Askov American. [volume] (Askov, Pine County, Minn.) 1914-current, 1936-09-24
Reducing Uncertainties
For Farmers

Many Republican critics of tie ma
tional administration policy with
reference to curtailment of agricul-
tural production have been guilty of
ignoring some pretty plain recent day
facts. AS long as we were debtor
nation and had to ship out every year
several hundred million dollars worth
of goods in excess of our imports to
pay interest on our debts to foreign
investors, we were not generally con-
scious of the fact that we were an
nually producing a dangerously large
excess of food and other agricultural
products far beyond our own ability
to consume. 1t so happened that most
of our debts were owed to industrial
countries with dense populations and
that those countries pursued an en-
lightened economic policy placing no
bars against importation of our food
products.
The World war changed all this.
From being a debtor nation, we be-
came, over night, so to speak, the
greatest creditor nation in the world.
Instead of being required to export
hundreds of millions of dollars worth
of goods every year in excess of our
imports, our new creditor situation
now required us to receive each year
many hundreds of millions of dollars
in imports in excess of exports. To
further complicate matters, shortly
Oft no hiUhnSt
tariff in the history of the nation as
if maliciously to make it impossible
for foreigners to find the necessary
wherewithal to pay for American pro-
duced food.
Thus arose our agricultural sur
ever since, except in the drouth years
of this decade. The farmer has de-
manded parity with industry. The
Republican party has made repeated
promises of aid but, though in undis-
puted control of all branches of the
government up to and including 1880,
did nothing. The McNary-Haugen
bill designed to dispose of the export
able surplus of agricultural commod-
tiles, was the farmers own proposed
solution. 1t was repeatedly passed
through Congress and as often vetoed
by Republican president. Hoovers
own substitute, the Farm Board, failed
miserably.
So far as our dealings with the ex-
portable surplus of agricultural pro-
ducts is concerned, we were at no
time in greater muddle than we
were when President Roosevelt took
office in March, 1888. He has GER
tainly tackled this difficult question
with his usual courage. While we
have heard much criticism of the
philosophy of crop limitation as a
means of restoring fair prices for
farm commodities, this policy appar-
emily has considerable merit. Would
any manufacturer continue year after
year to produce more goods than his
market would take at a fair price?
Would any merchant load up his
shelves and warehouses with guam
titles of goods in excess of what ex-
perience had demonstrated he could
resell at profit? Why in common
sense should anyone expect the Amer
fcan farmer to feed our population
at loss?
The Agricultural Adjustment Act is
now past history. The Supreme Court
has determined that it was beyond
the powers vested by our constitution
in the national government. Perhaps
this decision has not been altogether
unfortunate for the country. We in
cline to believe that final results, not
essentially dissimilar considered from
the point of view of limitation of pro
duction, may be achieved through the
soil conservation act, particular!
through the removal of all submar
competition with the bona fide farmer
The president has now taken a fur
Their step we'll calculated to aid in thu
solution of this problem by the con
stitution of a committee headed b.
the secretary of agriculture to as
semble data and to prepare program
to be submitted to Congress in Janu
airy looking toward crop insurance
This is welcomed as a forward steI
1t seems that few occupations invOlv
quite so much of gamble as that O
the farmer. In a year like this witt
agricultural prices high due to Gro
shortage and drouth, hundreds o
thousands of farmers have nothing t,
sell. Relatively few, therefore, ar