/ 



114 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



Mr. Pace. Mr. Walker, Mr. Hunter testified that, under the Agri- 

 cultural Adjustment Act of 1948, the Secretary has authority to make 

 acreage allotments to the noncommercial areas comparable to those 

 in the commercial areas; and hence, if the commercial area should 

 vote quotas, the Secretary would impose comparable reductions in 

 the noncommercial area; and, if that is true, the fears which Mr. 

 Andresen refers to would not be realized? 



Mr. WooLLEY. With regard to that question, Mr. Chairman, I 

 think you will find the testimony of the Solicitor was to the effect that 

 the Secretary of Agriculture had the authority to do so, but the 

 question of whether or not he would do so was not answered by the 

 Solicitor, and the statement was made by some member that he might 

 want to do so, but not by the Solicitor. 



Mr. Andresen. But, on the penalties involved in the noncommercial 

 area, I do not think the penalty would be very effective, if they sell 

 at less than the support price, or are denied the support price, because 

 over in Tennessee or in New Jersey or in some Eastern State, thev 

 get $1.61 a bushel. 



Mr. Walker. Yes. 



Mr. Andresen. And in the support-price program, in the- com- 

 mercial area, they get around $1.33 to $1.36, and out in California, 

 where they can grow three crops a year on the irrigated land — and 

 where they talk about growing 3 bales of cotton — they have $1.70 

 for a support price in the commercial corn area. 



Air. Pace. But in carrying out the provisions of the law, in the 

 commercial area, they can come under the 75-percent provision. 



Mr. Andresen. The 75 percent. 



Mr. Walker. You mean 75 percent of the rate applicable to the 

 commercial area? 



Mr. Pace. Yes. If the commercial area were to vote quotas, 

 the support in the noncommercial is 75 percent of the support in the 

 commercial area, but if the commercial area voted against quotas 

 the support price is only 50 percent of parity, out of which the non- 

 commercial would get only 75 percent, which would make a support 

 price to the noncommercial area of 37.5 percent of parity, even though 

 the commercial area has refused to vote quotas. 



Mr. Andresen. Does the gentleman mean by that that the $170 per 

 bushel for corn in California is not the correct support price? 



Mr. Pace. The difference in the support price, under the present 

 support-price program for corn is due to the fact that they fix the 

 support figure for certain markets and then adjust that for other areas 

 by adding transportation charges; but, under this new law, which I 

 hope will not go into effect on the 1st day of January, if it goes into 

 effect, and quotas are submitted to the commercial area, and they 

 disapprove, then the corn producers in my State will have a support 

 price of 37.5 percent of parity, while those in the commercial area will 

 have a support price of 50 percent of parity. Then what is happening 

 today, I think, would be a thing of the past. 



Mr. Andresen. Wliat I have been trying to point out is that 

 there is every inducement at the present time, at least, for farmers 

 in the noncommercial corn area to increase their acreage and produc- 

 tion of corn because of the high support price, and then because, if there 

 is no penalty, they can plant as much corn as they want to, and as a 



