AGRICULTURAL RELIEF

663.
because they have studied it. Assuming that the men who are inter- -
ested In those commodities are right In their suppositions—yes, we
are interested in having that done. They say this will do if. They
have studied their problems. So, we are for it just as we would

want them to be for a problem which we said would benefit the dairy

industry, because we would study the dairy industry.

Mr. Fort. Then, on the strength of their statements, you assume
that the passage of the Haugen bill will maintain the present acreage
for example, devoted to wheat? or

Mr. SExAUER. | assume so; yes.

Mr. Fort. And therefore you do not join those who think that
the equalization fee will tend to decrease the wheat production?

Mr. SExAUER. No.

Mr. Fort. Or that of any other commodity?

Mr. SExavEiR. I should not think so. 1 can not see that it would
work that way.

Mr. Fort. The position of your association, then, is that where
we are now raising a surplus which it is impossible to dispose of at
a profit we should continue to raise surplus in that commodity?

Mr. SExavER. It 1s my opinion that it is for the best interests of
the country as a whole to develop its raw materials and sell them on
markets, particularly in the development of such raw materials as
when they are developed do not decrease the fundamental raw ma-
terial which this country has.

Mr. Fort. I do not think that quite answers the question. I
asked you if it was the position of your association or yourself, as its
spokesman, that we should pass legislation deliberately designed for
the purpose of maintaining a surplus which 1t is impossible to dispose
of at a profit, with the agricultural commodities at the present stage
of surplus production.

Mr. SExavER. Absolutely.

Mr. Fort. You do?

Mr. SExaver. Yes, sir. I think it is necessary for the economic
structure of this country to do that.

Mr. Fort. You think it would also be true, then, that it would be
desirable to have excess surplus production of dairy products?

Mr. SExAUER. If they can be produced on the same basis, I see no
objection to it, providing that can be protected in the same way.
But I do not believe we will have that. It does not make any dif-
ference, as I see it, whether vour surplus production 1s dairy products
or whether it is wheat, corn, or oats, as far as the economic structure
of the country is concerned. As far as a particular commodity 1s
concerned, I do not think you are going to get that, providing you
do not force men to go in that in order to obtain a livelihood to keep
their children going through school and paying taxes—they are not
going to go into the dairy industry; and I speak not only from the
standpoint of the industry of the West, but of our own sections,
where we have grain sections. Men do not want to go to milking
cows unless it comes to a point where it is necessary to pay taxes on
their farms. Up to that point they stay in the production of cab-
bage, small grain, corn, potatoes, fruit, and various other things.
When it gets to the point where they are going to lose their farm, or
can not maintain their children in school, then they are apt ta go into
the production of milk.