GENERAL FARAI PROGRAM 375 



US a total consumer jwpulation in this country of around 170 million 

 people as a minimum by 1J)75. Of course, we are not dealing at the 

 moment with 1!)T5, but in our projections we have to think in those 

 terms. 



Next, the best information which we have been able to get indi- 

 ■cates to us that if we had adequate adjustment within agriculture and 

 production emphasis of the various crops, taking into account, of 

 course, a full-production economy, a high-level economy with sub- 

 stantially full employment so that we might have a higli domestic 

 nse of agricultural connnodities, taking into account what seems to 

 us to be the direction of f(n"eign policy in terms of international trade, 

 and taking into account another matter which I shall mention later 

 and that is the need for adequate reserves of storable agricultural 

 commodities, it seems to us that counting those factors in with ade- 

 quate adjustment within agriculture, our productive plant is not 

 only not too big, but in the years rather immediately ahead we may 

 be hard pressed to find ways and means and we will need all of the 

 things that science can develop and that technolo-y can develop to 

 give our plant the ])roductive capacity to meet our total needs, do- 

 mestic and foreign, with adequate, sound reserves. 



The second long-time assumption that I should like to challenge, 

 find this assumption seems to be more definitely implied in title II of 

 the 1948 Farm Act, is that low prices on a crop that happens to be 

 in surplus will, of themselves — and I have heard many statements 

 made to that effect — without so-called regimentation — result in re- 

 duced production of that commodity. 



I challenge that statement, Mr. Chairman, on the basis of any rec- 

 ords of agriculture that have ever been available. I have searched 

 the records as far as I have been able to find them and there are no 

 records to substantiate that assumption. Without a program where 

 ii farmer Knows he can work in cooperation with all other farmers, the 

 only answer that an individual farmer could possibly have to low 

 prices for his crop is to do everything within his power to increase 

 production so that the multi]ile of increased production times lower 

 and lower prices might, he hoi)es, yield him enough revenue to enable 

 him to sta}' in business. 



It seems to me as far as I have been able to check the records that 

 that is the record of the ])roduction pattern in agriculture as far back 

 as any adequate records have been kei)t. 



You will recall, of course, that up until the designation of the Stea- 

 gall commodities during the war, we dealt primarily only with the 

 so-called six basic commodities. Mr. Chairman, I have read the 

 19-18 Farm Act over and over and I recognize that I am just a rea- 

 sonably dumb sort of fellow and because I could not understand it 

 I had se^•eral economists give me analyses of it. Upon studying their 

 analyses I found the economists could not agree on title II of the 

 1948 Farm Act so I can only |)reface my statement by saying that if 

 my understanding of the 1948 Farm Act is correct, on January 1, sans 

 any positive action by the Congress, the specific authority for tlie 90 

 l^ercent of the Steagall commodities will expire and therefore we will 

 be back to the six basic connnodities, plus, I believe, wool for a period 

 of 1 or 2 years additional, and some discretion on the part of the 

 Secretary of Agricidture which would only be implemented if the 



