218 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



cost of production, could go into the market place and still sell at a 

 profitable price, whereas the other farmer on the small hillside farm, 

 who was unable to use machinery and unable to reduce his per-unit 

 cost, would get the support program, but it would be limited. 



Now, is it possible for us to separate your recommendations? In 

 other words, could we have an effective program if we accept your 

 price determination, which, frankly, appeals' to me because it brings 

 us up to a more reasonable date; and certainly it is a 10-year period 

 in which the farmers of the Nation have enjoyed some degree of pros- 

 perity, at least. Could we adopt that and your production payment 

 plan, and then resort to the controls that are now in the law, which 

 you say you have and which are almost complete? 



In other words, it appears to me that you have almost plenary power 

 under either the Aiken bill or the present program. What is your 

 comment with respect to that suggestion? 



Secretary Brannan. Mr. Chahman, first of all I must say that 

 technically the limitation upon the amount of support extended to the 

 production of any one agricultural unit is technically detachable from 

 the balance of the program. As a matter of fact, there are several 

 parts of the program which could be enacted or passed over entirely 

 without affecting at all the utility and usefulness of the part of the 

 program which was adopted. 



The Chairman. My recollection is that in your first testimony you 

 indicated that this 1,800-unit proposal was something that you had 

 suggested yourself as somewhere within the bounds of reason but that 

 you were not firmly fixed on the 1,800 unit and it might be too high 

 or too low. 



Secretary Brannan. That is correct, sir. 



The Chairman. In other words, that is a figure you just took out 

 of the air, so to speak? 



Secretary Brannan. Hardly that; the figure was derived from the 

 1945 census of agriculture, but we hold no brief for that particular 

 figure. It might be hish and it could have been low. 



The Chairman. The objective which you had in mind was to 

 protect the income of the small operator, the small family-sized 

 farm, and at the same time not encourage the large operator to con- 

 tribute to a surplus of any commodity? 



Secretary Brannan. I think those were the general objectives, to 

 maintain the stability of the rural community. 



The Chairman. Could we not still keep that objective in mind 

 and perhaps accomplish the same objective by using the controls 

 which we now have in the law? We have complete control over the 

 basic commodities, if the farmers or two-thirds of the farmers vote 

 in favor of marketing quotas. 



Secretary Brannan. That is right. 



The Chairman. If we can use the other powers which you have in 

 the law at the present time — that is, to withhold soil conservation 

 payments, withhold any kind of support prices unless the farmers 

 bring production in line with consumption — it seems to me we can 

 accomplish the same objective which you have in mind without 

 resorting to this 1,800 unit proposition, which, frankly, to me is com- 

 plicated and somewhat confusing. 



Secretary Brannan. Mr. Chairman, I again say that the balance 

 of the program could move forward into enactment without that 



