566 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



But we cannot do it all at one time; it takes time to develop these 

 things, and it takes time to build up funds, so with all of this problem, 

 with all of the different readjustments that must be made, our whole 

 stand might be summed up by saying that we want to use any possible 

 devices that will bring about the best results, and we believe that 

 through a board, selected about as we have suggested, it would be pos- 

 sible to leave discretion with the Board. 



And in our original testimony we said the purposes should be set 

 forth in the law. In paragraph 72, we suggest some of the purposes 

 Congress should have in mind, and paragraph 73 we stated : 



We recommend a section authorizing the Board, or the Secretary with the 

 approval of the Board, to use any of the devices of the act, or those existing under 

 other acts, to attain the purposes set forth, using them in such an order of 

 preference, as far as practical, as will make first use of the self-supporting, 

 measures requiring the least governmental aid, and resort to the more drastic 

 aid and controls as the least desirable, and the least frequently to be used. 



We discussed parity a little bit. We recommend the present parity 

 formula as reasonably accurate and practical for the time being. We 

 would like to see another one considered later, but we also recommend 

 that we do not need to fuss too much about parity right now. The plan 

 we have is a pretty good plan. We have a program for parity which 

 we would like to have ample consideration at the proper time, but we 

 cannot be developing new formulas of this sort in the short time 

 remaining before adjournment. We do think, however, that we could 

 accomplish just about all that is neded to do with a board such as 

 we have described, and we believe we can get support for it in both 

 the House and the Senate. If we can get the kind of board we want 

 we can really move forward. 



Mr. Chairman, I think that is about the picture that we wanted 

 to present. 



Mr. Pace. Thank you, Mr. Goss. Are there any questions ? 



Mr. Sutton. Mr. Goss, that is about the most unusual speech I have 

 heard presented to this committee. Would the establishment of this 

 Board which you mention eliminate the use of the House Agriculture 

 Committee and the Senate Agriculture Committee so that in the future 

 the committees would not be functioning ? 



Mr. Goss. Oh, no. The Board would be a part of the administrative 

 branch of the Government in carrying out the laws passed by the 

 Congress. It would not be a legislative body in any way. It would 

 only make use of the devices which you in the Congress provide. It 

 would be charged with the responsibility of carrying out the purposes 

 set forth in the law. 



Mr. Sutton. Congress would get recommendations of the Board 

 instead of the Secretary of Agriculture? 



Mr. Goss. No; we recommend no change with reference to the Sec- 

 retary of Agriculture, except that we give him the powers to carry 

 out the devices provided by the Congress, subject to the approval of 

 the Board. 



Let me illustrate : In the existing law, the Aiken bill, there is the 

 possibility of making payments. We think there are many Members 

 of Congress who maintain doubts as to whether the Secretary of Agri- 

 culture with that power would use the best discretion in making such 

 payments. If we had a board drawn from a fairly representative 

 group, which, in effect, had been approved by the joint committee and 



