820 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



Not surprisingly, the features in the Secretary's program relating 

 to the Nation's livestock economy appeal strongly to packinghouse 

 workers, for the aim is to provide a sound foundation for increased 

 livestock feeding and breeding. Not only would expanded livestock 

 output provide more jobs and steadier employment for packinghouse 

 workers, irrespective of whether they are unionized. 



In addition, increased livestock marketing and slaughter would 

 reverse the downward trend in livestock numbers evident for several 

 years. In terms of meat available for the public, this trend necessarily 

 expresses itself in reduced consumption which is now headed for the 

 low levels of the thirties. In fact, 1948 and 1949 per capita con- 

 sumption will register only about 10 pounds per year above the low 

 levels prevailing in the depressed thirties. Per capita consumption 

 is now consumption prevaihng during most of the war period, not to 

 speak of the enormous meat exports which the American farmer was 

 providing for out armed forces abroad and for relief in other countries. 



In a separate supplementary submission, prepared by the research 

 department of our union, this alarming decline in per capita consump- 

 tion and what it means for low-income families in the cities — and for 

 the American livestock grower — is analyzed in greater detail than I 

 have time for here. Our thesis is that there now exists a serious meat 

 shortage in the United States, when the measure applied is the 

 scientifically determined nutritional requirements of both adults and 

 children. To be sure, there seems to be enough meat, as evidenc<^^ 

 by well-stocked counters in the stores. But this deceptive appearance 

 must not be allowed to obscure the fact that demand has declined 

 significantly because far too many families cannot afford to buy all 

 the meat they need. 



Some price declines on meat have taken place but increasing prices 

 in other directions, including rentals, as well as reduced dollar income 

 in the lower brackets because of growing unemployment and part 

 time, are causing meat supplies to back up. A recent example is the 

 extremely disappointing experience this year in the "dull demand" 

 for Easter hams, a condition noted by the Business Week (April 23) 

 which will also be verified by the sales department of any packing 

 company. 



Now it might be assumed that "supply and demand" will eventually 

 solve this problem of under consumption and meat shortage. But to 

 make any such easy assumption amounts to accepting at face value 

 the public relations claims of large, dominating packing companies. 

 They assert that they compete "intensely" among themselves and 

 with the three-thousand-odd small slaughterers and processors. 



However, we agree with the opposite view held by the Department 

 of Justice. The Department of Justice charges, in its pending anti- 

 trust action against the Big Four that there exists collusion among 

 them in keeping wdiolesale meat prices higher than would prevail 

 under real competition — and, simultaneously, that there is collusion 

 among the Big Four to depress livestock prices. Parenthetically, 

 I will say that I am not at all certain that antitrust action is the 

 answer to this price-rigging problem, but that is another story. 



In connection with this important price aspect of the interrelated 

 livestock and meat problem, I again want to direct the committee's 

 attention to our supplementary economic analysis. In it. Department 

 of Agriculture figures are cited and charted relative to both the market- 



