728 AGRICULTURAL RELIEF

While the Secretary of Agriculture agrees partly with my views concerning
farm marketing, he expresses himself as not favoring certain suggestions contained
in my letter of February 8 to you, which objections I desire briefly to explain.
I appreciate his commendation of its purpose and objective, but apparently
Mr. Jardine did not give my plan the full consideration to which it is entitled.
Regarding my estimate.that $7,350,000,000, approximately one-half the price
spread between farmers and consumers, represents “unjustifiable and unnecessary
commissions, profits, rake-offs, etc.” he says:
“This department is not acquainted with the basis for these figures. He
(Yoakum) has no doubt, compiled his data with great care, but our research
bas thus far failed to reveal such unjustifiable profits in distribution.”
My data was carefully compiled. Tor more than 20 years (and intensely so for
the past 7 years) I have concentrated my attention on farm marketing, spending
time and money unstintingly in investigating the spread between the farmer and
consumer. The Government, so far as I have been able to learn, has given but
little attention to that phase of the problem. Thereofre, I wish to reaffirm that
my figures are dependable.
“The cost of processing (Mr. Jardine said) must also be taken into account.”
All but two of the 17 standard farm products I cited (sold to consumers for
$22,500,000,000, of which the farmers received only $7,500,000,000) go direct
from the farmer to consumer. Processing, therefore, does not enter into the
guestion.
Senator Capper, in his speech a few days ago, at a dinner held under the auspices
 of Columbia University and the American Country Life Association in
New York City, President Nicholas Murray Butler presiding, declared that
last year from farm products farmers received $10,000,000,000 while consumers
paid $30,000,000,000, the rest going to middlemen. In this the Senator included
all products, while I confine myself to 17 standard food products.
In paragraph 4 Mr. Jardine says:
«More and better statistical information would help to bring about a reduction
in the cost of middlemen services, to the benefit of both producer and consumer;”’
and that he is “strongly of the opinion that provision should be made for an
adequate census of distribution, recommended by Secretary Hoover.”
Such a census might be of some value. But it would cause long and useless
delay. Why complicate the situation and becloud the issues? When the farmer
are calling for action, why feed them statistics?
Mr. Jardine believes with me that “mass marketing by strong business organizations
 of producers would reduce cost of markefing, give farmers greater
bargaining power, and help stablize farm prices and adjust production to demand,
and that ‘‘these associations should be organized along commodity lines.” He
says:
“However, the enabling legislation proposed by Mr. Yoakum would not be
necessary, since farmers already have broad authority under the Capper-Volstead
Act to form cooperative marketing associations.”
This is partly true, but misses the main point. The Capper-Volstead Act
does not enable farmers to control and distribute their products and stabilize
prices through a ‘Marketing board of control” consisting of farmers. It does
not permit them to direct interstate and foreign shipments, or give them the
authority to make a uniform nation-wide marketing system effective.
If that act had given authority to stabilize profitable prices the farmers would
not now be on the brink of bankruptcy, with farm values reduced from
$79,000,000,000 to $56,000,000,000 in seven years. There isn’t a farmer or
business man in the land who does not know that further legislation is necessary,
and that it must be upon broader and more practical lines.
‘“ Mr. Yoakum’s proposal for a Federal loan for organization purposes should
receive a great deal of support, especially among professional promoters.” (P. 2,
par. 3, of Mr. Jardine’s letter.) .
What does Mr. Jardine mean by that? My plan calls for the least expenditure,
a very small loan not-exceeding $1,000,000 to any one commodity marketing
organization, and that for organization expenses only, to be reimbursed from
the first crop. (Fourth paragraph, p. 8, my statement before the Committee on
Agriculture of the House of Representatives, February 15.) Its very basis 1s to
take this matter out of the hands of promoters and politicians and place it under
control of the farmers. The farmers are not promoters, professional or otherwise.
 In honesty and integrity they stand at the head of our citizenship. In
business they are as capable as those engaged in any other lines of industry.
Can’t they be trusted to care for their own interests and fulfill their obligations
to the Government? I am sure thev can.