336 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



and other commodities that seemed of necessity to be raised on large 

 farms or plantations and aheady have quotas, you rather retreated 

 from your position of limiting this program to a family-sized farm. 

 Am I wi'ong in that? 



Secretary Brannan. I made the error the initial day, in an effort 

 to shorten up the statement, of not discussing the point of conflict 

 between the acreage limitation and marketing quota laws which 

 presumably attempt to gear total national production to total national 

 need and the 1,800-unit limitation on application of price supports. 



The information that we added later on was to the effect that 

 where this conflict occurs the weight of the decision would go in favor 

 of the marketing quota and the acreage limitation, namely that the 

 1,800-unit limitation would not apply if the crop was under acreage 

 limitations or marketing quotas. 



Mr. Cotton. But you are really convinced that there is a way 

 of having price supports at a reasonably high level, a guaranteed 

 profit to the farmer, a standard of living such as he has enjoyed in 

 the last 10 or 15 years, and not have to resort to actual crop control? 



Secretary Brannan. No, I have not said that at all, because we 

 already have crop controls and I have asked for retention of the 

 present statutes with respect to crop controls. As a matter of fact, I 

 understand that one of the bases of criticism is that we would be 

 seeking more crop controls. 



I tried to make clear yesterday that I have not done that. 



Mr. Cotton. It is my understanding that under your system I get 

 support for my 1,800 units or whatever standard is fixed but I can 

 produce to my heart's content in excess of that except that I do not 

 get support on the excess. 



Secretary Brannan. Unless you are in a crop which is under 

 acreage limitations or marketing quotas, in which event you could 

 not, except with penalties. 



You can still produce in excess under acreage limitations and 

 marketing quotas, although it is not a very good business. 



Mr. Cotton. Leaving aside those that are under marketing quotas 

 and acreage limitations I can produce all I want but my support only 

 applies to one segment of it, does it not? 



Secretary Brannan. That would be correct. 



Mr. Cotton. So if that were eliminated or did not work out, it 

 would be definitely a plan of crop control. That part of the plan ssijs 

 to the farmer, "You can raise all you want to of these particular 

 commodities, but we limit the support to a certain fixed amount." 



That is correct, is it not? 



Secretary Brannan. No, sir. As previously indicated, the produc- 

 tion payment can be so related to or coupled with goals or allotments 

 that it would be applicable only to those persons who complied and 

 could have the effect of discouraging production and assisting those 

 people who stayed within their allotments. 



Under the existing law we theoretically do that. We theoretically 

 give the producer of potatoes his loan or purchase agreement when 

 he is a compiler with the allotment program. But it is just as profit- 

 able not to be a compiler as it is to be a compiler where you are using 

 purchase agreements or loans. 



Mr. Cotton. Under your proposal, would that situation exist in 

 cattle and hogs? You put a provision in so that you can limit the 

 production if the producer is going to enjoy support on any part of it? 



