Price Control 



{Continued from page 10) 



fore, when I urge that entire responsibility 

 for farm prices, for rationing and for distribu- 

 tion of farm products be centered in one 

 agency, the War Food Administration, an 

 agency which they beheve is manned by indi- 

 viduals who have a sympathetic understanding 

 of their problems. 



The wholesale elimination of point rationing 

 which has taken place within the last few 

 days is a case in point. This action was taken 

 as a matter of urgent necessity, with respect to 

 meat at least, and we are not objecting to it. 

 We recommended months ago, when the heavy 

 run of hogs began, that pork be made ration- 

 free. If action had been taken then, the pres- 

 ent congestion of distributive channels would 

 not have developed in such acute form, and 

 many of the difficulties would have been 

 avoided. We greatly fear that the sweeping 

 action that has been taken may lead the pop- 

 ulation into false sense of security as to food. 

 We should remember that the weather is the 

 greatest single factor in crop yields, and that 

 a poor season in 1944 could easily bring about 

 a stringent, if not critical food situation with- 

 in another year. We believe that this situ- 

 ation could have been handled far more judi- 

 ciously than it has been handled, if the author- 

 ity had been centered in the War Food Ad- 

 ministration. 



Another case in which farmers feel that a 

 program has been hampered by administra- 

 tors who do not understand the farmers' prob- 

 lems is that of farm machinery. We simply 

 cannot understand why rigid production quotas 

 are reserved for some manufacturers when they 

 are not able to produce the full amount of 

 their quotas, while other manufacturers who 

 have met their quotas and have the labor and 

 materials to produce far more are not per- 

 mitted to do so. Furthermore, regulations 

 compel all manufacturers to spread their pro- 

 duction out over a specified period, instead of 

 permitting them to manufacture at top speed 

 until their quotas have been reached. Such 

 administrative regulations are hard to under- 

 stand at a time when the entire world needs 

 all the food that can be produced, and at a 

 time when additional farm machinery would 

 ease the burden of already overworked farm 

 people. 



Since price is a guiding factor in produc- 

 tion, it is extremely important that floor prices 

 be announced well in advance of planting 

 time so that producers may make their plans 

 accordingly. Vexatious delays in making 

 such announcements have been a source of 

 irritation to farmers. 



The policy of maintaining inflexible price 

 ceilings has also been very unpopular with 

 farmers, particularly the producers of such 

 perishables as fruits and vegetables. During 

 practically every season, the production of 

 some crops is reduced by one-half or more 

 as a result of a late freeze, a flood, an early 

 freeze in the fall, or other disaster. Since the 

 individual farmer's income is the result of 

 volume multiplied by price, it is apparent that 

 a producer's income can be halved if price 

 floors and ceilings are rigidly maintained in 

 disregard of such developments. It must be 

 apparent to any unprejudiced observer that 

 low consumer prices are maintained in such 

 instances at the expense of the farmer. If the 

 administrators of the program would follow 

 the plain terms of the law, they would ad- 

 just prices as a matter of equity to the farmer 

 in all such instances. 



In view of the fact that OPA has refused re- 

 peatedly to make adequate adjustments in price 

 ceilings to take care of these emergency situ- 

 ations, we favor an arnendment to the law 

 requiring the price a^jmnistrator to promptly 



review price ceilings whenever unavoidable 

 losses occur as a result of floods, freeze, 

 drought, etc., and give due consideration in 

 such adjustments to losses resulting therefrom. 



There is a super-abundance of cotton, yet 

 because of OPA regulations, cotton manufac- 

 turers have been forced out of production 

 of certain lines of low-priced cotton goods. 

 That curtails the demand for cotton, with 

 the result that the farm price has dropped 

 below parity. Any realistic consideration 

 of the problem by the OPA could have averted 

 this difficulty. 



Furthermore, it is a matter of common 

 knowledge that support prices have not been 

 maintained in many cases. The demoraliza- 

 tion in egg prices which followed the unprec- 

 edented production of recent months is a 

 flagrant case. Farmers increased their pro- 

 duction in response to appeals to their patriot- 

 ism by government officials, and in response 

 to definite assurance of price supports. When 

 the government failed to carry out its part of 

 the bargain, farm people and particularly farm 

 women considered its failure a breach of 

 faith. Such unfortunate experiences can only 

 result in reduced production and impaired 

 morale on the part of farmers and their fam- 

 ilies. I repeat, it is my conviction that many 

 of the difficulties such as the above could 

 have been avoided if all the authority for 

 farm price programs had been placed in the 

 hands of the War Food Administrator. 



Under the law, as it is now worded, it is 

 difficult, and in some cases impossible, for 

 citizens to get adequate redress in the courts 

 against unfair and discriminatory actions of 

 the OPA. There have been many complaints 

 also of arbitrary and flagrant abuses of ad- 

 ministrative power. 



We earnestly urge that the existing legisla- 

 tion be amended to curb administrative viola- 

 tions of the law by the issuance and admin- 

 istration of regulations and orders, to require 

 prompt action by the OPA upon complaints 

 filed by aggrieved parties, and to give ag- 

 grieved persons adequate right of redress of 

 their grievances through the courts. We can- 

 not emphasize too strongly the importance of 

 this action. 



One of the fundamental rights of every cit- 

 izen is the right to prompt court action in 

 cases where the freedom and economic wel- 

 fare of the individual has been interferred 

 with through government action. This right 

 shoufd not have to be surrendered at a time 

 of national emergency. 



Now a further word on consumer food sub- 

 sidies. What are the administration's argu- 

 ments for food subsidies.' There is only one 

 real argument. It is that if food prices are 

 raised the wages of workers must be raised. 

 The government's own figures show that the 

 wages of workers have gone up much further 

 and faster during this war than farm prices. 

 Admittedly, increases to adjust farm prices 

 still would leave these prices far below the 

 increases given labor. Admittedly, also, in- 

 creased expenditures for food by consumers 

 out of increased purchasing power would be 

 anti-inflationary instead of inflationary. Then 

 why does the administration insist upon sub- 

 sidies? The reason is plain. This adminis- 

 tration is unwilling to resist the demands of 

 labor. It does not intend to resist labor's 

 demands. Therefore, it continues to give 

 labor wage increases and at the same time 

 to pay part of labor's grocery bill, through 

 subsidies. It pays a part of the grocery 

 bill of all consumers and at a time when 

 consumers as a group are better able to pay 

 for their food than at any other period of rec- 

 ord. TKe problem of low-income groups 

 cannot be solved through food subsidies. It 

 is simply observed to give food subsidies to 

 all citizens on the theory that a small mi- 

 nority of the population has been unable to 



secure advances in wages. The only way to 

 solve the problem of underpaid workers is 

 through adequate wage increases. Further- 

 more, the administration, by fantastic prvp- 

 aganda, has tried to persuade consumers that 

 adjustments in farm prices would mean sharp 

 increases in food costs. Subsidies defeat both 

 the letter and spirit of the anti-inflation pro- 

 gram. They not only violate the law, but 

 they are inflationary. They increase the na- 

 tional debt. They cannot be defended save 

 as a means of favoring one class against an- 

 other. I am sorry to say that agriculture and 

 labor have drawn further apart within the 

 past few years. It is a tendency which will 

 prove costly to both groups. Administration 

 policies have been primarily responsible for 

 this divergence and I am sorry to say that 

 some labor leaders have insisted upon fasten- 

 ing war-time subsidies on agriculture with- 

 out ceasing to campaign for wage increases. 

 I again plead with Congress to take a firm 

 stand against the un-American policy of pass- 

 ing on to future generations a part of the 

 legitimate food bill of the people, rich and 

 poor alike, at a time when consumers are bet- 

 ter able to pay fair prices than ever before in 

 history, and at a time when people generally 

 are eating better than they ever did before in 

 history. 



By John R. Spencer 



"Meeting the Needs for the 4F's" is die 

 title of a soil building article and does not 

 refer to men for selective service. Maxi- 

 mum production of foods, feeds, fiber and 

 fats (the 4F's) can be reached only when 

 the soil is well supplied with organic mat- 

 ter and there is an adequate and well bal- 

 anced supply of the essential plant food 

 elements available to crops, such as nitro- 

 gen, phosphorus, potash and calcium. 



Nine samples of rock phosphate have 



been tested recently in spot sampling by 

 the lAA soil improvement department. 

 Pick-ups are made from rail cars or dealers 

 storage with analyses made by the Applied 

 Chemistry testing laboratory at Urbana to 

 ascertain if quality quarantees are being 

 delivered Illinois farmers. 



According to the Natioqal Fertilizer As- 

 sociation 104,520 tons of commercial ferti- 

 lizer were used by Illinois farmers in 1943. 

 Indiana farmers used 396,000 tons in the last 

 year — Wisconsin 178,500 tons, — Iowa 

 slightly less than 60,000 tons and Missouri 

 150,000 tons. All five states show substan- 

 tial increases in tonnage used over the pre- 

 vious year, in fact the largest increases in 

 consumption in recent years have occurred 

 in the Midwest. The steady rise in tonnage 

 during this war is in marked contrast to the 

 downward trend during World War I 

 which resulted from the cutting 'off of im- 

 ports of certain materials from Europe. 



Another effect of the cold wet weather has 



been to delay greatly the spreading of lime- 

 stone which usually is quite large in the 

 spring months of the year. 



IB 



L A. A. RECORD 



