The Sidney herald., 1961-03-29
M,e~
FOR
MONTANA
FROM
WASHINGTON

back in exactly the same position
as before.
81 think the legislation should
stand on its merits, and not on
sympathy or at least a cry for
sympathy that we went along with
you, now you have got to go
along with us.
Il feel certain that the propos-
al to be made as a substitute or
as an amendment to the bill pass
ed out by the committee is 60
ing to be a great deal more bene-
ficial to the farming communities
than the one being presented now
by the Committee on Education
and Labor.
"In discussing the question of
rural versus city, as far as the
present bill minimum wage) is
concerned, we were told that the
city folks followed through on the
feed grain bill and supported if.
| would like to refer to the Rec
ord of March 8, 1861 wherein one
OF cur colleagues from a city dis
trict made this comment:
1 am against higher price SUD-
ports for two basic reasons: First,
the idea that the Government can
cut production by offering farm
ers a higher and higher price in
centlve is to me a false one: and
second, | see nc logic at all in
being part of an effort which can
only have n effect - raise food
prices to consumers
"Yet we are told they went
along, that there was no question
that it was good for the farmer
and it was good for us. We are
asked now to accept this as a
matter of principle, and told that
without question we should fol-
low along blindly.
In his remarks opening debate
on this bill, the Chairman of the
full Committee politely implied
that if we did not go along we
were going to have to pay. Just
how we were going to pay was not
outlined by the gentleman from
New York.
Il would like to remind the
Committee it was the Congress
that put the farmer in the box
and now that ne is there maybe
some members think it is going
to be a little bit easier to manipu-
late him. | am not going to &C
along with that concept. The
farmer is as much a consumer as
anybody in the country.
1T was stated during the feed
grain debate, if you recall, thai
ne was n of the largest con
Sumers in the country. All
would do is to call the attention OF
the House to the fact that this
farmer would find any increase
IN the minimum wage a rather
difficult pill to take. He does
produce for us, he does provide
TOR us, and I for one am not go
ing to be inundated by any re-
marks made on the Floor regard
less OF who makes them"
A bill that passed the House
and Senate and which has now
become law is the extension Of
unemployment benefits on a com
pulsory basis. The result of this
as shown by a table inserted ir
bne Congressional Record ind.
Gates that Montana is going to bS
taxed $2,600.000 and could re-
celve a maximum benefit of only
$1,100,000, making a net loss. OF
$1,500,000 to our States economy
There are only five states tina
will receive more than they con,
tribute. These states have a tota
reserve of we'll over two billion
dollars, and could certainly take
care of themselves without ask
ing that we in Montana contribute
financially to their problem.
l would have been happy tx
support legislation as was passed
in 1858 where the states coulc
elect to go under the program, bur
there can be no justification fol
this compulsory, arbitrary formu-
la adopted by the Congress.