The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1936-02-22
enactment OF
SUBSTITUTE AAA
REPORTED NEAR
Measure Passed by House
Goes to Senate for
Action There.
Continued From Page One)

from intense production crops to
l-conserving crops this year I'M
der the new program. Last year,
under the AAA, 34,000,000 acres were
withheld from production.
Conference to Be Called
AS soon as the new program is
enacted into law Mr.. Davis and Sec
rotary of Agriculture Henry A. Wal
lace will call a conference of land
grant college experts, extension
service officials and soil-conserva-
ton experts to work out a detailed
administrative program.
President Roosevelt, meanwhile, is
expected to send tax program to
Congress to raise $500,c00,000 a year
to replace processing taxes knocked
out when the Supreme Court held
the AAA unconstitutional six weeks
ago. The recommendations are ex-
pected next week.
The temporary two-year soil con-
servation program, to be replaced in
1888 by 48 state Little AAA's," was
jammed through both houses despite
strong opposition in the Senate
from those who doubted its consti-
tutionality and in the House by rep
reSentatives of dairying districts.
Amended Nine Times
In the House nine amendments
vastly broadening the powers of the
Secretary of Agriculture and ex-
ceeding those granted under the
AAA in some instances were passed
in a hectic last-day session. A score
of other amendments were rejected.
Most important House amend
ment was one designed to afford
Consumer protection" and materi-
ally broadening the operating base
of the bill. This amendment, re-
jected in the Senate, requires the
Secretary of Agriculture to estab-
lish, at as rapid rate as he deems
practicable, pre-war parity income
for farmers, without discouraging
production to a point below the nor
NAL domestic human consumption
in the years 1926 to 1929.
The amendment setting up ratio
between purchasing power of farm
and other incomes carried New Deal
adjustment policies into new fields.
The similar amendment offered in
the Senate by Senator Robert F.
Wagner 3D., N. " was opposed by
Senator William E. Borah (R., Ida.),
who said it would delegate to the
Secretary of Agriculture power to
adjust income in the United States"
Differences in Bills
The Senate-approved bill listed
rivers and harbors projects under
soil conservation provisions. The
House bill did not. The House bill
contained, but the Senate did not,
provision making 100000 avail
able from the 1885 relief funds for
a wind erosion control program in
the "dust storm area" OF the South
west.
On the broad principle of soil
conservation through Federal sub
sidy to farmers who cooperate with
Federal suggestions both houses
were in substantial agreement. The
provision for permanent program
providing Federal aid to states
placing little AAAs into effect was
retained in both bills.
Both bills authorize Federal ex-
penditures to create and expand
foreign and domestic markets for
use Of agricultural SURPRISES, but
limit the amount that may be spent
under the act to $500,000,00O year.
The AAA spent pproximately
81 900, 100000 in 1885.
Jones Thinks 1t Constitutional
Chairman Marvin Jones 3D., Tex.)
of the House Agriculture Committee,
who directed committee work on the
bill and sponsored it on the floor,
said he believed it constitutional and
"the best that could be done" in
view of the Supreme Courts decision
outlawing The AAA.
Both hills were drawn as amend
ments to the 1885 Soil Erosion Act.
Dairy interests sought unsuccess-
fully to amend the bill to withhold
aid from farmers who use land with
drawn from cultivation for grazing
livstock
After the House rejected an
amendment by Rep. Clifford R.
Hope (Kan), ranking Republican on
the Agriculture Committee, to limit
subsidies to a maximum of $4,000
year for any individual, Rep. John
Taber Or. N. " introduced reso-
luton requiring the Secretary of
Agriculture to submit to Congress
names of farmers receiving $4,000 or
more year in benefits.