The Washington times., 1930-01-13
HOWELL PUSHES
SUGAR BOUNTY

With the Senate reported hos
tile to any increase in sugar
duties, the Insurgent bloc was
ready today to propose an $18,-
OO0, 900 annual bounty for Ameri-
can sugar growers in lieu of any
increase in the tariff against
Cuban and world sugar imports.
The bounty plan. modelled
somewhat along the line Of the
rejected debenture form of farm
relief, would scatter the bonus
among American sugar-growerS
and American sugar-mills. AS
drafted by Senator Howell (RJ
| Of Nebraska, the bounty would
be fixed at three-fourths Of one
cent per pound and would save
the consuming public about
$50, 900, 900 on its sugar bill as
compared with the proposed
Senate increase in tariff duties.
The Howell proposal would
provide for payment OF the
bounty direct from the Federal
Treasury from funds raised by
sale of customs warrants. This
would obviate the necessity for
annual appropriations by Con-
greSS. He further provides that
three-fifths of the bounty go
direct to the farmer and two
fifthS to the sugar operator.
Under this plan, the farmer or
producer would get fixed sum
Of $1.9O a ton on beet sugar and
$1.16 a ton on cane sugar.
The Senate, however, was re.
ported opposed to the bounty plan
because of general opposition to
the economic principle embodied
in it. There was no disposition
to deny the bounty would give
greater aid to sugar farmers and
sugar operators than any tariff
increase Congress might be ex-
pected to approve. There like
wise was no disposition to deny
the bounty plan would cost
less to the consuming public.
There was merely the Deep
rooted animosity for any form Of
direct subsidy.
The Democrats generally were
opposed to any increase in the
present sugar duty Of SITS on
Cuban imports and $2.20 against
the world.
Senator Harrison CD of Missis-
Sippi, sponsored an amendment
retaining the present rate and an
nounced he expected it would be
adopted by the Senate. The House
approved a new hundred-pound
rate of $2.40 against Cuba and
$500 against the world while the
pending Senate Finance Commit
tee recommendation would fix the
rates at 1920 for Cuba and $2.75
for the world.
Administration leaders generally
supported the committee rates.
There was possibility some might
endorse the InSurgent bounty plan.
The Insurgents, if beaten on the
three-forths. Of cent bounty,
were prepared to sponsor a second
plan, fixing the bounty at less
than one-half cent-44-1OOthS, to
be exact. the difference between
the present Cuban rate Of 1.76
cents a pound and the Finance
Committee recommendation OF
2.20 cents a ponnd.
Howell explained the 75-1OOthS
rate would cost $4,000, 900 a year
while the 44-1O0ths rate would
cost but $10,000,000. AS opposed
to this cost, he added, the Sen
ate Finance Committees pro-
posed increase in sugar tariffs
would cost the consuming public
$S4, $3.50, 900 a year.
"a bounty would give the pro-
Queer and operator direct RELIEF,
said Howell. 1.-THE tariff must
trickle down to him. In the past
when a tariff cost the consuming
public $50, 900 900, we find but
81. DOC, 600 of that cost trickling
it's way into the farmers pocket.
The rest is diSSipated. Our plan
would give him full benefits. AS
q sound economic form Of relief
it has no rival, alone it is direct" +"
The opposition was said to be
strong enough to defeat the
bounty plan. And there were
many indications that after it is
defeated the Senate will refuse
any increase in existing sugar
duties. This would merely throw
the controversy into conference
- SANANA