152 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



cess of 1,800 units would not enjoy support on the excess. This 

 would exclude part of the production on approximately 2 percent of 

 the farms of the Nation. 



I have arrived at this recommendation with considerable caution. 

 If we are encouraging the initiative of individual farm enterprisers we 

 must not set the eligibility point too low. As a matter of fact, we 

 need to place it as high as possible and still preserve the essential 

 rur^l values I hav? mentioned. The dividing point I am recommend- 

 ing has been determined on the basis of census material relating to 

 farms. This dividing point will provide support for just about the 

 amount of production available for sale from our largest family 

 farms. Such a large family farm Avould be a modern, mechanized, 

 efficiently-operated farm with some hired labor, particularly during 

 peak work periods, but still a farm on which the farmer accepted full 

 responsibility for the management and on which the farmer and his 

 family did a great deal, if not the bulk, of the farm work. 

 ^ Concluding observations: Summarizing the suggested program 

 methods, I would like to call your particular attention to these points: 



1. We would base price supports on a realistic income standard, 

 which is a more fundamental base than price alone, and yet we would 

 continue operations in the price field. The economy would continue 

 to have the same price stabilizing benefits which have been important 

 contributions of past programs. 



2. This would not be just a support-and-control program. It 

 would directly encourage the movement of a greater volume of com- 

 modites for which demand is elastic in relation to price, as well as 

 hold down the production of surpluses. This would enable the pub- 

 lic to realize more direct benefits. 



3. The recommended program makes definite provisions for support 

 of nonstorable commodities, which represent about tlu-ee-fourths of 

 cash farm receipts and which have not been adequately covered before. 

 Some of these nonstorable items would be eligible for the same prefer- 

 ential treatment that stora*ble basics have received. This enables 

 the program to work more directly toward the development of a 

 production pattern in line with people's needs and market demands. 



4. The recommended program permits plenty of leeway for enlarg- 

 ing farms in the mterest of efficiency and better living standards, but 

 it does not encourage the concentration of production on extremely 

 large farms. 



5. This program provides a closer tie between price supports and 

 other parts of the farm program and increases the responsibility of 

 farmers for carrying out the objectives of national farm policy. 



6. The suggested methods of operation are not new in principle, 

 and few are new in practice. 



So much for the program methods. 



In the final analysis, a program cannot be judged by its aims 

 and methods alone, but by actual results. I believe the recom- 

 mended program will measure up to the standards I nientioned in 

 the beginning. It provides farm people with price and mcome sup- 

 ports and the general economy with a large measure of stability. It 

 provides for ample reserves of storable commodities needed for 

 national security and for carrying out our foreign policy. It is rea- 

 sonably simple and thereby subject to efficient, administration. It 

 seeks not only in general but in certain specific ways to assure the 



