The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1935-02-16
For Unity of Action
(rarmers Union Herald)

NCdIulcI0 OIllOI1 I1SIdlOJ
At the recent state convention Of
the Minnesota Farm Bureau, Ches-
ter Gray. Washington representative
Of the Bureau, stated the position OF
his organization with respect to .
permanent agricultural program, as
follows:
Repeal Of the national homestead
act Of Civil War days which estab-
lished a national policy Of expansion.
Regulation of production by control
Of land, 50 that q farmer may operate
his own farm on his own initiative
and management. This plan would
take considerable poor acreage out
Of production, thereby attaining a
balanced production.
More attention to raising prices OF
agricultural commodities than to
limitation Of crops.
Expansion Of the currency to make
an adequate circulation medium and
establishment Of flexible ''commo-
dity dollar"
Lowering Of interest rates to agri-
culture.
Attention to and cultivation Of the
home market In preference to con-
stantly diminishing foreign market.
At the national convention Of the
Grange held in the month Of Deem
Der. the demands Of that organization
were expressed In somewhat similar
terms so far as expansion Of the cur
rency, lower Of farm interest rates
and protection OF the home market is
concerned.
A comparison OF the legislative de-
mands Of the three general farm or.
CARNATIONS, tho Bureau, the Grange
and the Farmers Union. reveals the
fact that they are not far apart in
their legislative programs, a sharp
difference being apparent on only one
subject, namely, price fixing.
The Farmers Union national con-
vention in its resolutions opposes the
A. A. A. program Of acreage limita-
tion, and processing taxes. For acre.
age allotments the Farmers Union
would substitute a marketing allot-
ment program with price fixing baS-
ed on cost OF production.
The Farmers Union program would
guarantee to the producer a cost Of
production price on that part Of the
crop which IS domestically used.
The balance Of the crop would have
to be segregated and kept on the farm
or exported II any export were possi-
be, the grower to receive for the ex.
port portion whatever price was OBJ
tanned less marketing costs, includ-
ing Of course transportation.
The three national farm organiza-
tons should at least work together
on all programs on which they are
agreed. They seem to agree on at
least three things
A. An expanded currency.
B. A lowered interest rate to farm
ers.
G. Protection against importations
Of Ill commodities which may be
grown on American farms.
Il they choose to disagree on
acreage, versus marketing control OF
crops, then on that subject they may
amicably separate. Just because they
do not agree on all phases Of q pro-
gram Is not . good reason why they
should not work together for those
things on which they do agree.
It Is well to keep In mind the fact
that the Grange has nearly . million
members and that their membership
Is more widely distributed among thu
Estates than either the Bureau Or the
Farmers Union. The Bureau has I
membership larger than that Of thu
Union and Is organized in more state.
than the Union.
The strength Of the Farmers Unio1
= concentrated In the mississippi
Valley states. West Of the Mississip.
Ip River the Union Is strongest Of al
farm organizations. Congress ane
1.-THE administration, whatever Farmer
Iunion members may think to the con
ltTaTy, are bound to give consideration
Ito the programs Of the Bureau ans
1.-THE Grange because those organiza
Itjous represent more farmers tina;
docs the Farmers Union. It Is neve
Iwise to Ignore facts.
There = certainly no threat to de