The people's voice. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1939-1969, 1956-08-31
Farm Program

farmers and rancherS have been
among the leaders in the fight to de-
velop a sound, national farm pro-
gram.
AS Democrats, we take pride in the
advances made by our basic industry
-agriculture-in the twenty years
which ended with 1862. Since then,
however, under an Administration I'M
friendly to agriculture, farm income
has fallen sharply. In the nation, net
farm income dropped from 151 bill
lion in 1852 to SILT billion in 1866,
a decline of 1914 billion in the farm
ers' take-home pay. In the same peri
cd, gross farm income declined from
$36.7 billion to 1929 billion, a loss
of 1913 billion not only to the farm
er but also to the business commu-
nifty which serves him.
In Montana, the situation was the
same. The total net income of Mon
tana farm and ranch operators was
$248.1 million in 1851 and $1602
million in 1854, a drop of $50. The
average net income per Montana
farm Or ranch declined 1870 in the
same period, from $6,724 in 1851
to $4,000 in 1854.
We hold the Eisenhower Admins
tration accountable for this recession
on our farms and in the business
communities which serve them.
President Eisenhower is calling for
1907 parity Sin the market place."
1t is in the market place that farm
er sells at wholesale and buys at re-
tail. He can never achieve parity
while he is at such a competitive dis
advantage.
The Eisenhower-Benson FLEXIBLE
rather "collapsible" support
program has totally failed to reduce
surpluses or provide stability of farm
income to the great injury of Mon
tana farmers and businessmen. We
favor full parity income for farm
families, through production pay
ments, in workable combination with
price support loans, purchase agree
ments, purchases and other methods.
We regard abundance as a bless
ing rather than a curse. And so we
would bring into play every practical
method of increasing consumption
first at home, then abroad-before |
restricting production, excepting only
the restrictions required to achieve
sound soil conservation. We urge
that greater effort be made to sub
stitute food for money in foreign aid.
We favor a national food allot-
ment plan, expansion of the school
lunch and fluid milk program, ade-
1uate nutritional standards in public
institutions and the issuance of food
stamps to the recipients of state aid
and assistance, increased farm ex-
ports and an international food and
raw materials reserve.
Under the present administration
he farmers Share of the consumer
'ood dollar has fallen to an all-time
ow of 38 cents. We condemn Secre-
AIRY Benson for his failure to carry
,ut congressional demands to conduct
| full scale investigation of the ever
spread between the amount
,aid by the consumer and the amount
.eceived by the producer. We call for
IN investigation of the widening
,pread between prices received by
armers and those paid by consumers,
md support such regulatory measures
IS may be found necessary.
We also would:
Establish a national safety food re- {
erve to be included in the National l
Defense budget of at least one years {
upply of food and fiber, upon which t
We could draw in time of disaster. l
Expand the Federal crop insurance t
rogram to all farm counties.
Reverse the Republican trend c
owards strangulation of the rural F
Identification and rural telephone t
rograms.
We pledge an about program to a
ring high line electricity and high t
ne telephone service to every Mon d
ana farm family with emphasis on
steady reduction of rates.
We also would: S
Require that all Federal farm pro- 4
rams be administered by democratic
committees composed of a