GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 599 



4. MORE ADEQUATE PRO\^SIONS TO ASSURE MAXIMUM USE OF VOLUNTARY 

 FARMER EFFORTS RATHER THAN GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION IN CARRY- 

 ING OUT FARM PROGRAMS 



Unfortunately, there is a strong temptation for such action agencies 

 as the Production and Marketing Administration and the Commodity 

 Credit Corporation to extend their operations further than is neces- 

 sary into the marketing and merchandising fiekls. I speak on this 

 subject not only as a representative for a farm organization, but also 

 as a former employee of the Commodity Credit Corporation. 



The Government is not a good merchandiser of farm products, even 

 those it owns. But nevertheless, there is a strong tendency for those 

 in charge of support programs to extend unnecessarily the arm of 

 Government into the marketing field. As recent evidence of this, I 

 quote a resolution reportedly passed by the conference of PMA oiR- 

 cials at St. Louis this past winter : 



We recommend that procedures for all price-support programs including loans, 

 purchases, and purchase agreements, provide for the use of the State and county 

 committees to the maximum practical extent in formulating and servicing these 

 programs. All contractual relations with agents utilized in the program such 

 as cooijeratives, banks, lending agencies, processors, handlers, warehouses, and 

 others that are essential in proper handling of any commodity, should be developed 

 in a uniform manner using to the fullest possible extent State and county com- 

 mittee supervision and assistance. 



That resolution was reportedly approved by responsible State and 

 national PMA officials assembled from all sections of the country. I 

 think that it is ample evidence that we dare not leave unlimited dis- 

 cretion to the officials of action agencies of Government as to how far 

 they shall extend their functions to include the handling and mer- 

 chaiidising of farm products. Because these men have large funds to 

 expend and because they are in positions of considerable authority at 

 national. State, and local levels, they can wield great influence oyer 

 our markets — far beyond that essential for carrying out farm price- 

 support programs. We believe that the law should make it clear to 

 everybody that it is the intent of Congress that Government activities 

 should be held to the minimum essential for implementing farm pro- 

 grams and that trade channels including both farmer- and dealer- 

 owned, should be utilized to the maximum extent possible. 



I have already discussed one way in which the need for Government 

 assistance can be minimized — namely, adjustments to make farm units 

 more self-supporting. In my appearance before this committee in 

 lOttT. I discussed at length a second method of minimizing the depend- 

 ence of agriculture on Government — namely, what farmers can do to 

 improve their own economic status through cooperative marketing and 

 purchasing. I shall not repeat this discussion here other than to point 

 out that through cooperatives, farmers can inject corrective competi- 

 tion into the markets which view the marketing problems from the 

 farmer's standpoint, since the cooperatives are farmer-owned and con- 

 trolled. The cooperatives are the buying and selling departments of 

 the farms they serve and as such are integrated with production on the 

 family-type farm. Let us never overlook the fact that farmer cooper- 

 atives are one of the strongest factors M'orking for the continuation of 

 the family farm in America. By combining the volume from a num- 

 ber of farms, farmers can own and operate efficient buying and selling 



