752 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



That is not in the tobacco provision at the moment. It is in our 

 draft. We have tried to make them uniform all the way through 

 because we have had, as you know, 10 years' experience in setting 

 tobacco allotments and we felt that we had pretty good standards for 

 taking care of all situations that might arise at the farm level. There- 

 fore, we have actually broadened the authority that now exists. 



Mr. Hope. I got the imoression from what you said a while ago 

 that there really was not much difference between the standards as 

 set up here for the allocation of acreage to the farms and the standards 

 we aheady have in the case of wheat. 



Mr. Bagwell. Except for abnormal conditions and the use of 

 previous farm allotments, I think perhaps that is true. 



Mr. Hope. It takes the question of land, labor and equipment into 

 consideration. 



Mr. Bagwell. Yes. Of course, we had that before to some extent. 

 We had the "land" factor in there to some extent, at any rate. 



Mr. WooLLEY. Crop rotation practices had some of that inherent 

 in them. 



Mr. Hope. The reason I am asking that particularly is because I 

 think it has worked out very well under the present condition as far 

 as wheat is concerned. I have heard no complaints about the present 

 provision. I would hate to see something added just for the sake of 

 getting uniformity with some other commodity that might disturb 

 the present situation which has not only been satisfactory, but by 

 usmg this same formula over the years you have built up a history 

 around it and an understanding of it by county committees which 

 would be somewhat disturbed if you spring a new formula on them 

 now. My thought is that while there may be something desirable 

 about having a uniform formula for all commodities, we should not 

 sacrifice too much to get it. 



I thijik there are difl'erences between the situations, as far as each 

 individual commodity is concerned, that have to be taken into account 

 in malsing allotments. I would hate to see too much sacrificed for 

 the sake of uniformity on paper. 



Mr. WooLLEY. On that point, Mr. Hope, all of our commodity 

 people, including the Grain Branch people, have agreed to all of these 

 changes as, in theu" judgment, not materially affecting the differences 

 that exist between commodities because of the iidierent difficulties 

 between commodities. 



Mr. Hope. I do not see anything seriously wrong with the new 

 formula, although I am not sure that I understand exactly what some 

 of these provisions would mean and how they might be employed. 

 I am not criticizing it because I do not have any reason to. 



Mr. WooLLEY. In the abnormal conditions, instead of abnormal 

 weather, you may find yourself up against a ciiTumstance which 

 might be brought about by the war, for example. An adjustment 

 ought to be made for that. Then if you only have an adjustment for 

 abnormal weather, you are in a position where you cannot make an 

 adjustment which is valid and something that a group of people with 

 divergent interests would agree upon. But abnormal conditions 

 could be interpreted to mean those types of things. That is just an 

 illustration. 



Mr. Hope. I agree with you. 



