588 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



Some farmers would fail, of course, and the interest rate, over-all, 

 would have to be very, very low. 



Mr. Pace. Is it your idea to administer this program through the 

 Farmers Home Administration ? 



Mr, Smith. We have made no recommendation on that. We think 

 it probably would be preferable if it could be made a cooperative 

 association type of credit somehow, but there are great difficulties 

 in the way of doing that. 



Mr. Pace. I think it is peculiarly fitting to and perhaps absolutely 

 necessary in cotton. As I see the future of the cotton industry in 

 America, it depends upon two things; cheaper and better cotton. I 

 think that is the only sensible answer, cheaper and better cotton. 



You and I know that there are areas, perhaps some of them in my 

 State, where the farmer will never be able to produce cheap cotton 

 as compared with some areas where it can probably be produced half 

 as cheaply. It is in the interest of the Nation and it is in the in- 

 terest of the industry that that farmer be subsequently led out of the 

 production of cotton and not driven out under the force program of 

 the Aiken bill. 



Mr. Smith. That is exactly our thinking, Mr. Chairman. This 

 recommendation, of course, grows out of testimony on wheat but it is 

 applicable to cotton and to all crops. There are one or two specific 

 points concerning wheat quotas that I should emphasize. One is 

 that we favor the adoption of the bill that has been reported by the 

 Senate committee to enable the Department of Agriculture to begin 

 planning for next year's referendum on wheat, if that becomes 

 necessary. 



There is, of course, as the committee knows, a gap between the be- 

 ginning of operation of whatever law is in effect on January 1 and 

 the present law, so far as the definitions of normal supply are con- 

 cerned. Until those are clarified, the Department would be in the 

 position of planning, on the basis of this year's definitions, a referen- 

 dum held under next year's definitions. 



Another point is that a very embarrassing situation will probably 

 confront the Department throughout much of the wheat country in 

 attempting to carry out so-called Public Law No. 12 which ]5rotects 

 farmers who shifted from wheat into war-risk crops during the war. 

 I am informed that in many instances records are not available or 

 they are very inadequate as a basis for administration of that law. 



In other cases, the farms have changed hands or the composition 

 of individual farms has altered. In any case, however, it would be 

 disastrous if the Department did not carry out that pledge to the best 

 of its ability. 



We simpiy wish to urge the committee to do whatever is possible to 

 get as equitable an administration of that law as possible. If it is 

 not carried out with some degree of equity and fairness, then it will 

 create vast resentment which will operate against the success of any 

 Government farm program. 



Mr. Pace. If you will pardon me there, I agree with you and I think 

 everybody on this committee agrees with you on that. I might men- 

 tion the fact that PMA now has worksheets out of every wheat 

 farm and every cotton farm in the United States to get the individual 

 farm history with regard to the planting of war crops and so on. 

 The fact that the farm has changed hands will create a difficulty and 



