70

AGRICULTURAL RELIEF
House or REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE,
Saturday, February 25, 1928.
The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 o’clock, a. m.,
Hon. Gilbert N. Haugen (chairman) presiding.
Present: Representatives Haugen (chairman), Purnell, Williams,
Thompson, Ketcham, Hall, Fort, Menges, Andresen, Adkins, Clarke,
Aswell, Kincheloe, Jones, Swank, Fulmer, Rubey, and McSweeney.
The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Sexauer, we will hear you.
STATEMENT OF FRED H. SEXAUER—CONCLUDED

Mr. ANDRESEN. Mr. Sexauer, I wanted to ask you a question or
two. I represent a dairy industry, and I wanted to see if you have
the same understanding that I have on the situation of the surpluses.
A great many dairy farms in my district were opposed to the McNary-Haugen
 bill on the theory that it would raise the prices of feed products
 and other agricultural commodities of which they were the
consumers and not the producers.
But they have changed their opinion to a great extent on the surplus
 proposition, fearing that unless something was done to help out
the grain and corn farmer and the cotton farmer, that dairying would
be extended to such an extent that we would soon have the same
situation in the dairy industry as we now have in grain, cotton, and
corn. We are selfish enough to want to look out for the future of
our own industry. You stated yesterday that probably in a year or
two we would reach the point where we would be producing a surplus
of dairy products. Now, my support of the bill and I take it your
contention on this McNary-Haugen bill is this, that we want to try
and prevent the same situation in the dairy industry as we now have
in the other surplus agricultural products?
Mr. SExauver. That is right.
Mr. ANDRESEN. So that we will have to be frank to admit that
even though we would have to pay a greater price for the feed we
aave to buy on the dairy farms and the other agricultural commodities
 that we are selfish enough enough to be looking out for our own
Future in order to protect ourselves. =
Mr. SExaukr. That is right.
Mr. ANDRESEN. And that any direct benefits to grain, corn, and
cotton farmers to-day is going to be an indirect benefit to us, even
though we have to pay more for those commodities.
Mr. SExAUER. That is right; yes.
Mr. CLARKE. Is there not an economic law after all that, in the
long run, rules in the country—that is, if there is any one commodity
n- whieh: there is more money for a little time that there-is a temporary:
 stimulus. that goes along with the production of that commodity
 and people rush in and after awhile a surplus occurs, prices go
down, and they turn again to some other thing? So that after all 1t
is an economic balance that is going on with agriculture?
Mr. SExAUER. That is true.
Mr. CrLarke. Has not that been true since the organization of
the Government? |
Mr. SExAUER. That is correct, Mr. Clarke, that so long as the
economic balance presumes to bring about a condition where agoTi-