Agricultural relief: Agricultural relief

Bibliographic data

Multivolume work

Identifikator:: 1831932415

Document type:: Multivolume work

Title:: Agricultural relief

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

Volume

Identifikator:: 1831934515

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-232102

Document type:: Volume

Title:: Agricultural relief

Volume count:: Pt. 4

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Scope:: III S., S. 255 - 297

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

Usage license:: Get license information via the feedback formular.

AGRICULTURAL RELIEF Mr. AsweLL. The last remark you made there is directly applicable to my bill. (Liaughter.) Mr. KiLcore. I am very much interested in your bill. Mr. AsweLL. I would not want a better statement for my bill. That is exactly what I stand for. I have been discussing this farm legislation for a generation, almost—my generation at least—in the House—with the cotton farmers; and really this bill, with a clause in it restricting production, without the fee and with the insurance plan, as seems sympathetically accepted here, I am honest in my belief that is exactly the kind of bill that the cotton folks have been wanting all these years I have been in Congress. I believe that covers the whole situation. It is a cotton bill as it stands. I do not know about the other commodities, but this bill, without the fee and with the insurance plan, is a cotton bill from beginning to end. Ar. Kivcore. Doctor Aswell—— Mr. Aswerrn. That is my honest judgment. Mr. KiLcorE. You know merely writing a restriction clause into a bill like this will not restrict production. There has got to be some- thing real there. The equilization fee would be an economic deter- rent and would not be merely a restriction in the bill. Mr. AsweLL. Perhaps. Do you not agree that this bill with the insurance plan is a good cotton bill, without the fee? Mr. Kincore. You understand, we are absolutely for the imsurance plan? Mr. AsweLL. Yes, sir; I am. Mr. KiLgore. All of the cotton cooperatives want the Bledsoe insurance provision. Mr. AsweLL. I think the committee is sympathetic. Mr. KiLcore. We think that is one of the best contributions that has been made to this for of legislaticn. Mr. AswerLL. That is the reason I am for the Haugen bill without the fee. [Laughter] Mr. KiLcore. We are absolutely for the insurance provision. Mr. Chairman, Doctor Aswell says that.with the insurance provision it would be a cotton bill. It would more nearly meet the needs of cotton than it would any other crop—general staple crop—than any other crop which carries tariff protection. I would not want—I may be wrong in this—a cotton bill that did not apply to other agricultural commodities; I would not want a bill that would work for cotton—and I do not think this bill without the equalization fee would work effectively for cotton—I would not want a bill that would work for cotton that would not work for wheat—— Mr. AsweLL. I did not say that, and nobody else says that. Mr. KiLcore. Cotton, tobacco, rice, hogs, corn, and the other staple crops—I would not want that for two reasons. Mr. AsweLL. Doctor, I did not mean that. Nobody else wants it if it does not work. Mr. Kircore. I understood you to say this would do for cotton. Mr. AsweLL. I said cotton, and you represent 6 per cent of the cotton of the country only and are talking for cotton. Now, I said this is a good cotton bill. It will work on tobacco and rice just as well as on cotton. Mr. KiLcorEe. I do not think it would be effective on any tariff- protected commodity. 269

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Agricultural relief (Pt. 4)

Multivolume work

Volume

Table of contents

Download

Volume

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation