Evening star., 1933-01-08

try. and objectors to the plan argue that
it would offer a strong temptation to
local collllsion, discrimination, bureau
cracy and corruption.
The operation of the law as to any
commodity would await agreement by
go per cent of the producers IN tnat
class.
A further tendency to break down
what President Hoover calls the spirit
of rugged American individualism Is
feared. The idea of controlling pro-
duction by acreage limitation is chal-
fenced on the ground that the yields
fiuctuate seasonally. Attempts to estt-
mate the domestic consumption under
some of the plans would be difficult, 1t
is protested, because in the case of cot
ton, for instance, the demand is much
greater at cents than at IL cents a
pound To limit wheat production In
the United States, it is argued, might
be to encourage Canadian production,
lust as British rubber control stimu-
lated Dutch production.
There is objection to subsidizing an
industry already ver-expanded. The
wheat price level limit proposed to be
fixed, it is protested, is based on a
period when farm prices were diSpro-
portionately high. Increased farm eff
cheney has reduced production costs
since that price peak was established
and transportation rates are lower.
Higher Food Costs Feared.
1t is insisted that the plan would
mean a burdenSome increase in the
cost of food to be borne by the con-
sumer, with the result that his real
wages would be lowered. The process
sors object to absorbing much of the
cost. One after another of the claimed
virtues of this unique idea have come
under fire as the skeptics caught their
breath, until scarcely any stand unchal-
lenged today. If unable to show that
export dumping of wheat will persist
they insist that the effect will be the
same to a degree through inability to
avoid dumping Of flour and other proc
essed products. Behind the scenes a
major battle is under way, with the
opposition apparently fighting losing
battle despite evidences of headway at
some points.
The fact that the annual farm in
come in the United States has fallen
from $16,000,00O, 900 to $500, 900, 900
since the World War and that nearly
Sc, 600, 900, 900 of that drop occurred in
the last three years has intensified the
demand that something be done with
out delay. Opponents of the domestic
allotment plan object that, at its best,
the bounty would restore only $1,000,-
100000 year. The not disinterested
reply is that this would be only a
starter, that it would be augmented by
the increase in market prices for farm
products and that it would mean even
more in general business revival.
Not only insurance companies and
others with heavy investments at stake
in the farm belt, but business men who
are looking for place to start things"
have been attracted to the plan. Where
Wall Street very largely resisted the pre-
viouS farm relief plans, that symbol of
organized American business, the Cham
Der of Commerce of the United States,
has at its head today a president who
unequivocally supports the domestic al
lotment plan.
Tobacco professors are skeptical of
its workability in their field, since the
years it takes to cure their tobacco
might force long delays before they
could cash in. Consumers organizations
are wary lest they commit themselves
to higher food costs. Some foresee a
$40 per capita annual increase in liv-
ing expenses Industrialists wonder
whether any differential in real wages
thus created might not put them at a
disadvantage in world competition.
II Is objected, moreover, that to put
such plan in operation would be to
create a vested agricultural interest
with tremendous political power and
that Congress would be under constant
pressure to increase the farm bounties
as 1t is under pressure to increase tariff
duties.
Notwithstanding the multiplying OBJ
jections to this most daring economic
proposal ever seriously considered in
America. it continues to develop sup
port. Present indications are that it
win be adopted in the Roosevelt admin
istration, If not sooner.