The Problem Facing Farmers 





X 



X 



K 



X 



X 



X 



By Earl C. Smithy President 

 Illinois Agricultural Association 



VJ^^HE Agricultural Adjustment 

 t^ Act of 1938 is now in its early 

 ^^ stages of administration. 



This Act had its origin in the grain 

 and cotton fields of the Middle West 

 and South beginning in the middle 

 twenties. The initial efforts of or- 

 ganized farmers were directed toward 

 securing national legislation enabling 

 them to maintain price levels for farm 

 commodities on a fair exchange basis 

 with industrial goods and American 

 wage standards. These principles for 

 the solution of the problem were em- 

 bodied in the McNary Haugen bills 

 of 1926-27-28. 



During the debate on this legisla- 

 tion in congress, it became increasingly 

 apparent that if farmers were to be 

 successful in the stabilization of price 

 levels of basic farm products on a fair 

 exchange ratio, they must be permitted 

 to gain effective control of the annual 

 and seasonal surpluses of such com- 

 modities. 



It is well known that crop surpluses 

 can be much more economically and 

 effectively controlled when stored on 

 the farm than when allowed to enter 

 the terminal warehouses. It is also 

 apparent to thinking farmers that if 

 surpluses are controlled in such man- 

 ner by farmers, it becomes necessary 

 later to adjust production to the ex- 

 tent necessary to permit orderly flow 

 of such stored up surpluses into the 

 market channels of the country. 



This is exactly what the AAA of 

 1938 affords farmers an opportunity 

 to accomplish. We shall see in the 

 weeks and months immediately before 

 us to what extent farmers are interested 

 in putting business principles into the 

 business of farming. 



We all recognize the limitations of 

 the program and its administration. 

 The Act does not in every way rep- 

 resent the thought of the Illinois Agri- 

 cultural Association. There are many 

 details connected with its administra- 



tion which appear to be too inflexible. 

 These have resulted in many inequal- 

 ities if not injustices in corn and soil 

 depleting allotments of individual 

 farms. However, I firmly believe that 

 the fundamental principles of the pro- 

 gram are sound, workable and defen- 

 sible, and I believe farmers will be 

 making a great mistake if they fail to 

 do their utmost in making the program 

 effective in controlling surpluses that 

 now exist as well as at their source. 



With the tremendous crop surpluses 

 of wheat forecast for the coming har- 

 vest, the enormous carryover of corn 

 reported on April 1 which can only 

 result in large surpluses next fall if 

 normal weather and normal acreage 

 are experienced this summer, the ques- 

 tion immediately before farmers is this: 



"Shall we take advantage of our op- 

 portunities before it is too late and 

 prevent these oncoming surpluses from 

 seriously breaking price levels, then 

 later move forward to correct any weak- 

 nesses and inequities in the present 

 program; or shall we exaggerate these 

 initial mistakes to the extent that we 

 seek satisfaction in ignoring the act 

 and its opportunities for securing and 

 maintaining fair prices for basic farm 

 products.'" 



For many year farmers have sought 

 a federal statute giving them an oppor- 

 tunity on a cooperative basis to do 

 what successful business and industry 

 have long done — namely, to control 

 production so as to balance supply 

 with demand and thereby sustain price 

 levels. 



Should we forget that the farm prob- 

 lem is one of the most complex and 

 difficult problems with which the Na- 

 tion is confronted? 



In appraising the AAA of 1938 and 

 its weaknesses and limitations, let us 

 not forget that many of its difficulties 

 necessarily arise from the complexities 

 of agriculture itself, an industry which 

 involves some 30,000,000 people, 1,- 



000,000,000 acres of land, one-half of 

 which is tillable and upon which is 

 grown 200 raw commodities, people 

 of every race, religion, and political 

 party, commodity peculiarities, historic 

 sectional prejudices, peculiarities of 

 markets, etc. 



Should we forget that the administra- 

 tive committees of farmers chosen and 

 elected by the producers themselves 

 have had a tremendous task in breaking 

 down the county allotments to the in- 

 dividual farms because of the limita- 

 tion of time and the hurriedly pre- 

 pared regulations.' 



Should we be unduly critical because 

 of all these circumstances, or should 

 we be as helpful as possible in trying 

 to make the Act effective? 



No doubt, there are many cases 

 where for one or more reasons, farm- 

 ers will find it very difficult, if not 

 impossible to fully comply with the 

 program this year. But by giving com- 

 pliance to the full extent that condi- 

 tions will permit, and thus be in better 

 position to work with those who have 

 found it possible to fully cooperate 

 this year, we will as farmers be in a 

 much better position to seek and se- 

 cure any changes in the law or its ad- 

 ministration that is found in the light 

 of experience to be necessary. Our 

 goal is a workable program that will 

 place farmers in a position to perman- 

 ently and effectively control surpluses, 

 make necessary adjustments in produc- 

 tion, permit surpluses to flow into mar- 

 ket channels without bearish influence 

 upon price, or in other words to make 

 the law of supply and demand operate 

 so as to sustam fair price levels for 

 farmers as has been accomplished by 

 American business. 



In appraising the Agricultural Ad- 

 justment Act, its purposes and its op- 

 f)ortunities, I have confidence that a 

 arge majority of farmers will not only 

 be fair but careful when making their 

 decision and discharging their respon- 

 sibility. 



•, ■ ■■ ■:: -I-.'- .-•;: 

 LA. A. RECORD 





t' 



