220 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



The Chairman. One other thing about cotton. It is true that 

 you now have, say 4,000,000 bales of cotton in the loan. Had you 

 imposed acreage allotments and marketing quotas on 1948 production 

 would it have been effective in bringing about a reduction in the pro- 

 production of cotton? 



Secretary Brannan. No, Mr. Chairman, because under the existing 

 law we would have had to assign a minimum of 27,000,000 acres of 

 cotton whereas the farmers actually only went out and planted 22,000,- 

 000 or 23,000,000 acres of cotton. 



The Chairman. All right, then. If you have 4,000,000 bales of 

 cotton in the loan at the present time it is not due to your failure to 

 ask for marketing quotas, but it is due to the failure of Congress to 

 reduce the 27,000,000 down to 20,000,000 or perhaps 18,000,000? 



Secretary Brannan. Yes. In other words, to sort of modernize 

 the formula for assigning cotton quotas by States and by counties. 



The Chairman. Under the potato program did you have any 

 instruments of control that you could have used to minimize the cost 

 of the potato program? 



Secretary Brannan. We used every one we had available, and they 

 were very ineffective. They amounted to nothing, as a matter of 

 fact. 



Mr. Andresen. Will the chairman yield? 



The Chairman. Yes, I yield to Mr. Andresen, 



Mr. Andresen. Just for a question. 



If we carry out the program suggested by the chairman, where you 

 have control of production and support-price payments, do you not 

 lose sight of the other big objective of your proposal? That is, that 

 would eliminate the lower prices of food to the consumers. 



Secretary Brannan. No; it would lower prices of food to the con- 

 sumers. That is exactly what it would do. 



Mr. Andresen. You want abundant and full production? 



Secretary Brannan. Yes, but — — 



Mr. Andresen. The chairman is suggesting that we have con- 

 trolled production. 



Secretary Brannan. But, Mr. Andresen, you will recall I said in 

 the initial statement, and I again said in the statement this morn- 

 ing- 

 Mr. Andresen. I recognize that, but I am talking about what the 

 chairman said. 



Secretary Brannan. I think he is talking about the same point. 

 He says there is a limit of porduction of some commodities beyond 

 which nobody would want us to go. I pointed out this morning that 

 with respect to potatoes the consumption is inelastic. In other words, 

 an unlimited abundant supply does not give you a proportionate 

 additional increase in consumption because people for some reason or 

 other just eat about so much potatoes, whether they are buying them 

 at $1 or $1.50. 



That is not true of milk and it is not true of meat. The greater 

 the supply of meat at reasonable prices the more of the consumer's 

 dollar is diverted into the purchase of that meat. 



It is a very elastic relationship between supply and demand in 

 that case. 



The point that the chairman was making, with which I entirely 

 agree, and I say it categorically, is that we had an excessive produc- 



