The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1935-03-28
CHANGE OF PROGRAM?

"A SISdb many PSOPASf AAOS go -
them political opponents-do not seem
to be exactly happy over the results
of certain phases of the programs of
the NRA and the AAA. Among those
prominently identified with the work
who seem to be particularly unhappy
on occasions is Secretary Wallace Of
the United States Department of Ag-
riculture.
In his testimony recently to a
House Appropriations Subcommittee
on the Agricultural Supply Bill for
1886, Mr.. Wallace took occasion to ex-
press some of this unhappiness.
The Secretary admitted that at best
the farm program falls below the
needs of the country and of the farmer.
He thought there ought to be an in
crease of thirty to forty per cent in the
output of manufactured goods in the
United States so that the farmers
could benefit through lower prices for
what they buy and the entire country
get into better condition.
Mr.. Wallace is quoted by the Asso-
ciated Press as stating, in part:
eff in some way it were possible to
turn out so per cent more industrial
goods at a price definitely lower than
the present price the result would be to
give very material benefit to agricul-
ture to buy more with the agricultural
dollar, and there would be more fac
tory workers to be fed in the cities"
"What methods should be used to
bring about that increase is certainly
not for me to say" the Secretary de-
clared.
He also asserted eve have reached
the conclusion that further action
along the line of reducing production
will not greatly increase the farmers
share. in the national income"
But Mr.. Wallace, who is good New
Dealer, ought to remember that it was
the New Deal plan to increase the
costs of prices of manufactured goods
through increase in wages and raw
materials so that the whole country
would benefit. Now if we increase man.
ufactured production fifty per cent and
glut the market, prices may go down.
Then the workers will be out of jobs.
And how are they then to buy the farm
products which have already been
made higher in price by blowing under
corn and Strengthening pigs with the
efficient assistance of Mother Natures
drouth? If we are to increase the sup
ply of manufactured goods fifty per
cent to make them cheaper for the far
mer why not increase the supply of ag-
ricultural products so the factory wor-
ker will be happy?
Ucually what is sauce for the gan.
der is sauce for the goose. If finished
goods have been made so; high in price
that the farmer suffers in buying
them, then it may be equally true that
the same thing has happened to the
wage worker in regard to farm pro-
ducts. The higher the prices of meat
and -four, the less the people in the
city and town buy. 1t is the same the
DRY in reverse.
Mr.. Wallace is quoted as admit
ting that the AAA cannot give the
farmers much additional benefit by
crop restriction. This is doubtless true.
Higher prices either in finished goods
or raw materials may well encourage
a buyers strike, and Stimulate i'm
ports over our tariff wall. This is al
ready happening in the case of many
farm products. Alien growers, en-
couraged by our crop restrictions are
raising bigger and better crops to
take the markets away from our
growers. Certainly further restric-
ting our crops will aggravate rather
than reduce the complaint.
Perhaps, after all, in trying to reg
ulate supply and demand and make
men prosperous by human law we
have overdone it a little. Maybe it
would have been better to restore
things before reforming them,