980 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



Mr. Pace. It seems to me that you are somewhat taking a contrary 

 position when you indicate on the one hand that to drop to 60 percent 

 support is going to bring production down to reasonable levels and 

 next you ask for compensatory payments in order to punish the 

 man who overproduces. There seems to be a little conflict in the 

 situation. If the low support is going to reduce production, what is 

 the need for compensatory payments? 



Mr. Case. T\'e do not think the low support will necessarily bring 

 all production down. I happen to represent a large commercial pro- 

 ducing area. I noticed a question that Mr. Andresen asked of our 

 friend from Long Island. Their agriculture is quite stable. The 

 amount of land is limited. However, in our country it can change 

 and shift a lot. 



T\e have had a lot of speculative potato growers during the price- 

 support program. "We admit it. We think that they are in there 

 because they feel they have their bet coppered, so to speak. "We 

 felt that the 60 percent of parity would move some of those men out 

 and I think that it will. I think it will cause some other large oper- 

 ators to reduce proportionately. But we do not place total reliance 

 on that. We have asked for these other regulations. 



Mr. Bryant. Mr. Chairman, I would like to throw out tliis thought. 

 I personally believe that this potato group prefers very much the 

 suggestion you have made. I think our reluctance to say "Yes," 

 we believe in marketing quotas, is quite largely due to the fact that 

 we do not understand them. 



I think that your recomm.endations will be given very serious 

 consideration. That probably is the approach that should be taken. 

 We do not know and we appreciate your suggesting it. I cannot 

 help but throw out one other thought, coming from Maine, that I 

 would like to have in the record, and that is that one of the reasons 

 for over production is a lot of potatoes coming in here from Canada. 



That has been brought out by Congressman Andresen. Until we 

 can get some help in that respect we have very little opportunity of 

 correcting this surplus problem. As we understand it, at the present 

 time your reciprocal trade agreement is so written that if we have a 

 production of potatoes under 350,000,000 bushels, Canada can bring 

 in an equal quantity under a low rate of duty. 



Therefore, your Department of Agriculture at the present time is 

 going to be pretty nearly restricted and unable to set a goal below 

 350,000,000 bushels because of these Canadian potatoes coming in. 



Mr. Andresen. Let me point out to you that whenever we have a 

 surplus of potatoes in this country, existing law gives the administra- 

 tion the authority to limit imports of potatoes under a quota which 

 may be a virtual embargo. They did not do that, although some of 

 us recommended it. 



The result was that 6 or 7 million bushels of Canadian potatoes 

 came in here, which required our Federal Government to buy 

 more potatoes in Maine, Long Island and other eastern areas which 

 would otherwise have been sold in normal channels of trade. 



Mr. CooLEY. The law already provides another way of taking care 

 of the situation. 



Mr. Andresen. Oh yes; they can put them under a quota and put 

 on an embargo if they want to. 



Mr. Pace. Wliich they will not do. 



