The CHAIRMAN. Over a period of time. I have found but a few witnesses who testified other than that low prices bring more production, because the farmers who have the machinery and who have big farms are prone to produce more in order to try to make both ends

meet.

Senator AIKEN. I believe we have got to concede that the dairy program has been expensive over the last 3 years. Officials have given me their estimate before the Commodity Credit Corporation gets out of the dairy business the cost will be a little over a billion dollars, possibly $1,100 million. It has been very expensive but consumption had dropped, as you know, from 816 pounds of milk equivalent per person to 689 pounds of milk equivalent per person over a period of just a few years. Those were the years when dairy interests and cooperatives did not have to hunt markets. They just turned it over to the Government and they lost a good share of the market. Now they are beginning to get it back. They have just about gotten the consumption in balance with production today.

Dairy products are the outstanding example of how consumption can be increased over the last 2-year period.

Mr. DUDLEY. Do you not think that the dairy industry is on the right track then to help solve their own problems?

Senator AIKEN. I think if the dairy industry has the courage to stay on that track that they will have the best years of their lives just ahead of them.

Mr. DUDLEY. I have another point that I would like to bring out here in regard to diverted acres that may upset all of this, if I may be allowed to present my testimony, or do you have any more questions?

The CHAIRMAN. Nobody is stopping you. Go to it.

Mr. DUDLEY. To get rid of the surplus commodities already on hand it will be necessary to limit production of the basic crops now under price supports. Some control of the acres taken out of production must be exercised or they will be planted to crops already in adequate supply and cause difficulty in those crops.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any reason to believe that is not being done?

Mr. DUDLEY. I do not believe there is much control over the acres taken out of production.

The CHAIRMAN. I am talking about lowering the acreage just what you said there-you are talking about control of production. That is being done every year now.

Mr. DUDLEY. But they are planting those acres to other crops that are going to cause distress in those crops, if it is allowed to continue. The CHAIRMAN. But you are talking about diverted acres now? Mr. DUDLEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood your statement to refer to a decrease in the production by acres of the crops that are protected.

Mr. DUDLEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. That is being done, you know.

Mr. DUDLEY. Yes, but if they are allowed to continue they are going to get surplus in other things, and if they are allowed to be put into grass or alfalfa or legumes, they will produce more dairy products and compete with us dairymen and upset the balance.

The CHAIRMAN. We are talking about two different things. I am not talking about the diverted acres, sir. I know something has to be done with that. I do agree with you thoroughly. The point I am trying to make to you is that under the program as now written and as it was prepared before or administered before, efforts are being made to reduce these commodities that are in surplus by reducing the acres.

Mr. DUDLEY. If something is not done with the acres I cannot help but feel they will be planted to some other crops.

The CHAIRMAN. You are talking about diverted acres. with you. Go ahead, proceed.

I agree

Mr. DUDLEY. It seems to me that the soil fertility bank plan is a feasible plan to take these diverted acres out of production and store fertility in the soil. A rigid check on those diverted acres should be made, for we dairymen in the Northeast would hate to see these soilbuilding crops harvested and turned into milk. If such a thing happened milk surplus would be worse than the wheat or cotton surplus.

I believe Secretary Benson has done a splendid job in trying to straighten out the agricultural situation. His policies are sound and he should be highly commended for not deviating from his principles of what he believes is best for the American farmer.

The flexible price system will do the most, of all the plans dreamed up, to reduce surpluses and put farmers in a position to produce what the market wants at a fair price.

High rigid-price supports or compensatory payments will both lead farmers into a completely socialized agriculture. Other countries that have socialism have less production, a lower standard of living and their farmers are not happy.

Agriculture is the most important industry of the country and it should not become a political football whereby politicians try to gain votes by promoting unwise and unsound schemes for farmers. Farmers know that the way to get a good income is production from the whole farm times price less expenses.

Farmers want to continue to farm under the free-enterprise system which allows them the freedom to run their own business, a system which has made this country the greatest country on earth. I hope you gentlemen will use your influence to keep it that way.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you name us a few of the politicians you are talking about?

Mr. DUDLEY. No, I do not care to name any.

The CHAIRMAN. Come on, name them. If you know any of them on the Agricultural Committee, name any one of them.

Mr. DUDLEY. I am not referring to the Agriculture Committee. I know a lot of you are doing a fine job, but I know that there are some people

The CHAIRMAN. You name me anybody that you know of in the Senate who is trying to play politics with the farm program.

Mr. DUDLEY. I do not care to.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course you do not. Why do you say it in your statement then?

Mr. DUDLEY. I could not name them, because I do not care to have it put in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Why not, you are a free American-nobody will put you in jail for that.

Mr. DUDLEY. All right. I think anybody that is advocating a rigid 90-percent-support system.

The CHAIRMAN. Is a politician?

Mr. DUDLEY. It is one of those people that are trying to use that as a means of getting votes.

The CHAIRMAN. I am doing it myself.

Mr. DUDLEY. Well, all right. I still cannot see how if you have high, rigid supports, encourage uneconomical production of something, that the country does not need, will solve the problem. I think these people that are going around advocating this are just getting the country and the Government into a worse mess than they are right now.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you finished?

Mr. DUDLEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. What would you thik of a program that would offer a premium to farmers to produce commodities that are readily salable and readily usable, say, like wheat that is readily millable, that would not be a drag on the market?

Mr. DUDLEY. Anything that is easy on he market, we do not need any kind of a Government program to encourage the production of it, the market price will take care of itself.

The CHAIRMAN. You think so?

Mr. DUDLEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. I am glad you think that way. I am sorry that you were not with me on these hearings.

Mr. DUDLEY. I have heard a lot about that. I have heard many statements saying high price supports on wheat have caused the production of unmillable wheat, just feed wheat, because production per acre is more, you get a higher price per acre.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course you know under any program, be it price supported or, in fact, any law, we always find somebody who gets around that law and tries to defeat it.

Mr. DUDLEY. That is right. I agree with you 100 percent.

The CHAIRMAN. You know that?

Mr. DUDLEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. It has been proposed by many people, and we have a bill pending before our committee now, to offer an inducement to farmers who will plant, let us say, millable wheat that we are short of now. Do you not think it would be a good idea to do it?

Mr. DUDLEY. I think that is a good idea if the supports on the lower grades of wheat are reduced to discourage it.

The CHAIRMAN. On the lower grade. I agree with you. Sure, that is what we had in mind.

Mr. DUDLEY. I agree; I am glad to hear that. I think that is a good idea.

The CHAIRMAN. What I would like to do or suggest, and the measure that we have that we are now considering and which I hope may become the law, makes the price-support program so low on these commodities that are unsalable, like wheat for chicken feed, that it would not pay them to produce it and the poultry growers of this area. might be able to get in on some of that cheap feed. Would you not like to see the same thing with cotton?

Mr. DUDLEY. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. We have a surplus of cotton today, but not of the good kind. What has occurred in this program is that a lot of farmers have produced not for the market, but for Uncle Sam.

If we can find a way to curtail that, do you not think it would be a good idea?

Mr. DUDLEY. Surely.

The CHAIRMAN. That is what we are trying to do.

Mr. DUDLEY. All right.

The CHAIRMAN. So you would not object to offering a little premium until we get out of the woods, because I do not want any protection, any more than you do, sir. The idea is to get the farmer out of the woods and to get him on his feet. And if we can put a law on the statute books that will encourage that farmer to produce goods that will be absorbed by the market and to discourage the production of those commodities that are a drag on the market, that would be of help. I just mentioned cotton. Of the amount of cotton we have on hand today, 41 percent is under an inch. The market does not want that, therefore let us say that we will not pay you. We will not support the price to you for cotton of that stable, or we will make it so low that you will be discouraged from producing it.

Would you not be for a program like that?

Mr. DUDLEY. I would like to say that I am heartily in favor of that program, but up until this moment I had not heard any such plans were under way. I am glad that you are doing that.

The CHAIRMAN. You are like, with all due respects to others, a lot of other witnesses who testified-not so much here, but in other places where the farmers of this Nation were asked to produce because of a pending war in Korea. They responded patriotically but the great trouble with them is that many produced more or less for Uncle Sam. They did not try to give quality production, and even during the war. It strikes out the benefits intended by the law on the statute books, a program whereby we would have compensated the farmer to produce what the market wanted. If we had done this we would not be in the trouble we are now. That is what some of us are thinking of.

Mr. DUDLEY. I am glad to know it. I think if the program had been put into effect right after the war to start gradually lowering price supports, we would not be quite as bad off as we are now. The CHAIRMAN. You mean which war?

Mr. DUDLEY. The Korean war.

The CHAIRMAN. The Korean skirmish or World War II?

Mr. DUDLEY. The Korean war.

The CHAIRMAN. The war ended suddenly. It was thought that it would go on a few more years. The year that it did end many of us thought that the Government should then have put acreage controls on, but it was not done. It should have been done, but it was not done, because of the fact that it was possible that it would continue longer than it did. Just because it ended suddenly, the programs were on and more was produced than was needed. I am satisfied if the law that was on the statute books had been put into effect and we had these decreased acreages and placed marketing quotas on, you would not have had on hand the amount of cotton I am sure that you now have.

Mr. DUDLEY. You are talking right along with my program. [Applause.]

I want you folks to use your influence.

The CHAIRMAN. We may talk in the same language, but you have a different approach. You are blaming it on the 90 percent support program when that is not correct. That is where we differ.

Mr. DUDLEY. I think it has been a big factor.

The CHAIRMAN. We would not argue it.

Mr. DUDLEY. That rigid price-support program was voted in by the House last year and your body did not vote it. So otherwise we would have had it right back going on right now.

The CHAIRMAN. You know who stopped it?

Mr. DUDLEY. I have an idea. I think you are the gentleman. The CHAIRMAN. Why, because I want to come back and see the farmers to see whether or not we could not get a better program. We could have probably squeaked it through Congress, but I did not want to do that. I wanted to come back here to the farmers and see from them whether or not we could not get a workable program. If I am to be classified as a politician for that, you are welcome to call me that. Mr. DUDLEY. I hope you folks will use your influence to persuade some of these other folks to vote along the way we want to see.

The CHAIRMAN. I will use all of the pressure I have in my power to do that.

Mr. DUDLEY. I appreciate that.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to get the Government out of business quicker than you, because I have been living with it a long time. I think it is possible if only we could get the farmers to try and cooperate among themselves. You take this Maine man who came here about potatoes. If you could get cooperatives organized in the various States, and those cooperatives will cooperate with each other, you might solve the problem. You try to see how far you go with that. Mr. DUDLEY. I am doing all I can to do just that.

The CHAIRMAN. You have the situation here in Vermont, and, in fact, in all of New England, with your dairy prices. I do not mean to say you are sitting high, or that you are eating "high on the hog" all the time I do not mean to say that. You have something you can more or less control. You have a great market to which you can divert your produce. All of the States have a provision in their own law to prevent a little milk coming in from perhaps Wisconsin and maybe other States. I do not mean to say that is not the thing to do, but if you worked all over the country and see what is occurring in other places where their sole revenue is from wheat and they cannot grow anything else in those places, that is their main crop, you might have a little pity for some of those fellows.

Mr. DUDLEY. We have a few problems being close to the markets. We have high land costs and high taxes that offset some of that.

The CHAIRMAN. Your high taxes may be your trouble. I was surprised to learn that in some of your Northeastern States your taxes were almost as much as 8 percent on your land. You ought to come to Louisiana.

Mr. DUDLEY. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. Our next witness is Mr. Hutton. Will you come forward and give us your name and whom you represent?