66 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



maintain and stabilize the income of farm people. They would like 

 to achieve that goal with the minimum amount of interference with 

 the normal plan of operation and complete freedom of the farmer to 

 do just as he sees fit. 



Mr. Sutton. The reason I say that, Mr. Secretary, is this: If they 

 are outside of this commercial area and they do not produce corn to 

 such an extent that they should be classified in the commercial area, 

 then they do not produce enough corn that it will matter in one way 

 or the other. 



For that reason, I personally believe they should not be classified as 

 a noncooperotor, even though acreage controls in corn do come about, 

 because they do not produce enough corn to matter. 



Secretary Brannan. If they do not produce enough corn to amount 

 to anything, it might follow, Mr. Sutton, that they do not produce 

 enough corn to seek the need of price support mechanisms. 



Mr. Sutton. I am referring to my home State, which is adjacent 

 to the commercial area. I have been in touch with quite a few of the 

 large producers of corn in the State since yesterday. They are almost 

 of one accord. They would like to come into the commercial area. 



Secretary Brannan. Apparently some of them are. 



Mr. Sutton. But they also say if they do not come under the 

 commercial area that they do not want to be classified as noncoop- 

 erators when it comes down to their tobacco and their cotton, if they 

 have no voice in determining the quotas on corn. 



Mr. WooLLEY. I think a pertinent observation on that, Mr. Sutton, 

 would be that we have never had acreage allotments on corn outside 

 the commercial corn area as such. We have only had soil depleting 

 allowances in our program outside of the commercial corn area. 



Mr. Sutton. But you could have it under this law. 



Mr. WooLLEY. That is true. 



Mr. Sutton. That is the reason I am saying it should be corrected 

 by law in case it ever did come up. 



Secretary Brannan. The answer to that, Mr. Sutton, is simply that 

 if it is necessary to apply some sort of restrictive measures in order to 

 secure the ultimate objective, namely, stability of price and some 

 balance between production and demand, then the amount and the 

 type of restriction that you can place on any one individual, of course, 

 is the thing we are speaking for, the minimum amount. 



If you think the law and the potential power to do the things you 

 indicated, which of course have never been done, should be changed, 

 I certainly am never going to be in the position before this committee 

 of seeking for powers merely for powers' sake. I would" not tell you 

 not to do it. 



Mr. Sutton. I have the highest of compliments for the present 

 Secretary of Agriculture, and I have no doubt whatsoever that he 

 would do it. But I am looking to the future when we may not have 

 as able a Secretary of Agriculture as we have today. 



Secretary Brannan. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 



Mr. CooLEY. Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Pace. Mr. Cooley. 



Mr. Cooley. Mr. Secretary, I am wondering whether or not that 

 power which Mr. Sutton has just referred to exists in the present law 

 or if it is found only in the Aiken bill. 

 fl Secretary Brannan. It has existed since 1938, Mr. Cooley, 



