GENERAL FARM PROGRAAI 615 



be very sure tliey had plenty of food, in the first place. It seems to 

 me that is the danger; you may find we have a famine or somethiiig. 



It seems to me that wherever the control to a great extent, lies in the 

 hands of the Secretary the farmer would always be in the position of 

 giving the consumer the first and biggest break. Do you not think that 

 is true? 



Mr. Davis. Yes, but you do have to put the authority somewhere, or 

 at least a certain amount of authority. I think the more you can sj)ell 

 it out the better, but you have to leave a certain amount of discretion. 

 We do not have any policy with respect to a commission like All)ert 

 (toss has suggested. I think that type of an approach probably needs 

 serious study. It looks to me, speaking as an individual, as though 

 24 members might be rather large for a commisison of that type. 

 However, maybe there does need to l)e more than one person making 

 the decision. 



Mr. Pace. Mr. Davis, earlier this year I had this thought in trying 

 to reach some constructive plan: Due to their nature, our commodi- 

 ties ought to be broken down into three general groups. No. 1 would 

 be those commodities whicli are subject to limitations on production 

 through acreage controls and similar devices, which would include 

 all of your ])resent basic, soybeans and others, where tlie production 

 can be maintaiiied within reasonable limitations. 



No. 3 should include perishables, fresh fruits, vegetables and so 

 forth. Their control, rather than being production control, which 

 is not very practicable, would be through marketing. Therefore, they 

 Avould be brought under a general, fair, comprehensive marketing 

 agreements act. It would be required that the producer's compliance 

 with that marketing agreement act would be necessary. That could 

 be adapted to the diversity of conditions that arise among perish- 

 ables. 



Then in the middle there should be a class for livestock and dairy 

 products and maybe one or Uxo others, including those that cannot 

 well be handled with the presently known types of controls. Dairying 

 is not an annual affair. In that field we might give consideration to 

 the proposal of the Secretary to control through payments or by some 

 other device. Has that ever occurred to you ? 



Mr. Davis. I think that the divisions in the National Council hand- 

 ling the three types of commodities you describe would somewhat 

 agiee with you. I am sure that our basic commodity divisions would 

 agi'ee with you that we ought to keep the loan and purchase pro- 

 grams and your acreage quotas. A number of our perishables al- 

 ready have marketing agreements and there has been an effort for 

 about 3 years now to expand that to some other commodities. That 

 effort has not been fully successful since it requires additional legis- 

 lation. I think there would be quite an area of agreement among 

 those two groups. In this middle group our livestock people are not 

 very much for any kind of a program. ()ur poultry people look upon it 

 with somewhat more favor. They are pretty much agreed today that 

 some kind of a payment to the producer is the best program. LfOoking 

 at it in broad outline, there is some basis for what you said. 



Mr. Pace. You could leave the middle group out of the picture 

 momentarily. 



Mr. Davis. At least make it optional with them. 



