952 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



we should not have a formula written into your law but that it has 

 got to be an administrative approach, because you have changing 

 conditions that we cannot foresee. 



Mr. CooLEY. You do not want these growers to be under the un- 

 certainty every year of having somebody in the Department write a 

 complicated formula like the one just read to this committee and to 

 change that every year? 



Mr. Bryant. I think you have to recognize it is an administrative 

 proposition and you pretty nearly have to have some flexibility. 



Mr. PoAGE. You say you have effected this formula in a compro- 

 mise, but why, then, do you not carry it on after you have fLxed your 

 formula? You carry this as a moving formula, as I understand it. 

 Mr. Wescott. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Poage. Which will forever continue to give the violator of 

 goals an advantage. I can understand why you had to make some 

 concessions to those people who had recently gone into raising pota- 

 toes; I think they are entitled to some consideration — and you 

 evidently do, too — but for the future, if we have a definite formula, 

 why do you write a formula that will always reward the man who 

 violates the goal? 



Mr. Wescott. An attempt was made to take care of him with your 

 compensatory payment. If he plants over his goal, then he is not 

 eligible for price support. 



Mr. Poage. But that does not mean a thing in the world, as Mr. 

 Pace just p6inted out. Under your program, I do not get the price 

 support if I overplant, but I go into the market and can get within 

 2 cents of the price support, because the man in the market would 

 rather buy my potatoes at 2 cents under than to buy yours at the price 

 support. So I can always get practically price support or close to the 

 price support for my potatoes. 



Mr. Wescott. W"e think in this case with your supply of potatoes — 

 you are familiar with what it has been over the past few years and 

 you are familiar with the surplus, and if those surplus potatoes were 

 allowed to seek then- market level and compensate by payments 

 unlimited in their determination under the method of price support, 

 how could that supplier live with a method of price support like that? 



Mr. CooLEY. It would not be very profitable for him to do it. 



Mr. Wescott. No, sir; it would not. 



Mr. Poage. You mean, in other words, instead of continuing to 

 rely that you would not rely any longer simply upon a floor price 

 under potatoes, but to put the floor and let it drop, say, to 60 percent 

 of parity? 



Mr. Wescott. Yes, sir. 



Mr. Poage. And then bring that floor back up to the former 90 

 percent of parity for everybody who complied with the goal, by paying 

 him a subsidy? I understand that word much better than I do 

 "compensatory payments." 



Mr. Wescott. No, sir; I did not figure on the 90 percent parity. 



Mr. Poage. Where would you bring it up? 



Mr. Wescott. At the present time, it is 60 percent of parity. 



Mr. Poage. That is right, and you are leaving your floor at 60 

 percent, are you not, and that means if I do not comply with the goals, 

 I can get 59 percent of parity, anyhow? 



Mr. Wescott. No, sir. 



