GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 317 



that if we are going to have a support program I have always felt 

 that you as Secretary of Agriculture must have control over production 

 or people might go out and produce so much of some of these com- 

 modities that it would be embarrassing to you and the United States 

 Treasury. 



Secretary Brannan. I think that is right. Even if you did not 

 have SLiiy program of supports we might see tremendous production 

 of some commodities. 



Mr. Murray. Here is a point I think we should decide on. Are 

 we justified in supporting any farm commodity in excess of what we 

 need in the United States? 



Secretary Braxxax. In excess of what we need in the United States 

 and for export and so on? 



Mr. Murray. I do not want to subsidize exports. I am willing 

 to let the export products find their own level. In the first years 

 when I was here wheat got as low as 54 cents a bushel. That was in 

 August of 1939. Yet at that time we were paying 27 cents a bushel 

 export subsidy on the wheat. 



The point I am trying to make is that we must have some basis on 

 which we support only what is needed within the confines of the 

 United States and let the exports carry their own load. 



I do not want to have to milk cows to pay taxes so somebody can 

 raise wheat and have the Government subsidize the wheat exports. 



I am willing to let them have the same chance I have on what is 

 used in the United States. Am I wTong in that thinking? 



Secretary Braxxan. Mr. Murray, it is an involved problem to 

 give a categorical yes or no on. I think it could be m the pubhc 

 interest to do whatever was necessary by inducements of some 

 character to have an adequate supply over and above domestic needs 

 for storage. 



Perhaps it should not be as a regular export arrangement. We do 

 now subsidize — and there I think the term is used correctly — the 

 exports of some crops and have done so in an eft'ort to maintain our 

 position in a world market, which market has been very critical as 

 a result of the war. I think almost everyone would say that the 

 efforts we have exerted to maintain our position in the world market 

 are in the best interests of all the people. 



I do not want to categorically agree with what you say because I 

 think there are many areas of exception. 



]Mr. AIurray. If we are going to treat all phases of agriculture the 

 same, which I hope to live long enough to see, we must have some 

 restriction on that order. I do not like to get section 32 funds largely 

 from imports of wool and other livestock products and then dispose 

 of them in the marketing of fruits and applesauce. 



We are operating an upside down program when we do that. In 

 respect to the chairman, I will not mention tobacco. If we have a 

 support program as far as I am concerned, the support must be based 

 on what we need in the United States. 



However, if we need that for a foreign purpose of the United States 

 as we have in the last 2 or 3 or 4 years, I would include that in the 

 support. 



That leads to what we are going to do about imports. I reahze the 

 powers the President has under section 22 of the triple A Act. Yet I 

 can see that any plan will have a lot of compHcations before the 

 President can put it in operation. Last year om* total imports in 



