946 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



to give the 'Secretary the right to say "Here is the agreement. You 

 have to agree to it whether you agree or not"? 



Mr. Westcott. My thinking there was that was as nearly a practi- 

 cal, fair approach as I knew how. As far as I am personally concerned, 

 my thinking is that marketing agreements should be spelled out the 

 same as acreage allotments. 



Mr. PoAGE. Are you going to requhe the same kind of an agreement 

 all over the land? In other words, if the Secretary submits a market- 

 ing agreement are you going to require farmers to accept it as written? 

 We get all of this fine talk about the farmers getting together and 

 agreeing upon the marketing agreements every time we talk about 

 marketing agreements, but I have never known that to happen except 

 when they get before the Committee on Agriculture. When they get 

 back home, they fall out, just the same as everybody else. 



Now, are you going to have the Secretary write the marketing 

 agreement, send it down, and say "Boys, sign on the dotted line that 

 you agree. This is your voluntary action. I want you to sign this 

 note saying this is your voluntary action," and will the producers have 

 no right to contradict him? Is that the kind of agreement you have 

 in mind? 



Mr. Wescott. No, sir. The marketing agreement was projected 

 into this thinking to try to present a better form of agreement than 

 now exists, to get a better quality of potatoes on the market than has 

 been possible in the past, where the price support was on No. 1, and 

 also some of the lower grades want something. It is just a suggestion. 



Mr. PoAGE. You are saying that is one of the requirements. 

 Suppose the farmers of the Panhandle of Texas — I do not want to 

 criticize anybody, and I do not know their views — but suppose they 

 refused to sign such an agreement and they are told "The Secretary 

 says if you sign this, you get the payment; if you do not sign, you do 

 not get the payment." They would sign and get the payment if they 

 stay within the goal? 



Mr. Wescott. Yes, sir. Under present conditions, he either stays 

 within the goal or he does not receive the price support. 



Mr. PoAGE. That is right. And they do not make any bones 

 about it. I recognize the Government has to do that. Now, is -this 

 a difl'erent proposition, where they are going to say to let the Secretary 

 propose these things but tell the public the farmers all agreed on it? 



Mr. Case. Mr. Poage, that particular subject was assigned to me 

 by the National Potato Council. The situation is this: That recom- 

 mendation from the council was to correct a situation we think is 

 shameful, where areas were turning in to the Government their No. 1 

 potatoes and at the same time marketing the mere culls. Now, the 

 only method we know of correcting that is through a marketing 

 agreement. We recognize the problems of enforcing marketing agree- 

 ments in all areas. It is easier done in some places than in others. 



As to how it could go into effect, there are marketing agreements in 

 effect that have been voluntarily voted into effect. It is entirely 

 possible to have a national marketing agreement where a majority or 

 some two-thirds of the potato growers nationally favor a potato 

 agreement, and have it forced on some noncompliance area. So that 

 could happen to the Panhandle or southern Texas. 



Mr. Pace. Are there any further questions on the marketing agree- 

 ment? 



