CONTENTS H. R. 1834, a bill to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to exempt certain wheat producers from liability under the act where all the wheat crop is fed or used for seed on the farm, and for other purposes---- H. R. 6145, a bill to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to exempt certain wheat producers from liability under the act where all the wheat crop is fed or used for seed on the farm, and for other purposes_ Bentley, Hon. Alvin M., a Representative in Congress from the State Blitch, Hon. Iris, a Representative in Congress from the State of Cole, Hon. W. Sterling, a Representative in Congress from the State Kendrick, K., president, National Association of Wheat Growers, and Herbert Hughes, chairman, national programs committee_ Poff, Hon. Richard H., a Representative in Congress from the State McLain, Marvin L., Director, Grain Division, Commodity Stabiliza- Additional data submitted to the subcommittee: Benson, Hon. E. T., Secretary of Agriculture, letter of April 5, 1955, Chillicothe State Bank, Chillicothe, Mo., letter of March 4, 1955, to House Resolution No. 71, General Assembly of the State of Missouri__ Peterson, E. L., Acting Secretary, Department of Agriculture, report of March 4, 1955, on H. R. 1834- Tucker, Orran N., office manager, Reynolds and Carter Counties, Mo., Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation, United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, letter of September 21, 1954, to Hon. A. S. J. WHEAT CROP USED ON THE FARM WEDNESDAY, JUNE 1, 1955 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The subcommittee met at 2 p. m., pursuant to call, in room 1310, New House Office Building, Hon. Carl Albert (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Mr. ALBERT. The committee will please come to order. We have met to consider sundry bills by various members, and these include S. 46, H. R. 1834, H. R. 3232, H. R. 3669, H. R. 4053, H. R. 4570, H. R. 5303, H. R. 5372, H. R. 5397, H. R. 6019, H. R. 6145, and H. R. 6437, all of which are identical or very similar in content. The purpose of these bills is to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended, to exempt certain wheat producers from liability under the act where all the wheat crop is fed or used for seed on the farm, and for other purposes. (H. R. 1834 and H. R. 6145 are as follows:) [H. R. 1834, 84th Cong., 1st sess.] A BILL To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to exempt certain wheat producers from liability under the Act where all the wheat crop is fed or used for seed on the farm, and for other purposes Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 335 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(f) The Secretary, upon application made pursuant to regulations prescribed by him, shall exempt producers from any obligation under this Act to pay the penalty on, deliver to the Secretary, or store the farm marketing excess with respect to any farm for any crop of wheat harvested in 1955 or subsequent years on the following conditions: "(1) That none of such crop of wheat is removed from such farm; (2) That such entire crop of wheat is used for seed on such farm, or is fed on such farm to livestock, including poultry, owned by any such producer, or a subsequent owner or operator of the farm; and "(3) That such producers and their successors comply with all regulations prescribed by the Secretary for the purpose of determining compliance with the foregoing conditions. Failure to comply with any of the foregoing conditions shall cause the exemption to become immediately void unless such failure is due to circumstances beyond the control of such producers as determined by the Secretary. If an exemption becomes void the provisions of this Act shall become applicable to the same extent as if such exemption had not been granted. No acreage planted to wheat in excess of the farm acreage allotment for a crop covered by an exemption under this subsection shall be considered in determining any subsequent wheat acreage allotment or marketing quota for such farm." 1 [H. R. 6145, 84th Cong., 1st sess.] A BILL To amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 to exempt certain wheat producers from liability under the Act where all the wheat crop is fed or used for seed on the farm, and for other purposes Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 335 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection: "(f) The Secretary shall exempt all producers, who may make application therefor, from any obligation under this Act with respect to any crop of wheat harvested in 1955 or subsequent years by such applicant on the following conditions: "(1) That such entire crop of wheat (A) is used for seed on such farm, or (B) is fed on such farm to livestock, including poultry, owned by any such producer, or a subsequent owner or operator of the farm, or to wildlife (including waterfowl) on such farm, or (C) is otherwise consumed on such farm; and "(2) That such producers and their successors comply with all regulations prescribed by the Secretary for the purpose of determining compliance with the foregoing conditions. "Failure to comply with any of the foregoing conditions shall cause the exemption to become immediately void unless such failure is due to circumstances beyond the control of such producers as determined by the Secretary. If an exemption becomes void the provisions of this Act shall become applicable to the same extent as if such exemption had not been granted. No acreage planted to wheat in excess of the farm acreage allotment for a crop covered by an exemption under this subsection shall be considered in determining any subsequent wheat acreage allotment or marketing quota for such farm." Mr. ALBERT. S. 46 has been passed by the Senate, and we have before us a Senate report as well as the report of the Department of Agriculture on H. R. 1834, dated March 4, 1954, which is favorable to enactment of the bill. We also have with us a representative from the Department, Mr. McLain, this afternoon. But we will ask you, if you don't mind, to stand by just briefly while we hear from Congressman Cole who has another meeting. Congressman Cole, the committee will now recognize you. STATEMENT OF HON. W. STERLING COLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN Mr. COLE. Mr. Chairman, I was one of those who introduced one of the bills which you enumerated, H. R. 4053. I appear not in behalf of that particular bill but in behalf of the general purpose of all of the bills. First, I want to compliment the committee on its decision to hear this problem, which is not of great importance in the entire nationwide problem of wheat production, marketing and so forth, but it is of great importance to the small wheat growers and particularly to the small farmer who also is a poultryman. I recognize that by exempting the wheat producer who uses his production on his property does do some violence to the general problem of the wheat marketing quota principle. But, on the other hand, to me, that does a greater violence to a much greater and more fundamental principle of government, and that is that a man should have the right to use the product of his own property in any way that he may see fit so long as he does not interfere with the rights of his neighbor or other property owners or does not use or exercise that right in an immoral or an improper manner. It seems to me entirely contrary to our fundamentals of private enterprise, private property, that a man should be subject to a penalty for growing a product on his own property and then consuming it himself or having it consumed by other animals on his farm or on his property. So I urge that the committee give favorable consideration to exempting this type of grower. I have no prepared statement. I do not wish to discuss the subject further except to strongly urge that the committee do take favorable action on the proposal. Mr. ALBERT. Thank you, Mr. Cole, for your statement. Is there any member who desires to interrogate Congressman Cole? Mr. HILL. Mr. Cole, I would like to ask a question. I believe that in the last session we passed a bill on wheat acreage, and eliminated some 12 States. Because of the total number of acres of wheat grown in those States they were not considered in the program. Now you are from New York. Would it not be better for New York and for the dairyman and poultryman if we eliminated-and I think we talked about it-25 States entirely from the program? And undoubtedly New York would be in there. Would that not be better than to pass a bill like this which would permit them to extend the wheat acreage if they wished as long as they feed it on the farm? Which would you prefer? Mr. COLE. Considering the problem from a purely provincial standpoint, that is, of doing what will accomplish what the people I represent seek to have accomplished, then the suggestion which you have made, Mr. Hill, would do that. It is my understanding that the wheatgrowers of New York State, in the vote which was taken on this matter last year or the year before, voted against coming under the wheat program. But, for some reason, their vote did not result in their being exempt. However, exempting all wheatgrowers from New York would not solve the principal objection which I have to the idea of penalizing a man for consuming his own production whether he lives in Kansas or New York or Colorado or wherever he may live. Mr. HILL. Of course, you understand 65 to 75 percent of all of the corn produced in this country is fed on the farm. Mr. HOEVEN. Eighty-five percent. Mr. HILL. He says 85 percent. I think he is a little high. What about that? Would that have any effect on what you are asking us to do here? Mr. COLE. Certainly, to be consistent, the same principle should be applied to all types of farm production. Mr. HILL. Then do you mean to say, in corn, the farmer could grow just as much corn as he wished without price supports if he fed it to the hogs? Mr. COLE. I would say so. Mr. HILL. But in commercial corn areas then you would have a different program. Mr. COLE. If you are going to continue a program of price supports and production quotas, then that is the way it should be. The man who produces a farm commodity for marketing as a commodity should come within the penalty provisions. But if it is raised to assist him in producing other types of farm commodities I think he should be exempt. |