192 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



foreign export demand, and all the other factors which go to measure 

 the annual production of a crop and its volume. Therefore, it would 

 be inconsistent to apply the unit limitation to a crop which was under 

 marketing quotas because already some limitation has apparently 

 been put on that crop through the marketing quota and acreage 

 limitation. 



You referred to the fact that you have in your State — and many 

 other States are similarly situated, I am sure — several crops which 

 are now or may be under marketing quotas or acreage limitations. 

 Let us take an example which may help me clarify my views about it. 

 Let us say that a particular farm raised cotton and livestock, for 

 example, and tobacco. The farmer raises 2,000 units of cotton. 

 That is over the 1,800 units that I have suggested as a figure for 

 study. He also raises 600 units of tobacco. Six hundred plus 2,000 

 would give him 2,600 units. That would be over the 1,800 units 

 suggested. 



He also raises a number of units of livestock. It would be my 

 suggestion that the committee think about this recommendation in 

 these terms, that inasmuch as cotton and tobacco are under marketing 

 quotas and acreage limitations, if they are, that' as far as the 1,800 

 is concerned it be not applicable in such a way as to scale down the 

 marketing or affect the marketing of the 2,000 units of cotton or the 

 600 units of tobacco, but that inasmuch as the total amount of 600 

 plus 2,000 is over 1,800, that on any other commodity for which there 

 is not an acreage limitation or marketing quotas he would not enjoy 

 further benefit of the support program. 



The Chairman. Bringing it down to actual application in regard 

 to tobacco, if I understand you correctly the tobacco program would 

 operate, under your proposal, just about as it operates now. Farmers 

 would have acreage allotments and marketing quotas and they would 

 have a support program which would provide for loans which could 

 be handled in somewhat the same manner as they are now being- 

 handled through the Stabilization corporations. 



Secretary Brannan. Exactly so. 



The Chairman. In other words, the program would not be disturbed 

 and there would be no change in it other than with regard to the 

 fair price, which will be determined in a manner different from the 

 manner in which it is now determined. Is that true? 



Secretary Brannan. Yes. The support standard as distinguished 

 from the parity formula, to get it into common terms. 



May I also just elaborate one step further. This is by way of 

 answering the argument that the proposal interferes with the tendency 

 toward diversion or readjustment in crops. Let us say that the 

 particular farm that we were speaking of a moment ago had 1,000 

 units of cotton and 300 units of tobacco. That would mean that he 

 had about 1,300 units in two crops which were subject to quotas. 



He then went into the livestock business or any other kind of 

 business which enjoyed a support price. There would be left 500 

 units. Let us say it is livestock. There would be 500 units of live- 

 stock which he would sell into the market place and which would 

 enjoy support. 



I have taken an example both above and below the suggested level 

 which, as I think I said the other day, might amount to in the area 

 of $25,000 at present prices. 



