GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 761 



Speaking concretely, the Secretary was asked by one of you "What 

 about wool?" His reply was, "We'll take a good look at that later." 

 We want to emphasize here again that ever since 1940 Government 

 has been taking a series of "good looks" and sheep production has 

 dwindled from 46,000,000 to 28,000,000. Do we want to "fiddle 

 while Rome burns"? 



In his letter inviting us to appear here today, Chairman Pace 

 raised seven specific questions. We now desire to answer those 

 questions in the light of our statement on the condition of our industry 

 and the points of agreement which appear possible with the program 

 of the Secretary of Agriculture. 



1. Do livestock producers want price support? Our answer is 

 that sheepmen see no alternative to some type of price support or 

 compensation payment if liquidation is to be stopped and production 

 placed at an optimum level. 



2. Wliat should be the level of support? It should compensate for 

 tariff aheady lost, balance any tariff reductions in the future and set 

 up at least a token incentive so that there would be no doubt about 

 future Government attitude toward maintaining a wool-producing 

 industry. 



3. Should price support be mandatory or discretionary with the 

 Secretary of Agriculture? It should be mandatory until production 

 reaches 360,000,000 pounds of wool per year, which is the minimum 

 amount considered permissible for the safety and economic stability 

 of the country. 



4. What type of controls should be set up to regulate the production 

 or marketing of sheep and wool in order for producers to be eligible 

 for price support? There should be no controls of any kind unless 

 and until wool production in the United States arrives at the 

 360,000,000 pound yearly level. If and when production reaches this 

 level, we should have another look at the support program. 



5. Should price support be carried out through loans, purchases, 

 direct payments to producers, or through some other methods? We 

 believe that among the price support methods mentioned by the 

 Secretary of Agriculture on page 20 of his April 7 statement, there is 

 sufficient variation to permit arriving at a simnle and workable sup- 

 port operation by consultation of leaders of our industry with the 

 officials of the Department of Agriculture who may be designated to 

 administer the program. 



Just for example consider this. Here is an industry which is 

 necessary to the country, which is in deficiency production, which is 

 actually starving because its historic supports have been removed. 

 It would cost Government less to support it than in the case of any 

 other industry of anything like equal importance to the country. 

 We suggest that if there is any question of the desirability of produc- 

 tion payments now is the very best opportunity for a trial test. It 

 should suffice to stipulate here however that the program finally 

 arrived at pass these tests: 



1. It should actually stimulate wool production. 



2. It should be simple enough to be understood both by producers 

 and consumers of wool. 



3. It should allow a minimum of possibility for sidetracking Govern- 

 ment support to anyone not actually responsible for production and 

 a maximum of support to the most eflicient producers. 



