630 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



I am quite sure if opportunity is given the gentleman from Kansas 

 will have some better understanding of that than I do. That m.eans 

 out of the 1948 crop, using it as an example, you would have a support 

 price of 500,000,000 bushels out of a total production of 1,300,000,000, 

 approxim.ately. Then you would have a support on about 35 or 40 

 percent of the crop. The balance of it would move in an open com- 

 petitive market. 



Mr. Kaseberg. Yes. 



Mr. Pace. That is somewhat comparable to the plan of the Com- 

 missioner of Agriculture of Texas, Mr. MacDonald, on what he calls 

 the domestic allotment plan for cotton. Are you familiar with that? 



Mr. Kaseberg. No; I am not familiar with cotton. 



Mr. Pace. Where would there be any need for a limitation on 

 production ander that plaA? 



Mr. Kaseberg. I do not know why there would be the need. 



Mr. Pace. How would you go about allotting the 500,000,000 for 

 wheat for food? 



Mr. Kaseberg. Through some certificate plan, I presume. 



Mr. Pace. Would you base it like the regular allotment s.ystem, 

 perhaps on a historical base of how much wheat the farmer had grown 

 in the past, or would you base it on the present formula which the 

 gentleaian from Kansas will have to pick up and fill in for me. 



Wliat is the formula now, Mr. Hope? 



Mr. Hope. You mean the acreage allotment formula? 



Mr. Pace. Of wheat. 



Mr. Hope. It is based on the last 10 years. The allotment to 

 the States and counties is based upon the previous 10 years, and in 

 the counties it is allotted on a formula which is written in the law 

 based on the best use of the land. 



Mr. Pace. That is all the comment I want to make now. 



Mr. Kaseberg. The mechanics of the plan have not been worked 

 out, but that is the structure of the plan that we feel would best 

 suit our needs. We cannot speak for all wheat growers generally, 

 but where we move a bigger percentags of our wheat into the export 

 market, we feel that that would fit our needs the best. 



Mr. Pace. Why do you make a distinction between wheat for 

 human consumption and wheat for industrial purposes? 



Mr. Kaseberg. I do not think wheat for industrial purposes can 

 compete at the relative price with other industrial production. The 

 reason I do not think it can is because it has not. 



Mr. Pace. You mean industrial use goes up and down according 

 to price? 



Mr. Kaseberg. More or less, yes. There were times during the 

 war, you know, when a lot of wheat moved into industrial uses, but 

 it was subsidized. A lot of it moved into feeding channels, but there, 

 too, it was subsidized. 



Mr. White. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question? What is 

 meant by industrial uses? Does it not eventually become human 

 consumption? 



Mr. Pace. When we speak of industrial uses, we are referring to 

 alcohol or plastics or that type of manufacturing, not food industries 

 or milling industries. 



Mr. Hope. May I ask a question, Mr. Chairman? 



Mr. Pace. Yes, indeed. 



