for this important work. However, with the cost-price squeeze
on in agriculture, it is more necessary than ever before that
we bring to fanners the ver) best information on ways and
means oi cutting costs. This means that 1956 is no time to
stop the accelerated program now under way. I -hall be interested in the budget recommendations of the Administration in
this field. In the effort to balance the federal budget. I hope
that important programs like adequate research and education
will not be victim of election year political expediency.
To me nothing is more vital to a lasting solution of our
farm problems than continued emphasis on research and
extension. The route to newspaper headlines and publicity is
to be for or against 90 per cent price supports. The route of
service tei farmers is to be for increasing appropriations J
our federal budgets for the expansion of research and etlu<1
tion in American agriculture. . . .
The farm problem has been with us for most of this gen*]
aliieii. The next generation will have to endure it onlv a li'"
while until we,ilel population catches up. That's why I li"f ■■■■
that those people vvllee eire sincerely the friends ,,f the \nli*'
can fanner mav quit fighting each cither and join on a pf
grain that will clean the commodity shelves, that will bri"
to the American farmer an alert, active and aggressive nieit^'veM
for his produce, and will eit the same time give truth at 's65B£ifj!
le, our slogan that f I may have a voice in the final p"2-25.
iioiincement of peace. k*rv
Senator Gore favors 90% Price Supports With Control'
THERE MIT. THOSE who sav that the present price-
squeeze difficulty would straighten itself out if the
government would merely step completely out of the
picture and allow the law ol "suppl) anil demand to operate
freely. This sounds good ei- an eaomeenie theeirv. hut even if it
worked, which 1 doubt, the small family-size producer vvouhl
I,,- crushed to death in the process, lhe trend toward large
corporate-type [arming would be greatly accelerated.
The manufacturer of automobiles can ail just his production to the number of cars he will sell at a price which will
give him a profit. If there are too many automobiles, he
simplv shut- down a part ol his plant until the supplv is
"adjusted." On the other hand, a feirnier cannot simply stop
producing (unless, of cur-.', he goes broke and is forced to
go out of business). Then, ton. the farmer, unaided, has no
control over the price he receives. Winn a steer is fat he has
to go tei the market at whatever price tin- buyer i- willing to
pav. The farmer who rebels onl) compounds hi- losses if he
continues to feed the steer, hoping for a better price.
There is a second major reason why the law of supply ami
demand doe- not eelwavs vvi.rk feer the fanner like it does for
other folk-. Generally speaking, if there is an over-supply of
some product, the price will go down, bringing about increased consumption and. ultimately, increased demand. But.
for some strange reason, ihi- principle doesn t seem to work
for the farmer. Though the price he receives declines, the
piiea- at the grocery store does not. For example, lower prices
for wheat have' not meant lower prices of bread. On the con-
trary, while wheat t,...k ei nosedive, bread made- a vertical
take-off. In 1947 wheat s.elel for $2.35 per bushel and bread
wa- 12'j cents per II,. During thc Erst ten months oi 1955
wheat has averaged s2.nl per bushel while bread was sold for
17.7 cents per pound.
Vnd, there is another statistical lent that weenies me. In
the three-year period 1947-49, the fanner received 19 per cent
of the retail price of bread. That was ei smeill share, indeed.
lint in .lulv. "tugust ami September of 1955 he received onl)
I I per cent.
Let us take a look at beef. In the 1947-49 period the farmers' share nl the consumers' beef dollar was 71 per cent. In
the third quarter of 1955 his share' was onl) (•! per cent.
In the same periods, tin' farmers -hen,' e.l llu- consumers' p'.rk
dollar dropped In,in 67 per cent I,, 52 per cent.
In I'lUi the farmers' -hare' ,,! the food eleilleir wa- ."id cents.
In 1953 it weis 49 cents. \t iln' presenl time, iln- farmers share
is running at the rate of 40 cents. . . .
There are a great man) people win. regard our whole' [arm
pn,mam as either unjustified subsidy or political pap. These
Sen. Albert Gore (D—Tenn.) at mi
seinii' people seem nol at all disturbed about lhe sub">°^"'!
industry from protective land-. Thev seem eve-n less r- j1
cerned with the' economic supports and protection '•''"ago
business and industry hv a plethora of government'*' ^xisle
main-, policies eunl regulator) agencies. . . . Mr,
Now, if the power of the people's government can b^f the
I., regulate competition and li\ profitable freight rates f"1 '"" I
roads, trucks, busses and airplanes if it can he u9*r°"r,
control, ami sometimes prevent, competiti I industry J1*'1"
imports, if il can be used to limil competition, ,-ll*'r!nc'^
profits and make for -..und and profitable banking °Perjirnm
il the powet of the people's government can he' "' Jrival
stabilize and support all other major segments of „'>' Isrnmi
'.mv. then I -en the power of the same people's gov'"'"Jore.
can justifiably be ti-< <l to support and stabilize agricull^Ver
the most basic industry of all. ■*"'■
Despite the dissenters, I believe price support f"r ^., ".'
commodities is now generally accepted as justifiable ?". ,,"'
mental policy. Hen-, however, the general agri-emeu'wr
There are sharp disagreements as to the level of fa"*1'
I've is Kniii vi News, Jttmtti