Illinois Leads in Congressional 

 Support of Farm Legislation 



I. A. A. Plays Prominent Part in Fight for National Farnn Policy Since Early '20s 



WHEN a farm bill affecting the 

 interests of corn belt agricul- 

 ture is before Congress, old time 

 Washington observers say you can 

 count on getting more votes from the 

 Illinois delegation in the House than 

 that of any other state. 



Back in February 1927 when the 

 fight waxed warm over the McNary- 

 Haugen bill which was opposed every 

 step of the way by the Industrial East, 

 Illinois came through with flying col- 

 ors. Eighteen votes, the solid down- 

 state delegation, aided by Sabath and 

 Kunz of Cook county, were recorded 

 for the bill on the final roll call. Only 

 seven Illinois congressmen, all from 

 Cook county, opposed the legislation. 



Again in May 1928, despite the veto 

 of the 1927 measure by President Cool- 

 idge, organized farmers pressed on and 

 brought the revised McNary-Haugen 

 bill before the House again for final 

 vote. This time 18 yeas again were 

 registered by Illinois congressmen— 

 the solid downstate delegation plus one 

 from Cook county. Five Cook county 

 votes were recorded against it. 



The Agricultural Adjustment Act 

 passed by the House Mar. 22, 1933 saw 

 Illinois in the lead a third time sup- 

 porting an important farm measure. A 



total of 23 favorable votes was the 

 count, this time including six votes 

 from Cook county to four against. 



The fourth major farm measure 

 which came before Congress only re- 

 cently is the bill embodying amend- 

 ments to the Soil Conservation Act of 

 1935. The vote on this measure ^vas 

 taken in the House February 21 when 

 21 Illinois congressmen gave it their 

 approval. Only one vote was cast 

 against it — that of Rep. Ralph Church 

 of Evanston. Rep's. Buckbee of Rock- 

 ford, Martin Brennan of Bloomington 

 and A. J. Sabath of Chicago did not 

 vote. The Illinois delegation in Con- 

 gress, numbering only 25 since Michael 

 F. Igoe, congressman-at-large. and 

 Rep. Arnold were appointed to other 

 positions, thus delivered 21 out of 25 

 possible votes for the legislation. 



Those who voted for the bill are: 

 Adair. Allen, Arends, Beam, Dirksen, 

 Dobbins, Keller. Kelly, Kocialkowski, 

 Lucas, McAndrews, McKeough, Mason, 

 Meeks, Mitchell, O'Brien. Parsons, 

 Reed, Schaefer, Schuetz. Thompson. 



The bill passed by a record vote of 

 267 to 97 with 65 not voting. As we 

 go to press the bill has been sent to 

 Conference Committee to iron out dif- 

 ferences between the House and Sen- 



LEADING THE WAY 



ate over details. It is expected to be 

 approved at an early date by both 

 Houses and signed by the President. 



In each instance, the educational 

 work among Illinois congressmen by 

 the I. A. A. was the dominant factor in 

 winning solid downstate support. Time 

 after time, Illinois representatives have 

 been invited to meetings, often at din- 

 ner, where President Smith and others 

 have carefully explained the prin- 

 ciples and details of the pending legis- 

 lation. 



Equally effective have been letters 

 and telegrams from County Farm Bu- 

 reau officials to their congressmen. 

 Without alert organization it is safe to 

 assume that the opposition, always well 

 organized against practically every 

 farm bill thus far proposed, would 

 have been far more successful. 



To what extent the influence of Illi- 

 nois Farm Bureau members repre- 

 sented by the Illinois Agricultural As- 

 sociation has been effective in mould- 

 ing national agricultural policy is little 

 appreciated except by those who have 

 been in closest touch with the fight 

 for farm equality beginning back in 

 the early '20s. 



The part played by George N. Peek 

 (Continued on page 8) 



CONSXff^^^^ 



■Q 



\ 



X 







f^'-'' 



