Senator WILLIAMS. In connection with the questions of payments for acres, I am not clear how that operates. Would you describe in detail just one specific operation, how you will arrange these payments and how they will be cashed?

Secretary BENSON. Let me ask Dr. Parrlberg to comment on that. Dr. PARRLBERG. Which of the two programs?

Senator WILLIAMS. In the soil bank plan, assume the farmer had an allotment of 100 acres wheat or corn, and he sets either all or part aside. How does he get paid and how much?

The CHAIRMAN. Wheat in Kansas, let us say.

Dr. PAARLBERG. If he had 100 acres of wheat allotment and he chose to underplant, to plant only 80 acres and put 20 acres in the acreage reserve, then as the program is now contemplated, there would be an estimate of what his normal production of wheat would have been on these 20 acres, which he takes out of production. He would receive certificates equal to a given percentage of the value of the wheat that would have been grown on these 20 acres, and that is a critical percentage, as has been indicated here. These certificates would be made available to him through the Commodity Stabilization Service. They would be cashable. They would be redeemable in cash or in kind at his election, perhaps at a prescribed rate that the Commodity Credit Corporation would indicate. Then as production is pulled down by this underplanting, a vacuum is created in the market into which the Commodity Credit Corporation could move a part of its present stock, receiving therefrom funds with which to redeem the farmer's certificates.

I think in bare outline, those are the essentials of the program.

Senator WILLIAMS. I congratulate you on the explanation, but I am back where I was before. I don't know what you are talking about. My question is this: Assume this farmer is in Kansas with 100 acres of wheat. How much will he get per acre? When he goes to the cashier of the bank, I am afraid he will be just as confused as I am unless it is spelled out more specifically. What does he get? Assuming conditions are as at present, what will he get per acre? That is the answer that I want.

Dr. PARRLBERG. This comes back, Senator, to the question that has been raised many times here this morning as to what the inducement should be, what the compensation should be, what the percentage of this man's production should be, to draw him into the program.

Senator WILLIAMS. That is the question, and that is what I am asking. In the absence of such information how can either the Committee or the farmers decide on this proposal?

Dr. PAARLBERG. As has been indicated, it will be necessary to make rather thorough studies of this and to indicate criteria that will enable the administrators to designate that particular and critical thing. We are not in a position at this time to make a specific recommendation. Senator WILLIAMS. What is the average yield per acre for wheat in the State of Kansas?

Secretary BENSON. Senator Williams, we will have to come back in with a lot of specifics on this. We have the figures in our files. They are being worked out now. We have the average yield figure for the States, by years and by counties, in most instances. We will have to work out the details.

Senator WILLIAMS. I recognize that. I know we do have those figures, and that is the reason it would be well for us to have some of those figures in the record.

Secretary BENSON. I think that is right. We ought to come forward with some specific examples.

Senator WILLIAMS. Are they getting $50 an acre or $100 on acre or what do they get?

Secretary BENSON. We can provide those examples of those specific figures for any States.

Senator WILLIAMS. Would you provide those figures on the different commodities broken down by States to the committee before we are asked to act on it?

Secretary BENSON. Yes, sir; I think we shall.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Scott?

Senator SCOTT. No question.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Schoeppel?

Senator SCHOEPPEL. As I understood the Secretary, he has most kindly and cooperatively indicated that he would be willing to come before this committee at another time to go into these matters in more detail, and I appreciate that. There are just one or two things I want no mistake about, because during our series of hearings we heard the request for more acreage, I care not whether it was wheat or cotton or tobacco or rice, but we understand now in the first initial approaches to this bill, that the established acreage quotas that have heretofore been established are now in force and effect unless modified by a later change, are the ones we are going to take to be the sustaining factor; is that correct?

Secretary BENSON. That is correct. The farmer would not lose those quotas by participating in the acreage reserve program or the soil conservation program.

Senator SCHOEPPEL. That is correct, as I understand it, but I wanted it on the record. I do have some questions that I want to ask probably at a later time, and I want to request from the Department, how the normal yield would be determined and will it be based on the average over a 3-year period, over a 5-year period, or a 10-year period? Because we have had in a number of areas, and I notice that my colleagues might have similar conditions in their areas which suffered considerable drought damage, and the yields on wheat naturally were down by reason of that.

Then what period of time that is going to be used in an equitable and fair way is going to be very important, and I am sure, Mr. Secretary, that you and the members of your Department's staff will come up with something on that score that will be enlightening to us.

Secretary BENSON. We will have some definite recommendations regarding the base period to be used.

Senator SCHOEPPEL. One thing that I am concerned about, because it affects my area of Kansas and Oklahoma and the western part of the Midwestern States, that is where we only have, say, wheat or maybe the sorghums as crops we must rely upon, no reference has been made to any of those sorghum grain crops in this testimony today. That falls under the category of the feeds.

I want at the proper time, when the Secretary comes before the committee with his staff, to go into how those matters might be handled and what consideration will be given to those areas where, if you fail

on wheat, and we cannot go to soybeans, corn, and any of the many crops which are or can be grown in other areas of the country. This is vitally important to us in those sections so affected and especially where we can show a history of sorghum grain production. I am sure the Secretary has thought of that.

Secretary BENSON. That is right.

Senator SCHOEPPEL. Time is getting late, and the Secretary is busy, and you are coming before the committee again. I will defer some other questions. I do particularly want to say that Senator Anderson and Senator Holland covered some other matters first before I had the opportunity of discussing and asking some questions on wheat that I think is most helpful in clearing these matters up.

I want to say one thing further, however. Some reference was made here to plowing up wheat in this present year's program. I think under the President's message he pointed out the need and the necessity by reason of the fact that the winter-wheat areas have already planted wheat. There was an opportunity he hoped that would be given by proper legislation and consideration by the Department to taking even some of that wheat that was now in the ground out of production by conforming to this program, if the Congress passes it. Secretary BENSON. That was suggested as a possibility in those areas where that is an accepted practice, and in order to give every farmer an opportunity to get into the program this coming year, 1956. Senator SCHOEPPEL. I think that is eminently fair, and I think it is most important for those areas in that category to be so considered. May I say that I do appreciate the outline you have given on this entire program. I think it is most helpful. I think it is most constructive, and it is very helpful to us as this committee moves forward under the time schedule that Senator Ellender has established.

Senator YOUNG. Mr. Secretary, I am not clear now, I don't know what the position of the Department is after Senator Schoeppel asked some questions, and the answers to my questions a while ago. Can or cannot a wheat farmer plow under part of his regular allotment to qualify for the acreage reserve and soil-conservation program?

Secretary BENSON. The President suggested, and I heartily concur, in those areas where winter wheat has been planted and where it is an accepted practice to plow that wheat under or mix it in with the soil, that that be accepted as one of the practices and would be permitted under the program.

Senator YOUNG. I understand that under the present law a winter wheat farmer can plow up his wheat over and above his allotment, but under this program

Secretary BENSON. In order to comply.

Senator YOUNG. Now he can plow up 20 percent or more of his wheat acreage his regular wheat allotment to come under the new acreage reserve program.

Secretary BENSON. Yes. If it is an accepted practice, and it is in many of the wheat areas as a soil fertility and erosion control measure. Senator YOUNG. This would be the first time that the Federal Government paid a farmer to destroy a crop.

Secretary BENSON. We are not paying him to destroy the crop. We are paying him to follow a practice which is accepted in the area and which is more or less common. Ofttimes farmers do that for soil

fertility purposes. They will plant in the fall and plow the crop up in the spring or mix it in with the soil as a regular practice.

Senator YOUNG. That is above his allotment, but to encourage the farmer to decrease his production below his allotment, the Federal Government will pay him to plow it up.

Secretary BENSON. We will accept that as one of the practices. At least, we suggested that to the committee for consideration.

The CHAIRMAN. As I indicated, soon after I asked a few questions, many of us would have liked to have asked you more questions. We realize you are a busy man and you have offered to come before us later, and we hope to call you when you have many of these suggestions you made this morning in such a shape as to be more specific, particularly with reference to the amount of payments that Senator Williams is concerned about, and it is my hope that you will get your staff busy and furnish us with this data as soon as possible, so we can reach that target that I have fixed of February 15. I think it is possible.

Secretary BENSON. I do, too.

The CHAIRMAN. If all of us get together and work

Secretary BENSON. Thank you, Senator. We will be glad to cooperate in any way. We are very anxious to see you reach that target and my staff and I will stand ready to do anything we can to be helpful.

The CHAIRMAN. With that understanding, the committee will stand in recess until 2:30, to meet in executive session with the heads of our farm organizations in the regular meeting room of the Agriculture Committee.

Secretary BENSON. Thank you very much.
(Whereupon, at 1 p. m., the committee recessed.)

PRICE-SUPPORT PROGRAM

TUESDAY, JANUARY 17, 1956

UNITED STATES SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10: 10 a. m., in room 324, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C., Senator Allen J. Ellender (chairman) presiding.

Present: Senators Ellender, Johnston, Holland, Clements, Humphrey, Scott, Aiken, Young, Thye, Hickenlooper, Mundt, and Williams.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order.

It will be recalled that when our committee met on January 4 I informed the committee that I had instructed the staff to proceed to draft a bill trying to carry out the suggestions made by various witnesses throughout the country, when we held our hearings last fall.

Senator Young, you will remember that we discussed that together, and we agreed it was a proper procedure. I want it well understood now-although it is labeled a "committee print"-it is not to be considered as a bill that has been prepared by the committee itself, and I had inserted in parentheses on the first page of this so-called committee print, January 17, 1956 "(Draft prepared by committee_staff to illustrate suggestions made by various witnesses at committee hearings held from October 19, 1955, to November 24, 1955)."

In other words, it is a draft that incorporates the views expressed by many witnesses throughout the country; and since we held hearings throughout the country I want it understood that this may be used as a form of bill upon which the committee will work but it is in no sense to be classified as a bill that has received the sanction of the committee, nor any of its members.

With that understanding, if there is no objection, I will make it public and we can probably use it as a basis for drafting a bill.

Senator YOUNG. Your action is in accord with the understanding we had with the committee a few days ago.

The CHAIRMAN. You will recall when we met on the 4th, I told the committee members-all members were present, I think, except twoI stated then that I had instructed our staff to proceed to draft a bill based on the hearings we held, and to that we would add or take away whatever we thought was better, based on suggestions made later on, either by the Department or by Senators or by the various organizational groups.

My good friend Senator Capehart here made a suggestion to me the first day that Congress convened, and I in turn suggested to him that