the corn produced.

That the equalization fee is not laid top top the whole commodity is not obvious from a casual analysis of the act. Yet a near study reflects that ar 10 provides that over there shall be payment "an equalization dues upon one of the following: The transportation, processing or revenue of together unit." over there is no other way to collection the fee. If that stood alone, then all the corn would certainly be topic to the fee unless it were provided by the raiser, yet Section 15 (1) says:

In the case of * * * corn, the term "processing" means milling for industry of * * * corn or the very first processing in any type of manner for industry * * * of corn not so milled, and the hatchet "sale" method the revenue or other disposition in the United says of * * * corn because that milling or other processing for market, for resale or for shipment by a common carrier * * *.

So, unless the corn is processed or marketed for milling or other processing for industry or is transported by usual carrier, it is not topic to the equalization fee. Yet the good bulk of that which is no processed nor transported by common carrier is complimentary from the equalization fee.

The only numbers in the arguments with referral to corn space some approximates based solely upon exportable surplus, i m sorry really form no basis because that the current proposed setup based top top desire because that orderly marketing and also not for regulating the tiny exportable surplus. While that is complicated to estimate the burden of this equalization fee, which should be borne because that the entire chop by this tiny proportion, the simplest calculation will display that the amount per bushel necessarily would certainly be tremendous, so that the industry for corn milling and other processing and for transport would be entirely dislocated.

The provisions the the present measure with recommendation to one equalization fee on corn need to not be perplexed with the other measures which have been proposed for the factor that former measures put the burden upon the entire crop, but this measure, in undertaking to place the duty that collecting payment on the processor, has reached this damaging result. That is no answer come say the the corn producers would certainly induce your advisory council and the members the the plank from their land financial institution districts to exclude corn from the procedure of this bill since the world who carry out not desire to salary an equalization fee and on who the burden does not autumn are 80 or 85 every cent that the producer of corn.

It might be contended that since there is to it is in an equalization fees on swine the feeders would be taxed, yet the swine and corn are different units and have a separate stabilization fund, and under the regulation the fees top top swine cannot be turned right into the stabilization fund for corn.

In figuring the portion of the corn chop upon i beg your pardon the fee would fall, while that is possible that the fee might fall top top corn lugged by a usual carrier, it is hesitant whether any board would certainly lay a taxes on transport where the corn was being transported to be sold to feeders. If they did, of course, the an outcome would be the to stop the fees in most situations the seller would certainly not transport by a usual carrier.

It is not sufficient to say the the ideal to put the equalization fees on swine would readjust the inequalities in between those bearing the burden and also those not bearing the burden, first, because the board might commence operating as to corn and not desire to run or be permitted to operate as to swine. However, lot of the corn would certainly be fed come cattle and also live stock various other than swine, and also there is no ideal to lug the commodities of live stock various other than swine under the provisions of the law.

With a necessity for a fees on component of the corn crop and also no dues on the balance, the complimentary movement and dealing in the commodity would be hampered come an almost unbearable extent. It would certainly take a horde of inspectors to assure the payment that the fees on the certain corn compelled to bear it. A feeder of cattle who had actually the important machinery to grind or to like his corn to buy from various other farmers for feeding purposes would be able to market his cattle totally free from the price of the equalization fee, while one more feeder that purchased such ground feed would certainly be compelled to industry his cattle with the added cost the the equalization fee on the corn. This, that course, would certainly be true regarding swine; moreover, the feeder who had actually been compelled to purchase the soil feed would certainly pay the fees on that, and also when that sells his swine that pays second fee on that transaction. He pays twice.

It is provided in the legislation "the plank shall identify in the instance of any class the transactions in the commodity even if it is the equalization dues shall be payment upon transportation, processing, or sale." if this language is not really clear, a setup is set out through Representative Haugen, one of the co-authors that the bill, in the adhering to language (Congressional Record, February 10, web page 3528):

For wheat top top hand at the beginning of the operation period the board would undoubtedly have to collect top top the processing. In the situation of transaction throughout the operating duration the board would pick either the sale or the transportation.

The action itself offers in section 10 (b) the plank may, through regulation, require any person engaged in the transportation, processing, or acquisition by sale of a basic agricultural commodity: "(1) * * * (2) to collection an equalization fee together directed by the board and also to account therefor." therefore the usual carrier if on transportation, or the processor if on processing, or those who secure through sale, if ~ above sale, collection the fee which must autumn on the producer. Transportation under the act means the acceptance of a commodity through a common carrier for distribution (Section 15 (5)). Regardless of just how it is accumulated it is the will that it shall fall upon the producer. The farmer payment it once his product moves.

Thus the Senate report, web page 23, says:

The fees are enforced at the suggest of transportation, processing, or sale, together the board may determine. Their amount will, the course, be reflect in the price to the producer. * * * The committee bill, however, requires farming producers to meet their own losses through their very own moneys. * * *

On page 25 the adds:

Neither the the above effects of the fee constitutes price fixing. The producer or other person may sell for together price together he chooses. The buyer may pay together price as he wills. There is no limitation upon the price to be solved by the contracting parties save that the equalization fee, just as a broker"s fee, will be taken into account in getting here at the price to be paid.

It is crucial to bear in mind the the equalization fee can only be levied top top a unit the the basic agricultural commodity. This means the yes, really commodity itself as identified in ar 6, to wit, cotton, wheat, corn, rice, tobacco and also swine. The reference in subdivision (h) of ar 6 come food products of the commodity specifically boundaries the application thereof of part (d), (e), and (f) of ar 6, which do not in any method relate to the equalization fee. All of the sections managing the equalization fee and every one of the recommendations to it plainly limit its applications to the simple agricultural commodity itself, and also they can not lay a fee upon flour or other assets of wheat, meal, or other products of corn, meats, or other products of swine.

While there may be some conceivable means of getting to an import of any kind of of these agricultural commodities as such, there is no possible way of reaching any type of of these assets after they room processed. The result would be to throw all of our processors and also millers who would need to buy the commodity through the expense of equalization fee included into competition through imports from Canada or other nations who sent in any product of any of the simple agricultural commodities.

Of course, the millers or other processors who take place to get preferable contracts indigenous the board might have the ability to recoup that loss to a specific extent, but the milling volume of the tiny mills and huge mills is good enough come take treatment of double the lot of milling and also other processing to be done, and the mills which were no fortunate sufficient to obtain such contracts would certainly be ruined. It is a fundamental principle in composing a tariff law that once a duty is placed upon a raw product a compensatory duty must be put on the made or processed product in which the raw product is used. Right here is a fee put upon the life product without an possibility to location a like fee ~ above the handle product which can be imported. Raw commodities dumped abroad deserve to there be processed and also reshipped right here to the disaster and destruction of this totality bill.

In resolving the amount of the equalization fee the board must necessarily estimate the crop, due to the fact that it is your duty to calculation the probable "advances, losses, costs and also charges to be paid," and to recognize the amount because that each unit. That course, they space compelled to estimate the chop in order to calculation the variety of units. Among the co-authors the the bill suggests that if the legislation had remained in operation indigenous 1925 the equalization fee on wheat have to yield $131,750,000.

I cite this to present the huge sums involved. If one of two people the calculation of the chop or the dimension of the fund needed must be inaccurate, so that there is built up many millions an ext than needed, over there is no way to return it come the producer. Intend there need to be estimated an exportable surplus of 200,000,000 bushels the wheat and also there is a excess of however 100,000,000, the money would be virtually twice as huge as it should be, and also if the amount affiliated should be anything choose that stated by Representative Haugen the board would have fifty-five or sixty millions much more than required of the farmers" money. There is no means to return it. Now, in the situation of noodle there is provision that any type of excess the is collected for the stabilization money shall be paid ago to the producer.

This is had in section 10, Subdivision (3), and Section 11, Subdivision (e) as follows:

10 (3) In the situation of cotton, to worry to the producer a serial receipt for the commodity i beg your pardon shall be evidence of the participating attention of the producer in the equalization fund for the commodity. The board might in such instance prepare and also issue such receipts and prescribe the terms and conditions thereof. The Secretary the the Treasury, ~ above the request of the board, shall have such receipts all set at the office of Engraving and Printing.

**********

II (e) when the amount in the equalization money for cotton is, in the opinion of the board, in excess of the amount sufficient to bring out the demands of this action in respect of such commodity, and also the repertoire of additional equalization fees thereon is most likely to preserve an excess, the board may retire in your serial stimulate as countless as practicable that the superior receipts evidencing a participating interest in together fund. Such retirement chandelier be had by the payment to the holders of together receipts of their distributive share of together excess as identified by the board. The account the the distributive share payable in respect of any kind of such receipt shall it is in an amount bearing the same proportion to the confront value of such receipt together the value of the heritage of the plank in or attributable to the money bear to the aggregate face value of the superior receipts evidencing a participating interest in such fund, as figured out by the board.

But over there is no location in the law which offers for a go back to the producer that other products where the assessment of the fee levies an quantity in excess of that vital for the stabilization fund. Over there is fairly a large variance indigenous year to year of the amount of production of this different simple agricultural commodities, and also it is manifestly unfair to carry out that as to cotton the producer shall share in any type of excess collected, while as to corn, wheat, swine, rice and also tobacco no such provision exists.

In all the comparable bills heretofore taken into consideration by congress it has actually been thought crucial to administer for the go back to all producers of any amount they need to pay in overabundance of that required, and it is illogical and indefensible to deem it important to still make the provision because that the cotton producer and deprive the other producers of that benefit. This appears to it is in the rankest sort of discrimination in favor of one crop and versus all the other plants in the bill.

Another an obstacle will it is in in making suitable estimates that the amount of products and also the amount of the equalization fee. It is improbable the this board could do any much better in this respect than has actually been excellent by the department of Agriculture. In spring wheat the approximates of the department have actually been 78,000,000 bushels too small and 90,000,000 bushels also large; in winter wheat, 126,000,000 bushels too little and 1,400,000 bushels also large; in corn, 430,000,000 bushels too little and 657,000,000 bushels as well large. In cotton the range has to be 2,983,000 bales too little for 1926 and also 3,286,000 bales too huge for 1918.

These room all recent estimates and also show conclusively the impossibility of arriving at specific conclusions. No rebates are allowed except top top cotton. Any year because of this that a huge corn"or wheat chop is approximated which transforms out to be too high too lot money would be collected, and as it is not returnable the would an outcome in so lot loss to the farmer. If the crop were underestimated, the fee could not furnish a big enough amount to sustain the sector on that certain commodity.

The key policy of this bill is whole reversal of what has been heretofore thought to be sound. Rather of undertaking come secure a method of orderly marketing which will certainly dispose of products at a profit, that proposes come dispose that them at a loss. It runs counter to the rule of conservatism, i beg your pardon would need us to develop only what deserve to be done at a profit, not to waste our soil and resources producing what is to be sold at a lose to us for the benefit of the international consumer. It runs respond to to the well-considered principle that a healthy and balanced economic problem is best maintained v a complimentary play the competition by undertaking to permit a legalized restraint of profession in these commodities and also establish a types of syndicate under government protection, sustained by the countless power that the farm board come levy fees and also enter into contracts. For many generations together practices have actually been denounced by law as repugnant to the general public welfare. It can not be the they would now be discovered to be valuable to agriculture.

This measure is so long and involved that it is difficult to talk about it without going into numerous tiresome details. Many other factors exist why it ought not to be approved, yet it is difficult to state them all without creating a book. The many decisive one is that it is no constitutional. This feature is debated in one opinion of the lawyer General, herewith attached and also made a part hereof, for this reason that ns shall not consider the details of the phase of my objections. Of food it consists of some good features. Some of its provisions, intended to assist and strengthen cooperative marketing, have been borrowed from propose that execute represent the basic trend the constructive thought on the farming problem. In this measure, however, these provisions space all completely subordinated come the main objective, i m sorry is to have actually the government dispose of exportable excess at a loss and also make some farmer taxpayers foot the bill. This is no a measure up to assist cooperative marketing. That is effect, on the contrary, is to get rid of the an extremely conditions of benefit that now induce farmer to sign up with together come regulate and improve their own business.

That there is a genuine and an important agricultural difficulty is keenly appreciated by all informed men. The proof is all also convincing that farming has no been receiving its same share of the nationwide income because the war. Farmers and business men directly dependent upon farming have suffered and in many instances still experience from conditions beyond their control. They room entitled to and also will have every consideration at the hands of the Government.

Surely, a real farm relief measure have to be just and also impartial and also open the method to help for every farmers. Surely, it must not contemplate, as this measure up inescapably does, that farmers in some regions must be penalized because that the advantage of those in various other regions. Surely, it have to be aimed to promote the welfare that the ar at large. Over there is no thoughtful male who walk not completely appreciate how vital a prosperous agriculture is come this nation. It should be helped and strengthened. Come saddle it with unjust, unworkable schemes that governmental control is come invite catastrophe worse than any kind of that has yet befallen ours farmers.

It has actually been stood for that this bill has been unanimously authorized by ours farmers. Number of of our biggest farm organizations have refused to support it, and important decimal in the members and leadership among the most crucial organization who are tape-recorded as giving it endorsement have protested come me versus it. The is no to be assumed that the farmer of the United claims want our agricultural policy started upon law as is propose in this measure. The final judgment of American farmers constantly has been and will it is in on the constructive quite than the damaging side. What the farmers want, and what the American civilization as a totality will approve, is law which will certainly not substitute governmental administration for individual and cooperative initiative, yet will facilitate the constructive efforts of the farmers themselves in their very own self-governed organizations.

Although this arguments and others have been progressed in Congress and also outside, ns find tiny attempt has actually been made come answer them. The push for this bill arises mainly from the natural and also proper sympathy with the farm distress native the after-war inflation speculation and also collapse. Many sincere and thoughtful civilization have expended a good deal of time and also energy in functioning out this measure and also are totally honest and also honorable in their advocacy of it. The is a great regret to me that i am can not to pertained to the conclusion that the invoice would aid agriculture, it is in of benefit to the country, and also be in accord v the Constitution.

Other plans have actually been suggest in congress for breakthrough in this recovery, which plans market promise the sound assistance to the farmer without these unconstitutionalities, intrusions of executive, management authority, this contracting with packers and flour millers and also other manufacturers, this overproduction v its inflation and inevitable crash, without this indirect price fixing, buying and also selling, this creation of substantial bureaucracies. They are, top top the contrary, devoted entirely come the principle of structure up farmer-controlled marketing comes to to take care of their problems, including occasional surplus production, and applicable come all farming and not to a minor fraction. I have typically urged together legislation. I wish again to renew my reference that part such setup be adopted.

See more: You Had Me At Hello A Day To Remeber, You Had Me At Hello

I am as such obliged come return Senate invoice 4808, entitled "An action to develop a federal farm plank to assist in the orderly marketing and in the control and also disposition of the excess of farming commodities," without my approval.