DOWN TO EART
Any solution to the farm problem must, of
necessity, consider not only farmers, but urban
dwellers as well — taxpayers all. President
Eisenhower advanced what he considered a
fair and equitable plan in his message to
Congress. The plan is outlined below.
PRESIDENT Eisenhower's Nine-Point Farm Plan most
likely has been cussed and discussed by any number
of informed and uninformed farm operators, as well
as by legislators, housewives and businessmen. Doubtless
it has also become a matter for much discussion to the
staunch chew-and-spit crowd who congregate on street
Farmers, in all likelihood the greatest individualists in
America, are always sensitive to a shift in the wind of
governmental interference. A panacea offered for the
agricultural barometric disturbance was Eisenhower's
Nine-Point Farm Plan. Some farmers are no longer sure
of their "ground," for the Hydra-headed farm plan presents
problems peculiar to certain areas, and its many ramifications are not always discernible per se.
To some farmers it seems a veritable lifeline; to others
it appears to be a strangle hold unequaled in modern
times, marketing quotas notwithstanding. Additionally,
the President is said by some to be assiduously wooing a
rustic maid in order that he may marry the rural vote.
Election campaign hoopla to the contrary, the truth
of the matter is that the farmer, who generally operates
out of the limelight, has become, hyperbolically, the cynosure of all eyes. And now the farmer regards those eyes,
perhaps with some justification, as too often astigmatic
Undeniably, the farmer's difficulty is no Johnny-come-
lately thing; it is a problem of long standing. He is caught
in a squeeze play — squeezed between rising prices for
the things he buys, and declining prices for the things he
sells. Furthermore, it has long been a matter of record
that as the agricultural economy goes, so goes our entire
social order — economically speaking, that is.
Two of our greatest farm problems are the utilization
of pre-existing stock, and a sensible way to diminish output. If these two problems can be dealt with concurrently.
perhaps the farmer will no longer be getting there (W
bank) "latest with the leastcst." . s
President Eisenhower, in his message on farm P1'"1'1.]
sent to Congress on January 9, 1956, stated that CtP
farm problems needed prompt congressional action-
outlined the causes of these problems as follows:
First - production and market distortions, the result j
wartime production incentives too long continued.
Second current record livestock production and n09
record crop harvests piled on top of previously accumuia«
Third - rising costs and high capital requirements. ^
One of the greatest problems facing our nation •>
ever-growing surplus. These surpluses are the res"
wartime production incentives which were continues
long after the war. Disposal efforts have been inclh't
By way of explanation, for each hypothetical bushel ^
given commodity sold, one and a half bushels have
stockpiled to take its place. One is reminded of the;
climbing stairs in the dark—he takes one step up and ■
down two. And, were it not for these mounting SUTPJ
currently farmers would be getting more moncv M
commodities which they sell. ^^
Until 1954 there was 90 per cent of parity p
port, a practice still favored by a great many 1 ,|
However, the Agricultural Act of 1954, passed <J**|
partisan support, was felt by many to be a step in t'1 J
direction. It brought price flexibility, which was a&Q
to keep commodity supplies in balance with niar'<^S!,r0l'
than 60 different survey groups and more than 500 1 J
nent farm leaders participated in the study that a
develop the Agricultural Act. Agricultural eo J
research institutions, mail from thousands of farm' * A
farm organizations all contributed to this bipartrS' p'
ture. Essentially, it replaced the 90 per cent price S"*j|
with "flexible* supports. These flexible supp<>rts Jf
Fai is Forum News, Ap"
tent of par;
to the aver
*d not ado
karvi the 8
* billion si
th« third q,
1,1 1951 t,, 3
It was tl