FARM BOARD TO FARM STRIKE 433 



That this group of "bolters" have crossed the Rubicon and definitely and posi- 

 tively aligned themselves with the Farm Bureau, the County Agent, and the 

 political machines known as agricultural colleges, goes without saying, and 

 it is hardly understandable how they can further pose as Farmers' Union. They 

 have definitely and positively aligned themselves with the Hoover administra- 

 tion, with the Mellons, with the Fesses, the Moses, in fact, with the powers that 

 propose to industrialize the United States and absolutely and forever destroy 

 the American farmer. 91 



By the end of 1931 the futility of the Farm Board program had been 

 pretty well accepted by the heads of the three general farm organizations 

 who met to form a common program of action. At a conference held 

 in Washington in January, 1932, the leaders of the Farm Bureau, the 

 Grange, and the Farmers' Union drew up a six-point program which 

 they said they would support. It called for an amendment to the Agri- 

 cultural Marketing Act to provide for an effective control of surpluses, an 

 equitable federal tax program but not a general sales tax, a stable cur- 

 rency that would insure stable farm prices, tariff equality for farmers, 

 speculation curbs, and independence for the Philippines as a means of 

 stopping the importation of cheap substitutes for American farm prod- 

 ucts. 92 This program was broadcast over a national radio network with 

 the three farm heads participating. 



During 1932 farm organization after farm organization spoke out in 

 critical vein against the Board. The Farm Bureau reverted to the equaliza- 

 tion fee principle of the McNary-Haugen days, the Grange adhered to its 

 export debenture plan, and the Farmers' Union, under the leadership of 

 John A. Simpson, favored a price-fixing program that would insure the 

 farmer his "cost of production plus a reasonable profit." In general, the 

 only thing that kept these three bodies together was their opposition to 

 the Federal Farm Board and not any agreement on the specific remedies 

 to be applied. 93 



In its third and final report, the Farm Board conceded that the surplus 



91. Iowa Union Farmer, May 20, 1931. 



92. American Farm Bureau Federation, Report of the Executive Secretary, 1932, 

 p. 6. 



93. Des Moines Register, September 23, 1932; Farmers' Union Herald, December 

 21, 1931; Milwaukee Journal, March 13, 1932; Minnesota Farm Bureau News, 

 April i, 1932. 



