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:: 1831935244

URN:: urn:nbn:de:zbw-retromon-232156

Document type:: Volume

Title:: Agricultural relief

Volume count:: Pt. 8

Place of publication:: Washington

Publisher:: Gov. Pr. Off.

Year of publication:: 1928

Scope:: III S., S. 591 - 642

Digitisation:: 2022

Collection:: Economics Books

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

Chapter

Document type:: Multivolume work

Structure type:: Chapter

Title:: Statement of hon. William C. Lankford, representative in Congress from the state of Georgia

Collection:: Economics Books

AGRICULTURAL KELIEF 639 pressure has been put on him; will he feel that it is not a square deal and that you are trying to force him to do something he does not want to do and therefore say “I will not join.” He will pay the fee under protest, I fear, and even through the bill works well, will it not be more or less unpopular and hard on the cooperative associations? Then, there is another objection I have to the McNary-Haugen bill, which I hope this committee will remedy, if possible before they vote the bill out, either with the equalization fee or without it I am concerned about the individual American farmer. I am concerned about the farmer who carries his cotton to market, as my father did, and sells one bale or two bales. Now, the McNary-Haugen bill would provide for taking a certain amount of the commodity off the market. The organization would buy that commodity from the poor fellow who has to sell. That commodity passes out of his hands; it passes into the control of the cooperative association. They may hold it off the market; they may dispose of it as they please. Prices may he boosted by operations, but the poor fellow has already sold out. He has lost. And he has lost because his cotton was sold too low. Cotton may go up. People may say, ‘‘Oh, well, the South is getting a good price for its cotton. Cotton is bringing a better price,” but the poor man who sold it lost. He is out. That is the objection I have to the export plan. That, is the objection I have to the plan of my good friend from Georgia Mr. Crisp. That is the objection I have to nearly all these plans that do not take care of the poor fellow who planted and made the cotton where you boost the price after it is too late for him. Now, if you can work out some plan in the McNary-Haugen bill through the drafting service or through members of the committee, providing that when cotton is bought from a fellow who does not belong to the cooperatives, and later on the cotton goes up that in some way you will take care of him so he will not lose, you will thereby improve the bill very much. It will be a wonderful help to the bill if you can work that out and put it in the bill. I am for the plan I suggest here in my bill because I have drawn that plan in the interest of the individual. He holds his own cotton. He may borrow money on it, and manipulate any way he pleases. But he does not sell it at a sacrifice; he holds it and when cotton goes up he gets the benefit of the increase. } I have another suggestion which I wish to make to the committee. [ took the McNary-Haugen bill and performed a simple, painless, bloodless operation by trimming out of that bill the equalization-fee provisions and inserting in lieu thereof the debenture plan in a modi- fied form. I provided that the debentures be issued not to the ex- porters but that the proceeds go into the stabilization fund of the McNary-Haugen bill so as to make unnecessary the equalization fee and yet give the farmers the benefit of the other provisions of the McNary-Haugen bill. I believe this plan is preferable to the present plan of an equalization fee. I know that I like the idea much better. I also took my contract, production and marketing, control plan and grafted it into the McNary-Haugen bill and reintroduced it as an independent bill as a suggestion, but I am free to confess that I think my original plan is much better for many reasons, which 1 shall be glad to explain to this committee should the committee ever wish to take up the idea of comparison of the two plans.

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Agricultural relief (Pt. 8)

Multivolume work

Volume

Chapter

Table of contents

Download

Volume

Chapter

This page

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation