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.