GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 199 



Mr. Hope. I do not want to pursue that any further now, because 

 it is a collateral issue. 



Mr. Pace. Mr. Chairman. 



The Chairman. Mr. Pace. 



Mr. Pace. Mr. Secretary, I want to get back to the plan you pro- 

 posed. I want to make one comment on this discussion that has not 

 been made here. \Vlien you attempt to support part of a crop and 

 do not support the other part, have 3^ou given consideration to the 

 stupendous cost to our Government? One of two things is bound 

 to happen. 



If you are supporting three-fourths or four-fifths of the crop and the 

 remainder of it is in a free market, two things are going to happen. 

 One is that the support level on thi-ee-fourths is going to have a 

 tendency to raise the market price. Those not enjoying support wall 

 get part of the benefit from it. 



Then it will have the second tendency of breaking the support level. 

 It will bring the supported portion of the crop down below the support 

 level, and you wdl have to pay the difference between the support 

 level and the market price. 



I can see the possibility that it will cost you hundreds and hundreds 

 of millions of dollars to permit a part of the crop to move in a free 

 market and therefore break your support level and require you to 

 pay the difference. 



Mr. Hope. Will you yield for this comment? TMiat the Secretary 

 has just said about potatoes where he supported part of the crop and 

 did not support the rest proves exactly what you are sajdng. 



Mr. Pace. Frankly, I am hoping that you will consider the reverse. 

 I am disturbed about the big operator, but instead of the plan you 

 propose of giving him limited support, I would like to see you turn and 

 help the family-sized farmer through his acreage allotments and see 

 that he gets an acreage allotment adequate to make a living on his 

 farm. 



When you give a man an allotment on the basis of a family-sized 

 farm under the quota laws, you protect the family-sized farm and it 

 will have the result of reducing considerably the acreage of the big 

 operators and it will not cost you one single dime. 



Mr. Andresen. Will the gentleman yield? 



What the gentleman said is true, and furthermore, it may leave the 

 Government holding biUions of dollars worth of farm products as a 

 result of the entire operation. 



Secretar}- Bfaxn.an. Except for the last sentence, may I say I do 

 not agree with what you have said, Mr. Pace? 



Mr. Pace. You mean you do not agree that in making acreage 

 allotments we should take into account making allotments adequate 

 for the family-sized farmer to make a living? 



Secretary Branxan. No, I was referring first of all to your language, 

 to the effect that when some part of the commodity moves in the free 

 market, that that is an argument for not using production payments. 

 I assume that was what you were directing that argument to. I do 

 not agree with that. ; 



The second thing that you haye just said with which I do not agree, 

 Mr. Pace, is that you are going to solve the problem by giving the 

 small farmer acreage allotments when a good, part of them we are 

 talking about do not have acreage. We haive' to give them acreage 

 before they get acreage allotments. 



