Next Year's AAA Program 



How to Strengthen Weaknesses In Administration of 

 tlie Present Act Being Studied 



^[|^*^LUGGING the holes in the 

 Lj 1938 agricultural adjustment 



^. program was the subject of a 

 spirited discussion at the Midwest Farm 

 Bureau Training School, Lafayette, Indi- 

 ana, July 21. 



With President Earl C. Smith, of the 

 lAA presiding, Claude Wickard, direc- 

 tor of the north central division of the 

 AAA, answered questions and outlined 

 some of the problems now being given 

 serious study for next year. 



"One thing we're going to have to do, 

 and that is get the acreage allotments out 

 on time," said Wickard. He inti- 

 mated that there would have been sub- 

 stantially more compliance, had the allot- 

 ments been out a month earlier. 



"Another thing we hope to do is to 

 simplify the program," he continued. 

 Wickard said that the differences and 

 peculiarities in crop production between 

 sections of the country were largely re- 

 sponsible for the multiplicity of rulings. 

 These rulings are the result of never- 

 ending demands from local committees, 

 farmers, and others for clarification of 

 details, he said. He held out little hope 

 that a general farm program applicable 

 to little and big farms, owner and tenant 

 operated farms, and one fair alike to the 

 grain, livestock, dairy, wheat, and fruit 

 and vegetable farmer could be written in 

 a few words and on a single sheet of 

 paper. 



A Big Problem 



"One of the biggest problems we are 

 up against," said Wickard, "is to bring 

 about the adjustment in acreage necessary 

 to make the plan effective with the funds 

 at our disposal. 



"It would be easy to get a much higher 

 percentage of compliance — up to 90 per 

 cent or more — if we made it simple for 

 all to go along. Our recent survey has 

 shown that where farmers are required to 

 make only a slight adjustment in their 

 cropping plans, we get about 90 per cent 

 compliance. But where farmers have a 

 high soil depleting history and must 

 make more drastic adjustments to comply 

 for the payments we get only about 40 

 per cent compliance. 



"It is hard to get these farmers with 

 high history to go along, yet we need 

 their compliance to control crop surpluses. 

 Our survey showed that farmers in this 

 group had to make a substantially 

 higher adjusment to qualify for soil 

 conservation payments. 



"We realize that the men who have 

 been following a sound soil conservation 



program as recommended by the state 

 agricultural college have a just complaint 

 when their neighbors who have been 

 robbing the soil are given a higher corn 

 or wheat allotment in line with their high 

 history. 



"But what would be the result if we 

 spent all our money, gave it to the low 

 history farmers for making no change in 

 their cropping plans, and came to the 

 end of the year without any substantial 

 downward adjustment in acreage? How 

 long would such a program hold up.' 

 What would our critics say then.' After 

 all this is a crop adjustment program and 

 we have tried to develop our rules to get 

 results, insisting that every man make 

 some contribution to the adjustment to 

 be eligible for payments." 



At conferences of leaders charged with 

 administration of the program in the 

 states and counties, Wickard said that 

 there was little hope expressed that it 

 would be possible to get very far away 

 from the history of crop acreage on each 

 farm and have a successful program. 

 Compromise Two Views 



He admitted that the object of a pres- 

 ent study by Department of Agriculture 

 research men is to work out a better com- 

 promise between those who insist that the 

 soil-robbing farmers make all the adjust- 

 ment and others who believe that pay- 

 ments should be made entirely on the 

 basis of per acre downward adjustment 

 from the customary corn and wheat acre- 

 age grown on each farm. 



Another criticism offered during the 

 question and answer period from the 

 floor, has to do with the plight of the 

 small farmer who is asked to reduce corn 

 acreage below what he needs to feed live- 

 stock used for home consumption. 

 Wickard stated that this problem too, 



^^K?e,7^ 



OoprWJMOm! fataia itatatt. Inc.. 



1 kM twr^ M* Ud wko M Ma w«Mm hr 



was being given consideration for next 

 year's program; that there was senti- 

 ment expressed in favor of letting a small 

 farmer produce all the corn he needs for 

 home consumption, and making it pos- 

 sible for him to earn his benefit payments 

 by such soil improving practices as lim- 

 ing, terracing, pasture improvements, and 

 so on. 



Shall We Fix Farm 

 Prices? 



^ \ yl — HY not have the government 

 ^^y 1/ fix minimum prices for farm 

 ff ff products and do away with 

 all the bother of acreage adjustment, 

 measuring compliance, commodity loans, 

 surplus storage, township and county 

 committees, benefit and parity payments, 

 etc. .' 



This question tossed into the hopper 

 for discussion at the Midwest Farm Bu- 

 reau Training School, at Purdue Uni- 

 versity July 18-21 produced some lively 

 comment. 



"TTiis plan has been given no serious 

 thought, thus far, by responsible leaders," 

 replied H. R. Tolley, AAA Administra- 

 tor, "because this country is a democracy. 

 We have heard something about dictator- 

 ship and regimentation. We haven't had 

 any of that up to date. Our programs 

 thus far have been absolutely voluntary. 

 But if minimum price fixing were in- 

 voked, that would be real dictatorship 

 and regimentation." It would be neces- 

 sary to license all buyers of farm prod- 

 ucts, Tolley explained. Enforcement of 

 such a law would be a tremendous prob- 

 lem in a country as large as the United 

 States. 



Who Will Buy? I 



It's one thing to fix minimum prices 

 and it's another to get buyers for your 

 commodities at the prices fixed, suggested 

 President Earl Smith. If we fixed mini- 

 mum prices for corn, cotton and wheat, 

 the demand for fixing the price of hogs, 

 cattle, sheep, |X)ultry, fruits and vege- 

 tables and other products would follow. 

 Then how could you get buyers for all 

 your livestock and other perishable prod- 

 ucts when ready for market if they didn't 

 choose to pay the price demanded.' 



Price fixing, Tolley explained, is not 

 a new thing in the world but it would 

 lead away from democracy and into regi- 

 mentation and dictatorship. He dis- 

 counted the idea that it would be possible 

 for farmers to organize and effectively fix 

 minimum prices on their products as 

 manufacturers are doing on monopoly 

 goods. Agriculture is so widespread, so 

 easy for anyone with a little capital to 

 get into, that price-fixing, it was generally 



4 



\ 



agreed, would break down. 



\ 



L A. A. RECORD 



