790 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



On that question, "Should the Brannan proposals pertaining to live- 

 stock whereby a subsidy paid direct out of taxes equal to the difference 

 between the average farm price and the new 'parity' is given to the 

 producer, be endorsed and advocated before congressional committees? 

 Mr. Melvin Todd of Union, Nebr., president of the association, told 

 me the directors voted a unanimous and emphatic 'No.' " 



The second question on which we asked a vote was, "Should this 

 program be opposed and Congress asked to continue the current pro- 

 gram or the Aiken program that would go into effect January 1, 1950, 

 until something more sound could be worked out?" On this question, 

 the Nebraska association directors, each of whom is president of his 

 county association, also voted a unanimous "No." 



The third question asked was this, "Should the Corn Belt Live- 

 stock Feeders Association continue opposition to any and all programs 

 whereby the Government seeks to control prices or produclfton of 

 meat?" And on this question, the Nebraska Livestock Feeders .A.s- 

 sociation' directors voted an emphatic and unanimous "Yes." 



The other votes came in by mail, from all of the States of the 

 central Corn Belt. In filling in their answers, these officers and 

 directors of the State and county livestock feeders associations were 

 not under the mfluence of some silver-tongued orator or some dominant 

 personality. Their vote was made in the full privacy of their own 

 home. They placed their vote in an envelope and mailed it in, either 

 signing it or not, just as they chose. No place was put for such a 

 signature. They were invited to express their views, but this was not 

 made at all obligatory. 



We got back 97 votes, and, gentlemen, out of all those who answered 

 that questionnaire, only two voted for the Brannan proposal to 

 subsidize livestock. Of those 97 answers received, 92 turned thumbs 

 down, and some of them most emphatically, on his proposals. Thi'ee 

 did not vote. 



On question No. 2, as to whether or not we should ask that either 

 the current program or the Aiken program be continued until some- 

 thing better can be worked out, 82 said "Yes"; 6 said "No"; and 9 

 did not mark their ballots. 



On question No. 3, 86 out of 97 voting said to oppose all efforts to 

 control prices or production of meat. 



Some of these men expressed their own views in letters. I have 

 their letters here, which I would like to make a part of the record, 

 with your permission. 



(Tiie letters above referred to are as follows:) 



To Whom It May Concern: 



Whereas livestock farmers of Winnebago Co., 111., favor free enterprise; the right 

 to produce in abundance, without restriction; and the right to freedom in shaping 

 up farm programs and policies, and 



Whereas tiie farm program as recently proposed by the Secretary of Agriculture 

 carries the threat of regimenting farmers as well as makes it possible for certain 

 individuals to draft and direct farm policies and programs; and 



Whereas the proposed program offered by the Secretary of Agriculture will 

 undoubtedly cost the taxpayers of this country an added burden of taxes for 

 administrative and subsidy purposes; and 



Whereas the livestock farmers here assembled are of the opinion that the 

 program proposed by the Secretary of Agriculture is not workable; be it hereby 



Resolved, That the Winnebago County Livestock Feeders Association support 

 the farm program known as the Aiken bill, to the extent that this program be 



