GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 729 



Mr. Pace. Is it not true, Mr. Bagwell, under the present law, if 

 those conditions should arise the Secretary has ample authority to 

 remove the quotas, even though they have been voted? 



Air. Bagwell. Yes, that termination provision is still in there. 



Mr. AxDRESEN. I agree that he could remove them, but there is 

 justification for the provision in the old law that you would not have 

 the referendum until after May 10 the following year. The only step 

 that you are taking now is: You are proceeding under the old law to 

 announce the acreage allotments on wheat. 



Mr. Walker. That is correct. In the absence of marketing quotas, 

 those allotments would be for price-support purposes. 



Mr. Hope. And that is all that you are planning now? You are 

 not planning any election for marketing quotas because you do not 

 have any law which would authorize any election novv' before the 

 25th of July? 



Mr. Walker. Well, we are making some preliminary plans. In 

 case marketing quotas should be proclaimed and a referendum be held 

 this summer, we would have to have some of the preparatory work 

 out of the way in order that it could be done. To the extent that we 

 are looking forward to the possibility that marketing quotas might 

 be proclaimed, preliminary preparations are in the making. 



Mr. Hope. Is that on the assumption that the Secreta^ry will 

 proclaim marketing quotas under the 1938 act this summer and fall, 

 or is it in anticipation that the House will pass the bill that the Senate 

 has already passed which puts into effect the provisions of the Aiken 

 bill as far as marketing quotas are concerned, ahead of January 1? 



Mr. WooLLEY. On that, Mr. Hope, I think you probably know 

 that we considered that question from the standpoint of what the 

 position of the Department is, and in talking it over with our State 

 PMA directors we considered whether it would be more advisable to 

 hold the referendum in May of 1950 or in the summer of 1949. After 

 a very thorough consideration of all of the points involved, it was the 

 consensus of the group, and we agree with them, that it would be 

 advisable to hold the election that summer rather than next spring. 



However, there are arguments on both sides of the question, and 

 it is strictly a matter of judgment. It is such a debatable issue that 

 we do not feel that our judgment in the matter is infallible, by any 

 means. 



Mr. Hope. I would lilve to go into that a little later on its merits. 

 \Miat I was inquiring now of Mr. Walker was under which law they 

 were setting this up, whether it was under the old law or the new 

 law. If under the new law it would be in anticipation we might pass 

 the bill which was passed by the Senate. 



Mr. Walker. In any event, a certain amount of preliminary 

 preparations are needed when- a referendum of a million and a half 

 farmers is to be held. Therefore, we have only proceeded to the 

 extent of designing the forms and the procedures to be followed in 

 holding the referendum. If the House should concur with the Senate 

 on the Aiken amendment, a referendum could be held before July 25 

 by setting up the effective date in the 1948 act. In that event, we 

 hope to be prepared in case the referendum should be held by that 

 time. 



Mr. Hope. AYhat I really want to get at is this: Has the Depart- 

 ment already reached a decision that in the event the figures which 



