734 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



the marketing quota you only deal with those who overplanted and 

 might be under acreage allotment. 



Mr. Pace. I think on the other side it needs to be said — because 

 while I shall not seriously interfere with the wishes of the wheat grow- 

 ers, I am, of course, listening very attentively to the application of 

 whatever you do here to other commodities, particularly cotton— that 

 the cotton growers may expect the same treatment that the wheat 

 growers have. My own view is that the discontent which the gentle- 

 man from Kansas spoke of will arise. I think it will arise with the 

 old wheat producer and particularly with the new wheat-producing 

 areas. 



I fear that 9 out of 10 or 7 out of 10 of those who have planted 

 excess wheat acreage will vote against quotas. When the penalties 

 are on acreage allotments, alone, they are minor. About the only 

 thing you lose is yom^ SCP payments and a lot of them do not have 

 any. 



It is said that you lose your support price. You do directly, but you 

 still have it indirectly. 



If you and I, Mr. Walker, are allotted 50 acres each and you stay 

 within your 50 and I plant 200, while I do not get the support du'ectly, 

 I can take my wheat to town for 10 or 15 cents under the support 

 price and I can sell it. I, therefore, get 95 or 98 percent of the benefit 

 of the support price. 



Mr. Walker. That is right. 



Mr. Pace. There is nothing under the cotton law that says a man 

 must have his allotment before he votes. They frequently did that 

 in our section. I think the farmer, however, is entitled to know what 

 his allotment and his support price will be. 



Mr. Walker. We realize that the producers must have some idea 

 about his allotment before we can expect a favorable vote on market- 

 ing quotas. 



Mr. Pace. You went so far with us one year that you did not give 

 us our allotments until after the crop was planted, much less after 

 the vote. You gave us the allotments after the crop was planted and 

 then called us noncooperators if we had planted more than you al- 

 lotted to us. 



Mr. WooLLEY. Those are the kinds of things we are trying to cor- 

 rect. 



Mr. Hill. May I ask a question? 



Mr. Pace. Yes, indeed. 



Mr. Hill. I would like to go back to what you are doing right now, 

 especially in my State. Are your PMA committees really hning up 

 the wheat acreage, taking the historical background of all the wheat- 

 growing sections in Colorado? 



Mr. Walker. That is correct. They have gone down the road and 

 visited the farmers and got the historical data or the farmers have come 

 into the county PMA office and recorded their historical data and that 

 data is now being listed for purposes of determining farm-acreage 

 allotments. 



Mr. Hill. I noticed two newspaper articles. One large wheat 

 grower had stated that the PMA plans in Colorado were to cut our 

 acreage 55 percent for 1950. That bears out Mr. Hope's thinking 

 that you get suspicion and distrust and dissatisfaction in the minds 

 of all those wheat growers and we might get into difficulty. What is 



