GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 17JI 



Secretary Brannan. And if I may say, Mr. Chairman, that is the 

 key to this whole discussion. 



The correct comparison is not one between what the proposed 

 program may cost and the cost of no program at all, but a comparison 

 between what the recommended program may cost and what the 

 present program on the statute books is going to cost if it is projected 

 into the next year or two. We have some very tangible evidence of 

 what the present program is costing already and not benefiting con- 

 sumers in any way, shape or form. 



The Chairman. But before costs of the present program were 

 actually incurred, there was no way that you could determine with 

 accuracy the ultimate cost of any particular program, was there? 



Secretary Brannan. That is correct. 



The Chairman. In other words, you had no way of knowing that 

 per-acre yields on potatoes, for instance, would increase substantially 

 as they have increased? 



Secretary Brannan. No; we began to get some intimations from 

 our experience of the last 2 years. We knew enough the last 2 years 

 to suggest to the Congress that some kind of real acreage limitation 

 should have been applicable to potatoes. 



The Chairman. In recent years there has been a definite increase 

 in per-yield production with regard to practically every crop, has 

 there not? 



Secretary Brannan. That is right. 



The Chairman. Is not that a compliment to the American farmer? 



Secretary Brannan. That certainly is, and to the skills of our 

 scientists and the research of our scientists. 



In other words, it is the result of the investment of the American 

 people in the Department of Agriculture. 



The Chairman. You referred to production payments. We have 

 heard a lot of talk in recent years about compensatory payments, 

 production payments, and subsidies. 



How do you regard the production payment as referred to and 

 contemplated by you? Do you regard it in the nature of a subsidy? 



Secretary Brannan. I do not like to refer to it as a subsidy. It is 

 a payment to farmers to encourage them to keep their production 

 up to such a level that all of the people could benefit from our pro- 

 ductive resources. 



The Chairman. And would it also encourage him not to go above 

 a certain level in production, which would be devastating to the 

 farmers? 



Secretary Brannan. Yes, it would. 



The Chairman. In other words, it works both ways. You have 

 set certain goals and this is an inducement to the farmer to stay within 

 those goals, yet to reach the goals that have been set? 



Secretary Brannan. And may I add, Mr. Chairman, also to en- 

 courage orderly marketing. 



We have an example of that right on our threshold in the next 2 

 or 3 months. 



At the appropriate time, I would like to discuss that with the 

 committee. It is the price support operations under the existing law 

 as related to the production of pork and the marketing of pork. x\s 

 you recall, there is a suggestion in the language that we might want 

 to put the production payment suggestions into force and effect within 

 the new few months. 



