A. R. Kumm, banker, Velva, N. Dak. U. W. Lienhart, garage proprietor, Velva, N. Dak. L. A. Boneson, sanitary engineer, Velva, N. Dak. O. L. Ness, retired farmer, Norwich, N. Dak. Hon. HAROLD LOVRE, Chairman of the Special Subcommittee on Agriculture: I was chosen to represent grain farmers of McHenry County Farmers Union, North Dakota, at the hearing here in Watertown, S. Dak., today, October 13, 1953. I will do the best I can to bring to you the beliefs of my neighbors back home on what kind of farm program we want. Attached to this report are a number of letters and petitions, signed by farmers, laborers, and businessmen. The one thing that is uppermost in the minds of the farmers today is price. With the market prices on nearly every farm product going down day by day and the price of things we have to buy staying right up there or going higher, is it any wonder that wheat farmers voted so strongly in favor of marketing quotas on August 14? I invite you to step into the PMA office in McHenry County any day in the week now and see for yourselves how interested the farmers are in price supports and price protection. Furthermore, we are opposed to a twoprice system because we think that is just another form of flexible prices, to which we are opposed. I know the cattlemen back home are thinking of prices. Their thoughts are about all they have left, for the price of cattle is almost nothing, but how about a steak? We want parity for all farmers, not only for agriculture's sake alone, but for the good of the entire country. We hope the administration will back up its campaign promises of 90 to 100 percent of parity made a year ago at Kassen, Minn., but with the Secretary of Agriculture talking about free markets, farm prices being too high, and now a new one, strengthening American agriculture through research and education-it is a little confusing, to say the least. I'll grant that there may be room for both research and education, but these without a guaranteed price would be fruitless. History shows that all former depressions have started on the farms, and I think we have one on the farms right now. I know that I have one on my farm this year, with wheat going 5 or 6 bushels to the acre and weighing only 48 pounds to the bushel. Had it not been for the price protection of a Government loan on wheat, I would no doubt have to apply for a seed loan next spring. Yes, gentlemen, we must have parity prices to stay in business, and that means that the prices must be supported by the Federal Government, with the State, county, and community committees functioning as in the past. We do believe, however, that the State PMA committee should be elected by delegates, as the county committee is now. We believe that the price supports should cover all farm products, even if it means that we have to control production sometimes, although we would like to see, first of all, that everyone gets plenty to eat and to wear. I think that the American farmer has demonstrated in the past his desire to produce plenty of current needs plus some for a rainy day. We believe that the Federal Government should stay in the farm-crop storage blsiness, since the cost so far has not been very great and the benefits have been enormous. FARM CREDIT Credit is something that the majority of us farmers must have at one time or another. Therefore, we do not want higher interest rates, but, with the Government at present leading the way with higher interest rates, it is only natural to believe that all rates will go higher. Just a look at our Commodity Credit Corporation grain loans: up another one-half percent this year, it now stands at 4 percent. If we do not redeem our loans and pay this high interest rate, who pays it? The Commodity Credit Corporation? No; my guess is the taxpayer. We think, too, that Congress should enact laws to protect our farm cooperative credit agencies, such as credit unions, production credit administration, and the farm loan associations, so that they can be used to serve the people for whom they were built. We also believe that the Farm Credit Administration should be in the Department of Agriculture, as we do not think that any other agency can feel the pulse of farm credit needs as quickly and as well as the Department of Agriculture, if it is inclined to do so. The Farm Home Administration is doing a good job in our community and could do better if more funds were made available, especially in the spring of the year. To discontinue the Farm Home Administration here would, I think, mean disaster to nearly all veterans and many others, as this is the only source of credit many farmers have. NATURAL RESOURCES We are opposed to private industry getting into any more of our natural resources, especially in the fields of electricity and the telephone. All of our publicpower projects, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Rural Electrification Administration, steam-generating plants, and transmission lines (and we should have had a Missouri Valley Authority), have done great things for all the people in the areas they serve. All of this has been done in areas where private companies have refused to enter in the past. We believe that cooperatives and municipalities should have preference in buying electric power wholesale from these public-power projects. The law requires it, but a recent ruling by Interior Secretary McKay provides that this low-cost power should go to the privately owned utilities instead. We would like to see some liberal action by the next Congress on these practices of the administration. CROP INSURANCE We believe that crop insurance should be strengthened and the multiple-crop insurance should be extended to all counties. The reason for this is the switch from wheat to other high-risk crops. We also believe that the premiums should be reduced to a point where more farmers would feel justified in taking on the extra cost of insurance. SOIL CONSERVATION The population is growing at such a rate now, that to cut out the soil-conservation program we now have might in a very short time put us in a position of food shortages, instead of surpluses that seem to be such a plague now. Therefore, we believe that the Federal Government should help in this matter because it is too much for each individual farmer to do alone. We believe the Soil Conservation Service has done a commendable job in the past and see no reason for changing it. In closing, I want to say that we are family-type farmers, and we want to stay that way. We also want all of agriculture to consist of family-type farmers. We ask you to help us to keep it this way. Thank you for the privilege of presenting our views before this subcommittee. ISAK HYSTAD. VELVA, N. DAK. Mr. LOVRE. Thank you. Mr. Jacobs has a statement and it will be filed for the record. (The document referred to is as follows:) Re farm bill. HOUSE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE: The goal should be 100 percent of parity. The present support program, with ceiling of basic farm crops, has proven quite satisfactory. The loss on several commodities has been very small compared to the gain under the support plan. Acreage allotment may be used if necessary. It is very necessary to protect the American market against imports from foreign countries. Adequate soil conservation is very necessary. Beef cattle and dairy products should be added to the price-support plan. If a sliding scale must be had, it should be at 90 to 110 percent of parity. Congress should investigate the present marketing system. The spread is too wide-what a farmer receives for his food products and what the consumer has to pay for the food products he buys. This investigating is very necessary. Congress should pass a bill whereby the underprivileged could obtain the necessary food for a well-balanced diet. This could be done by some kind of stamp plan or similar means. The donation of wheat and other foodstuffs has proven very beneficial to friendly foreign nations. Export market should be extended as fast and as much as possible. My contention is that with every man, woman, and child receiving a reasonably good diet, and with our ever-increasing population, there would be very little food surplus. At least 1 year's food supply should be stockpiled. Longtime credit with low rate of interest is very necessary, especially for the younger generation who wishes to start farming. Due to the high cost of farm equipment, it takes considerably more capital today than it did some years ago. Electricity should be available at a nominal cost, such as our present REA and RTA, with powers developed from Government owned and controlled hydroelectric powerplants. Congress should extend the present farm bill for a period of not less than 3 years from January 1, 1954. The farm bill should be a nonpolitical program and should not have to be thrown out every time a new administration takes over. A good farm bill is very important, because farming is the basic industry. I am a farmer and own 120 acres. Rent additional 40 acres. ALCESTER, S. DAK. HERMAN JACOBS, Jr. (Representing Union County Farmers Union). Mr. LOVRE. Lewis Beckwith, of Kodaka, S. Dak.? (No response.) Mr. LOVRE. Mr. James Ramey, of Kodaka, S. Dak.? (No response.) Mr. LOVRE. Edward H. Erickson, of Ortley, S. Dak.? STATEMENT OF EDWARD H. ERICKSON, ORTLEY, S. DAK. Mr. ERICKSON. I favor high production in foodstuffs and full support and full storehouses so the population of this Nation should have available plenty of food, and an economy that will carry these things. I think there is something wrong with this little deal right here [indicating a dollar bill]. It is too hard to get a hold of and too easy to get rid of it. There is something wrong with the economy, the long-range picture. We should carry full production, full storage. I will write a statement and mail it to you. Mr. LOVRE. Mr. George L. Jackson, of Dawson, N. Dak.? STATEMENT OF GEORGE L. JACKSON, DAWSON, N. DAK. Mr. JACKSON. I will file my statement but I would like to say a few words. Chairman Lovre and members of the Agriculture Committee, my name is George L. Jackson. I am from a farm in Dawson County, N. Dak. We operate a farm with my two sons, one in high school, and one daughter. Our farm is a family-size farm which we are here to represent today. My farm is a little large for a family-type farm. I was born and raised on a farm and I farmed as a farmer on my father's homestead in the early days. We operate 2,500 acres of land of which 800 acres are under cultivation. We raise wheat. My allotment was 400 acres. They cut that down considerably. We substitute for that flax, corn, a lot of that; cattle, also. We raised 250 head of cattle. We have 120 head of ewes and 100 head of hogs. So you can see from that that I know something about the problems of the farmers of North Dakota in that area. Not only being a farmer, we take active part in the rural territory. Also, I am a member of the local electric cooperative of North Dakota and I served on the REA board for several years. I am very much concerned about the REA problem and the power situation. You fellows know about that. In order to make our loans on this program at low rates we have to have low cheap power in order to make our obligations to the Federal Government. Therefore as the result of that, all efforts of the committee should be made to help the Missouri River development and the Missouri River Basin. I am also a member of the Beck Rural Telephone Cooperative, in which I am president. I am also president of the State Rural Mutual Telephone Cooperative with headquarters at Bismarck, and we represent 12 RTA rural electric cooperatives. I will file with you in brief statements of our needs from these cooperatives. Also, I will file with you a statement from our county farmers union statewide or county organization of which I am a member. I thank you very much for your time and support. (The documents referred to are as follows:) We, the board of directors of the Farmers Union of Kidder County, at our meeting held September 28, 1953, in Steele, N. Dak., recommend to the Agriculture Committee to work for a 100-percent parity on all farm products at your next session of Congress. It is our belief that under a 2-price system for agricultural products, full parity cannot be attained. We comment Senator Murray for his cost study and believe it should be extended to include all products of farm and industry alike. We believe that if necessary to achieve parity for perishable products, direct subsidies be paid the producer. We believe that all risk-crop insurance should be extended to all producers of different varieties of grain. We request that sufficient funds be made available to develop each RTA Co-op to its full extent without delay from the time of the initial loans. To our way of thinking, interest rates should be lowered as our national debt was accumulated with easy-to-get dollars and can never be paid back with hard-to-get dollars. It appears local banks are unable or unwilling to make sufficient funds available for farming operations on longtime terms, therefore, we believe more funds should be made available to the FHA both for operating and farmpurchase loans. Reinhold Dammel, Crystal Springs, president, Reinhold Dammel. Carl Halmgren, Steele. Ervin Keim, Robinson, Ervin Keim. George Jackson, Dawson. Otto Johnson, Steele. APRIL 15, 1953. Summary of funds required for allocation in the fiscal year beginning July 1953, to continue the development of rural telephone projects in North Dakota 1. Barnesville Rural Telephone Cooperative... 2. BEK Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. 3. Bowman Slope Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. 4. Dakota Central Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. 5. Dickey Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. 6. Dickey Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. “B”. 7. Dunn Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. 8. Northwest Mutual Aid Telephone Corp. “A”. 9. Polar Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. 10. Polar Rural Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. "B". 11. Reservation Mutual Aid Telephone Corp. "A". 12. Reservation Mutual Aid Telephone Corp. "B". 13. Souris River Telephone Mutual Aid Corp.. 14. United Telephone Mutual Aid Corp. 15. West River Telephone Mutual Aid Corp.. 16. Acquisition North Dakota Telephone Co. properties... 3, 500 Total.. 38, 647 29, 807, 911 5,792,396 24, 434,515 Mr. LOVRE. Mr. Robert E. Lee, of La Moure, N. Dak. STATEMENT OF ROBERT E. LEE, LA MOURE, N. DAK. Mr. LEE. I have 8 children, 1 in Korea and 7 in schools. I know what costs are. I am going to take another rap at the parity formula. I feel it has not been modernized or streamlined to meet our everyday problems. We do not have the fixed packages of our city friends, you might say, such as social security or old-age benefits. We do not have the fixed packages of railroads and industry. All these things have been wrapped up and handed to us. We have no way of fastening packages on. We have to have a parity far stronger than the parity we had in the past. Another remark about finances. I heard quite a few asking for better financing for farmers. This is the way I look at it: Something has to come first before we have a sound financing. We have to have a sound agriculture price-support system and a crop insurance. Otherwise you will never have good sound credit for agriculture. |