(The document referred to is as follows:)

Four years' change in carryover and production plus imports, 1952–56

Commodity Credit Corporation stocks as of Dec. 31, 1952 (from price support inventory of that date)

Carryovers, production and imports, total supply and total disappearance for

Carryovers, production and imports, total supply and total disappearance for

Carryovers, production and imports, total supply and total disappearance for

crop years 1952-55

Mr. THATCHER. I have a full tabulation here beginning with the stocks on hand when Secretary Benson took office.

Senator THYE. Mr. Chairman, those references to the imports, would it be a lengthy statement if you read it, Mr. Thatcher, because not all will go back and read this record, and we are sitting here as a committee trying to formulate some ideas here as to what is necessary to incorporate in a bill.

Mr. THATCHER. Senator Thye

Senator AIKEN. That is the imports of price-supported commodities?

Mr. THATCHER. Yes, sir.

Senator Thye, these statements include what you have asked for. For the record, you will have all of it beginning in July 1952, down to date.

Senator THYE. Splendid.

Senator AIKEN. Will you tell us, has there been an increase in the imports

Mr. THATCHER. No.

Senator AIKEN. In the last 4 years?

Mr. THATCHER. Oh, yes, in the last 4 years, we had some very substantial increases. But I thought you meant this year compared to

last.

Senator AIKEN. I mean, year by year. Senator Thye and Senator Mundt know that there were imports which ought not to have been permitted to come in about 4 years ago.

Senator THYE. That is what I had reference to, you see, that it would be well if it is reflected in a statement, because we have some very able press folks here, and the public needs to be informed about all of these questions if we are, as a committee, to have public acceptance of what we finally recommend, if it involves money. And here the press are the best medium of getting this story to the public.

Now, I have been criticized too many times for being too much for agriculture, and I want agriculture's problem laid before the public so that the public can understand what the agricultural group is faced with as well as what this committee is faced with.

Mr. THATCHER. If there had been no imports of barley or rye or oats, there would not be a bushel of barley or oats or rye in the hands of CCC today.

Senator THYE. That is what I wanted you to say, Mr. Thatcher, because the reason why the imports were permitted was a good-neighbor policy, and the good-neighbor policy contends that our industrial output goes back into those countries, and we have taken those countries' surplus production and brought it in here in competition with an already oversupply of foods and fibers.

Mr. THATCHER. And if you include the feed wheat with thatSenator THYE. Yes, sir.

Mr. THATCHER. If you include the feed wheat, the oats, rye, and barley that have come in from Canada-if they had been excluded-you would not have much surplus grain in the Government's hands today, because way over 500 million bushels came in since 1948. Senator THYE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I apologize to Senator Young for interposing myself on his time. Senator YOUNG. Mr. Thatcher, I want to commend you first for a very good statement. I think it was a constructive statement. You

give the administration credit where credit is due, I think, on the new proposals, and you propose in addition what you think to be necessary, an adequate program to help farmers. It is one of the best statements presented so far.

Now, Mr. Thatcher, you were taken to task a bit ago for having your name attached to some document along with many others. I wanted to say to you that I, too, and I think all of us, are guilty of getting our names attached to documents which we do not entirely believe in. And my latest offense, if it is one, is having my name as a cosponsor on a Republican farm bill.

I did it, Mr. Chairman, in order to get the administration's proposal before the Congress. I do not believe in all that is in it, and I may say further that section 106, to my knowledge, was neither in the President's message nor in Secretary Benson's message.

Senator AIKEN. Let me say, Senator Young, if I had been here the other day, I would have suggested that that section come out. If I had seen it before it was introduced, it would have come out before it was introduced, because it would nullify the purpose of the whole bill. Senator YOUNG. Yes, indeed.

Senator THYE. Mr. Chairman, if the Senator will permit at this time, I look upon this bill like all the other bills. It is like so much material that has been brought in to the workman's bench, whether he be a carpenter or a cabinetmaker. It is something for us to work with in the fabrication of a legislative bill.

Had I known that that paragraph was in that bill when the telephone conversation from you, Senator Aiken, was had, I would never have been a cosponsor of the bill.

Senator AIKEN. If I had known it was in there, I would not have asked you, Senator Thye.

The CHAIRMAN. There is an easy way to cure all this. Just withdraw from the support of it.

Proceed, Senator Young.

Mr. THATCHER. May I say something?

Senator YoUNG. Yes.

Mr. THATCHER. Since we are on the subject of supply and demand, may I at this point add a statement on that matter, with respect to that matter, by Secretary Benson?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. THATHER. It is in a summary of his speech of October 28, 1955, given at Moorhead, Minn., and in a note to editors put out by the Department of Agriculture is item No. 7, which reads as follows:

The Secretary states that this year there will be close balance between production and consumption of the total production. The present indication is that consumption and exports will absorb 99 percent of all we produce, and only about 1 percent will be added to carryovers.

I think it is a good statement.

Senator ANDERSON. What year does that apply to?

Mr. THATCHER. 1955.

Senator ANDERSON. How did the year come out?

Mr. THATCHER. I do not know. But I think he was meaning here I assume he meant feed grains.

Senator AIKEN. No. I think that referred to overall agricultural production.

Mr. THATCHER. Then that shows we are pretty close to balance in supply and demand.

Senator AIKEN. I think we are.

Senator YOUNG. Mr. Thatcher, I notice in your statement that you state that we have an investment of approximately $8 billion in agricultural surpluses.

Mr. THATCHER. Yes, sir.

Senator YOUNG. That statement is in accordance with what most of the witnesses have told us. I think it is a bit misleading in a way, however.

Now, on November 30, 1955, we had eight-billion-two-hundred-andsix-million-odd dollars invested in loans and what CCC had accumulated in surpluses. Now, the total investment in commodities was. $6,130 million, and the loans outstanding were $2,076 million.

So, many of these loans will be redeemed, and the $8 billion does not represent a true figure on surpluses held by the Federal Government. In other words, the Federal Government holds about $6 billion.

Mr. THATCHER. Well, let us assume that they will own $8 billion. On that investment, they may have a considerable loss. The figure you permitted us to put in the record, as to what we think would be a safe reserve to set aside, based on current prices, is $5.2 billion. That amount would call for storage charges of somewhere around $150 million to $200 million a year.

I want to make this further comment about the present cost of $1 million a day for carrying Government stocks. For carrying this adequate, or maybe excessive, supply of food and fiber for the people of this country, only represents $2 per capita per year. The cigarette smokers alone will pay twice that much just in excise taxes in 1 month. The $1 million a day for farm storage is only 1 percent of the defense budget per day. That is to say, the defense budget runs $100 million a day, and the cost of this farm storage program is $1 million a day. Maybe it is too much, but certainly in relation to the defense budget, this cost for food and fiber that ought to be on hand to protect the people is not high. It is only 1 percent.

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed, Senator Young.

Senator YOUNG. Mr. Thatcher, our imports of oats, barley, and

rye

Mr. THATCHER. I cannot get your question.

Senator YOUNG. Our imports of oats, barley, rye, and feed wheat in the last 5 years have been in excess of 500 million bushels, as you

know

Mr. THATCHER. Yes.

Senator YOUNG (continuing). Or a half billion bushels.

Mr. THATCHER. Yes.

Senator YOUNG. We have practically no duty now on imports of feed grains from Canada, as you know. It is very low now. Mr. THATCHER. Yes.

Senator YOUNG. And Canada has no program to restrict their farmers' production.

Do you think it would be wise for the United States—

Mr. THATCHER. They have a restriction on what they may market. Senator THYE. But there is no restriction on their production? Mr. THATCHER. No. The farmer can plant on the farm as much as he wants to, but there is a limit to what he can take off the farm.