The Coolidge examiner., 1938-11-03

OOF DeODiS are ulSO u NFOOie"s
bought readily by foreign nations.
But foreign markets are now glut-
ted. American farm surpluses must
either be dumped abroad at any
price foreign buyers are willing to
pay. or be left to rot in U. S. gran
aries. Most people have favored the
latter policy, meanwhile deploring
the economic unbalance that allows
many U. S. citizens to 60 hungry
despite bountiful crops.
The easiest remedy would be to
let low prices drive American farm
ers off the land, but this is socially
inhumane, politically unsound and
economically foolhardy. When the
New Deal started in 1893, AAA was
formulated to pay farmers for linn
iting their acreage. Funds came
from processing taxes levied against
manufacturers, but ultimately paid
by consumers. When the Supreme
court ruled processing taxes invalid,
a "soil conservation" program was
set up to pay farmers for retiring
their land. ostensibly to give it
rest but actually to limit produc-
ton. Thirty per cent Of customs
receipts were set aside to pay for it.
Last spring, with surpluses still
piling up, congress passed a new
farm law. too late to limit produc-
ton this year, which partially ac-
counted for its failure. Under il the
government may Cd control produc-
tion with consent of a majority of
farmers; (2) make payments for re-
firing land; 80 make additional
parity" payments as protection
against less than production cost
prices; (4 loan money against
crops. If compulsory control is en-
forced next year - as provided
wheat and cotton acreages must be
reduced one half. Agricultural re-
belhon would result.
Still seeking the answer, Secre-
tary Wallace recently tried export
subsidies, which the state depart
ment's Undersecretary Francis B.
Sayre condemns as 1.-The uneconom-
ic giving away of our substance to
foreign nations" Though u. S.
farmers are being subsidized the
difference between export prices
and the domestic market price,
many observers consider it ridicu-
lous to sell surplus foodstuffs abroad
at a loss when several million
Americans are going hungry. Con-
sequently next winters congress
will be asked to adopt still another
farm bill, the most far-reaching at
tempt yet made to kill two birds
with one stone. The birds: farm
problem and poor relief. The Wal
lace plan: surplus farm products
would be distributed to u. S. low
income groups instead of being
dumped abroad.
Though the federal surplus COM
modities corporation already dis
tributes potatoes, prunes, milk and
other minor products not affected by
AAA. the new plan would include
beef, pork, wheat, corn and cotton.
Broadly, it would follow New York
city's method of selling milk to re-
lief families for eight cents quart.
the city paying the difference. If
expanded to a national proposition.
the U. S. would pay retailers the
difference between standard price
and cost price.
To pay for it. Secretary Wallace
asks restoration of processing taxes,
which theoretically fall on manufac-
turers but ultimately strike the con-
sumer. Opponents argue that re-
tail prices would rise, that consump-
ton would drop and substitutes
would be encouraged, thereby hurt
ing the farmer. But since the gov
ernment hopes to stabilize farm
prices, its counter-argument is that
producers would have steady in
come and increased purchasing pow
er. thereby boosting U. S. prosper
ity. These are the arguments next
winters congress will hear.