GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 827 



Our board of directors made up of men from 41 State hatchery 

 association affihates, went on record a year ago in favor of a farm 

 price support program which would be, in effect, a stop-loss operation 

 on all farm commodities. 



We do not believe the Government is justified in guaranteeing a 

 profitable operation in any line of endeavor. Such a procedure 

 operates in direct opposition to the American way of reward for 

 individual enterprise. 



The poultry industry has been the recipient of Government aid 

 off and on for over 15 years. I cannot say today that any of the 

 panaceas solved our periodic problem of overproduction. They fre- 

 quently enabled our producers to show a profit on their poultry 

 operations, whether justified or not. Our hatcherymen are frank to 

 admit that they in turn receive direct benefits when an effective price 

 support program is in operation. We sell more chicks. 



There can be no question but what the heavy demand for chicks 

 this year is partly due to the Government's action in supporting eggs 

 at a level which is designed to reflect a minimum of 35 cents a dozen 

 to the producer. Members of this committee should bear in mind 

 one striking difference, however, between the support price program 

 this year as compared with that of a year ago: Although the support 

 price is identical, food costs are lower and the support level has auto- 

 matically become much more profitable to the poultrymen. Last 

 spring, when feed prices were high, the support price on eggs was 

 not sufficient to stimulate interest in chicks. 



We appear agreed on one point with respect to support prices in 

 our industry: Programs to date have worked in favor of the sub- 

 marginal producer while penalizing the man who makes poultry his 

 business. The support program has kept the submarginal man in 

 business, with his frequently low-quality merchandise entering com- 

 mercial channels to compete with the man who does not need, or does 

 not care for a Government support. 



Another point on which our industry members are in apparent 

 agreement is that support program to date have not been developed 

 with any particular regard to one of the greatest admonitions in all 

 time: Man must earn his living by the sweat of his brow. The 

 policv of supporting wheat, for example, at levels which enable the 

 wheat man to make around $1 a bushel on every bushel produced, 

 with perhaps no more than 3 weeks' work on the crop, is morally 

 WTong. The policy has resulted in upsetting the balance between 

 grains and grain-consuming animals, and the American public is 

 paying the bill today. It also is destro^'ing the fertility of our soil. 



The present support program is the outgrowth of a wartime measure. 

 It was to provide a cushion so that farmers could taper off production 

 from the wartime heights and return to peacetime levels. I ask you 

 whether this has. been done. You know the answer. The Govern- 

 ment has kept faith with the farming industry but farmers have not 

 kept complete faith with the Government. 



And now, as in so many instances where the Government is at- 

 tempting to relieve the citizenry of the burden of making its owti way, 

 we find a growing expectancy among our peoples that the Govern- 

 ment should and will protect them against all harm. 



This committee is wasting its time in trying to build a Utopia for 

 the American farmer. 



