GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 563 



of politics. The grave danger in many of the proposals which have 

 been put forward is that the^^ would be usecl politically, and we 

 believe that a board is probably the best way to handle it. So, we 

 would recommend a board, and I want to say just a word on how 

 we would suggest that it be appointed. We would have these various 

 devices which have been set up, and the board would be set up with 

 certain purposes to be attained. Those purposes roughly would be 

 to use every available means without the aid of Government, and then, 

 in order of preference, we would turn to the various governmental 

 aids, using such things as our cooperative marketing system, our 

 Marketing Agreements Act, the flexible floors, the fixed floors, the two- 

 price sj'stem. stock piling, taxation, as they come on down, reaching 

 the marketing allotments, the acreage allotments, and subsidy, if 

 subsidy is ever justified as among the least desirable. We would keep 

 away from regimentation as much as we can, realizing that there 

 must be a considerable amount in the way of controls before we 

 make the necessary changes from our war-production conditions back 

 to normal. 



The purpose should be set forth in the law that we get away from 

 controls as fast as we can, and we believe through the discretion of 

 such a board, with those purposes clearly set forth in the law, that it 

 presents an opportunity for using all of these devices and getting where 

 we want to go, from the standpoint of just good business practice. 



We do not see very much likelihood at this late season of the year 

 that you are going to be able to pass a very comprehensive legislative 

 program setting forth in detail complete new remedies. We believe, 

 however, that it is entirely possible to select a board and give that 

 board discretion to use what we have, and then we can add to it from 

 time to time as conditions warrant. 



Now as to the question of how you can select such a board that 

 could be trusted to use the discretion we seek. There are two or three 

 approaches to the problem. We do not claim that the suggestions 

 that we have to make are necessarily superior, but we are going to 

 make them as the best thinking we have been able to develop. Our 

 suggestions are a bit unorthodox, but if we can accomplish what we 

 all want we can afford to get off the beaten path a little bit. We 

 would propose a fairly large board, appointed by the President, made 

 up of these three groups. One from each farm credit district, repre- 

 senting agriculture — I do not think the word "representing*' is exactly 

 the word we want. One from each farm-credit district, thoroughly 

 familiar with the problems of the farmer. When we get a national 

 board we do not want them to represent agriculture alone : we want 

 them to represent the public interest. 



Right here it might be well for the committee to consider in the ap- 

 pointment of any board, the provision which was written into law, 

 creating the War Mobilization and Reconversion Board. When men 

 are drawn from different groups, they should be specifically charged 

 with the responsibility of representing the public interest rather than 

 the group alone -from which they are drawn. We think that the pro- 

 vision referred to is a very sound provision, and should have your 

 consideration. 



We would take six from the processor group, and six from the dis- 

 tributing group, or it has been suggested that there might be four from 



91215 — 49 — ser. r. pt. 3 14 



