876 GENERAL FARM PROGRAM 



portion of grain crops produced are consumed on the farm. I also 

 "produce hogs, cattle, and chickens for market. Incidentally, I was 

 born and raised on this farm and have continually lived there. I have 

 served as a county AAA committeeman for a period of 7 years, and as 

 a community committeeman 3 years. 



As a result of this background and experience of administering AAA 

 programs, the farmers of central South Dakota have thought me 

 qualified to appear before the Agricultural Committee, and as such 

 I am here, more as a reporter to give the members of this committee 

 a report of what the farmers are thinking in regard to a permanent, 

 long-range farm program. 



It was my privilege in 1937 to go on a farmers' goodwill trip through 

 the South.' There were 200 county AAA committeemen and a few 

 State AAA committeemen on this special train from eight States of 

 the North Central region. At nights we would gather together and 

 discuss things we farmers deemed necessary in a farm program to 

 protect farm income. Foremost were parity price and parity income, 

 of which no less than 100 percent would be adequate to suppport our 

 national economy. The thinking was that farm income is the basis 

 of all our national economy, that $1 of farm income turns over seven 

 times, or a ratio of 7 to 1. So less than 100 percent parity was not 

 thinkable. 



May I give the committee an example of less than 100 percent of 

 parity? And this is my own experience. I have sold hogs for from 

 $1.75 to $2.50 per hundred pounds; eggs for 6 cents per dozen ; butter- 

 fat for 11 cents per pound, and have as evidence receipts of sale of 

 cattle on the public market- — cow, $1.75 per hundred; heifer, $3.25; 

 steer, $3. 



That was good grade Hereford stock. That was not cull stuff. I 

 have the evidence of the sale on the market here. 



My wife's best dressed was made by herself of print material from 

 feed sacks, and this is not my experience alone, but of farmers in 

 general. This was a flexible parity, for at no time did farmers receive 

 less than 59 K percent of parity. 



How to achieve 100 percent of parity, by subsidy or otherwise? 

 Farmers want a subsidy only as a last resort. They want the 100 

 percent of parity income from the market on the portion of their 

 crop which is fairly allotted to them by their farmer-elected commit- 

 teeman. The national quota of each commodity should be deter- 

 mined by the Secretary of Agriculture, to adequately meet the do- 

 mestic needs of our country. The surplus should be disposed of on the 

 world market, with a food and clothing plan for the low-income 

 groups in our country; or in other words, a two-price system. How 

 would this create parity price? This is simply making the law of 

 supply and demand work, just as any other business does. 



How could this be done without subsidy? And would all farmers 

 support this? By using the principles of the McNary-Haugen plan, 

 twice passed by both Houses of Congress, and twice vetoed by Presi- 

 dent Coolidge. It should include a tax so severe on the sale of sur- 

 pluses that the chiselers can't afford not to comply. In my visits with 

 farmers and committeemen of South Dakota and other States. I 

 find they do not object to these controls and realize that they are a 

 must if parity income is obtained, but don't like the chiseler^ — 

 neighbor or brother. 



