xt7wwp9t2q46_27 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7wwp9t2q46/data/mets.xml https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7wwp9t2q46/data/59m61.dao.xml American Liberty League 37 linear feet archival material English University of Kentucky This digital resource may be freely searched and displayed. Permission must be received for subsequent distribution in print or electronically. Physical rights are retained by the owning repository. Copyright is retained in accordance with U. S. copyright laws. For information about permissions to reproduce or publish, contact the Special Collections Research Center. Jouett Shouse Collection (American Liberty League Pamphlets), No. 30 "The AAA Amendments: An Analysis of Proposals Illustrating a Trend toward a Fascist Control Not Only of Agriculture but Also of a Major Sector of Manufacturing and Distributing Industries," April 22, 1935 text No. 30 "The AAA Amendments: An Analysis of Proposals Illustrating a Trend toward a Fascist Control Not Only of Agriculture but Also of a Major Sector of Manufacturing and Distributing Industries," April 22, 1935 2013 https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7wwp9t2q46/data/59m61/59m61_30/Am_Lib_Lg_30_001/Am_Lib_Lg_30_001.pdf section false xt7wwp9t2q46_27 xt7wwp9t2q46 Pamphlets Available ir *
*
Copies of the following pamphlets may I I
be obtained upon application to the
League’s national headquarters:
Why, The American Liberty League? I
Statement of Principles and Purposes
American Liberty League—Its Platform I AS
An Analysis of the President’s Budget Message
N. R. A.-Its Past, and Recommendations for .
the Future ·
Analysis of the $4,880,000,000 Emergency Relief
Appropriation Act. * * *
Economic Security-A Study of Proposed Legis- .
lation
The Bonus——An Analysis of Legislative Pro-
posals
Tlighgfsréstitution Still Stands—Speech by Jouett s An AIMIYSIS Of Proposals Iuustrating
Ingation—;’gssibigities Involved in Existing and 3 TI'€I1Cl t0W3fd 3 Fascist Control
ropose egis ation I .
The Thirty Hour Week——Dangers Inherent in ` Not Only °fAg“°“1'i“’·'° but
Proposed Leyieioiion i Also of a Major Sector of
The Pending Banking Bill-—-A Proposal to Sub- A . . ‘
ject the Nationfs Monetary Structure to the Manufacturing end D1S’
·· Eiioiiiiiii ef Peiiiiii tributing industries
The Holding Company Bil1——An Analysis of
Proposed Legislation
"What is the Constitution Between Friends?"-— .
Speech by James M. Beck
Where Are We Going?—Speech by James W.
Wadsworth
Congress at the Crossroads—Speech by Jouett AE C
Shouse y- *14,
Price Contro1—An Analysis of Experiments and I
Recommendations for the Future · ` _ A 5 u
Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow——A Review of lp ‘“ l""”
Factual Analyses issued by the American Lib- A ’?I·y Le}
erty League and a discussion of the Legislative
Situation
The Labor Relations Bi1l——An Analysis of an
Undesirable Measure
Government by Experiment—Speech by Dr. N eil
Carothers
A How Inflation Affects the Average Family- i
Speech by Dr. Ray Bert Westerfield AMERICAN LIBERTY LEAGUE
National Headquarters
* NATIONAL PRESS BUILDING
WASHINGTON, D. C.
AMERICAN LIBERTY LEAGUE
NATIONAL PRESS BUH.DING I
WASHINGTON, D. C. * *
Document N0. 30
April. ross
The AAA Amendments
ir
Amendments proposed by the Administration
j to the Agricultural Adjustment Act typify the
_ j highly disturbing trend toward the delegation of
unwarranted authority to the Executive branch
of the government. Regardless of what the im-
mediate purpose may be, the amendments lodge
in the Secretary of Agriculture powers which are
both far too sweeping and altogether too indef-
inite in character. They would permit decisions
by Executive officers on policies which should be
reserved for determination by the Congress. The
tendency of the proposed legislation is distinctly
toward a Fascist control not only of agriculture
but of a major sector of the manufacturing and
distributing industries.
The amendments recommended by the Secre-
tary of Agriculture offer these objectionable pos-
sibilities:
1. An arbitrary one-man control of industries
handling, processing and distributing agricultural
and other products in an annual volume of more
than $20,000,000,000.
4 2. Licensing of these industries under terms
involving experimentation in price-fixing, pro-
duction control, labor conditions or any other
phase of operations at the discretion of the Sec-
retary of Agriculture.
3. Imposition of the will of one economic group
upon another through provisions giving farmers
a voice in decisions respecting licensing of pro-
cessors and distributors.
4. Further regimentation of agriculture
through quotas and allotments under marketing
· agreements.
5. Indirect compulsion upon agriculture
through terms of licenses imposed upon process-
ing and distributing industries.
6. Broadening of an act whose constitution-
ality is open to serious question.
7. Danger of political coercion through use by
the AAA of its powers over books and records
of industry.
8. Experimentation at the expense of the tax-
_ payers with the "ever normal granary" and other
new schemes for overcoming laws of nature.
j Present Law
The existing Agricultural Adjustment Act de- .
clares it to be the policy of the Congress "to
3
. _ . . with or without the consent of the parties af-
eelebllell elle lllallllelll Such. belellee .bellWeell fected, to license processors, associations of pro-
the llrelluelllell and eelleulllpllell of egrleulllllrel ducers and others engaged in handling any agri-
eemmedlllee end Sllell. lllellllellllg eelldllllelle cultural commodity or product thereof or any
therefor, as w1ll reestablish prices to farmers_at competing Commodity or product tlioroot Lioou_
e level llllell Wlll glve, elgrlellllllrel eerrlllleelllllee F sing is not limited to basic commodities. Under
e llllrelleelllg llelller Wllll respect to llrlllelee that j terms of the licenses, which are intended to assist
farmers llllY> eellllvlllellll, to elle Pllrelleelllg newegg in making marketing agreements effective, the
of egrlellllllrel eerrlrllerlllllee lll elle lleee Perlerl s. Secretary would have very great power over the
Tlle lleee llerlell le lllle llre`Wllr llerledr Allgllell l operations of agricultural industries. Moreover,
l909“’·llllY lel-lv exeellll lll lllle eelee of tobneeo his control over agriculture would be strengthened
for Wlllell llle lleell'Welr llerledr Allgllell l9l9—— inasmuch as the effect of the licensing of pro-
July lezer le llee‘l· , cessors and distributors would be to limit the
Section 8(1) of the Act gives the Secretary of markot for farm products.
Agrlelllllllre newer, to Prevlrle for rerlllelllell lll The licensing amendments include a broaden-
nereege or Prerlllellerl of lleele ejgrlellllllrel eerll‘ ing of the definition of interstate commerce and
lllerllllee rllrellgll egreelllellre Wlrll produeers or give the Secretary of Agriculture access to books
by other voluntary methods. Rental or benefit and papers oi agricultural industries. .
Paymerlle may he meds to rarrllere lll eellrleellerl Another proposed amendment tightens control
lllOl`€Wllll_ lll Such amounts ae lllle Seeretnry over agriculture by specific authorization of
deems fair and reasonablea Basic agricultural quotas and allotments iii marketing agreements.
commodities as enumerated in a subsequent sec- etlior proposed arooiuimorits givo authority to
llml are _Wlleall» l`Ye» flex, harley, 90llllOll» Held adopt the so-called "ever normal granary" plan.
OOTH, green SOl`8llllmS, hogs, settle, l`lOa» teh-sooo, The government would be allowed to purchase
Sugal beets end Sllgal Oallar Paallllla alld mllk farm commodities held as collateral on loans and
end lla Prerlllela _ to use such commodities in lieu of cash in benefits
Section 8(2) of the Act gives the Secretary of to tarmors
Agriculture power to enter into marketing agree- “
ments with processors, producers, associations of Status 0f Legislation
producers end others engeged ln the hnndhng of The administration amendments to the Agri-
ally agl`lOllll¤l1l"alOOmll1O€lll?Y· Allll·ll`llSl? laWS al`O cultural Adjustment Act were introduced on
waived under such agreements. February 12, 1935, as S. 1807 and H.R. 5585. `
Section $(3) of the AOl¤ glY€S l¤llO,SaOl`€lal`Y of Hearings were held before the Committees on
Agriculture restricted authority to issue licenses Ag;-ioulturo of tho Senate and tho Houso
p€1`II1ll3l»lIlg pI'OC€SSOI'S, 9iSSOCl3»l`»lOl1S of pI`OCll1C€I`S S_ has been aipprcved the Senate Cem-
end others to allgaga lll llla hnndhng of ally agl`l· i mittee on Agriculture with amendments which
Oulhlllal OOmmO€ belWeell lllle Olllrellll aV€l`ag€ measure. In other respects, notably in authority
lalm PllO€ end llla lall exchange Vallla of llla granted to the Secretary of Agriculture to use 30
COmmOdllY· l , per cent of gustomshreceipts annually in new
schemes for t e bene t of agriculture, the bill is
Prepeeed Amendments broadened. This provision would allow the Sec-
The most lmllerlallll of elle amellrlmelllls HOW retary to adopt, without specific authority by
reeemmerlrlerl by lllle Seererary of Agrlelllllllre the Congress, any or all of several plans hereto-
ai.l°€ those Whlch seek to strengthen the l.1C€I1S111g fore the Subject Of Inueh eontroversy among
section. In place of_ the pI°€S€nt r€St1I°iCt€d 13H* them the equalization fee and the exporlt d€b€n_
g¤a8”f·l_lll€l`€ la allballllllerl a gl”€allY_ lll`Oa h°ge* cattle and eeeeem
and the restoration of normal economic condi- The ehlef Iteed fer heeeeee eeeerdmg ee. eeietele
tiens in the marketing of sneh eommeditiee er of the Agricultural Adjustment Admrmstration
products and the financing thereof » 1S rn milk, a basic commodity, and in various
The present provision has been interpreted by fruits, gergetables and nuts, which are not basic
at least one of the lower courts to im 1 that eemme Nee" - - - -
licenses rnust he eonnned to terms ang eeendn H.R. 7088 contains other prov1s1ons intended
tions necessary to eliminate unfair practices. as eefeguerde W1*h.*‘€SP€°t.*° the exeeelee ef
The right of the Secretary to issue licenses other- erbmiery eueeeeley m the 1SS¤¤·¤<2¤ of heeItSee’
Wise has been questioned such as a_proh1b1t1on against a national applica-
In the pending bill both in its eriemel term tion of licenses to_ processors and distributors
and as amended, it is hrovided that heeneee may nnless first tried without success along regional
· · · · - mes.
Eettleeiggdtel(nt;aetleleefggeteiieneeretfemlegijgtinfgifgeege It is provided that the licensing system shall
ment signed by persons handling not less than net epply ee femeem Hewevele lf e fermer else
50 per cent of the volume of business done in the Fgeeeieeiuetfjgteereeeeleereeergeleuleerel predeeee’ he
· · · - ay e .
eeeeteeeggee classes of mduemel and eemmerelel It is obvious that the power of the Secretary
Furthermore it is provided that licenses may ef Agriculture exerted eereegh the heeeemg ef
be issued for rthieh the neeessary majority ep_ ‘ agricultural mdustrres will be felt by farmers_
proval within the processing or distributing in- Whose Only merkere le ehuteVeee,er31led'th f N
dustry is lacking. This can be done whenever Repreeeereeeves ejrleee - 't · e Sweet- edd GW
the Secretary of Agriculture with the approval ‘ Yorlnemg geelze wlehle gage- intetee lede reee
of the President determines, following a hearing, on ere ‘ - e- mlme re me eee 110,,
that sneh eonrse is uthe only nraetieal means of dare to urge the licensnig of farmers themselves,
advancing the interests of the producers of such eele ML We’deWee°h’ but leleeewe fen Wee that
commodity pursuant to the declared policy." lf It een reguleee’ ehreegh e' Ieeeee eyeeem’ every
H.R. mss and s. 1807 as amended contain an p°"S°“ engaged m buymg °" femng °‘Z p“’°°SSmg
additional requirement that the issuance of ferm pmduete eee fzemee hlglself Wm be regu-
licenses without the consent of the majority of 1e‘eed° That le e e e Jeeeve
the industry involved must be "approved or
fanroreid by at least two-thirds of the producers Control Of Industry
w 0, uring a representative period determined ·
by the e eeee eee,-, have been engaged ee me pro- 1Th€t§“f*$'*“’>’ gg Qgftcumg {mls have
dueeaee ree market er me commodity specified 8* m°e ““"i"SS eu- °‘Y‘ Y ° °°“ ‘F° an ¥mp‘¥"“‘
in sneh marketing agreement er neenee b ant list of industries 1f the pending legislation
· 6 ’ er Y were enacted in the form originally recom-
7
mended. The suggested modihcations would oiiicial. The Secretary of Agriculture would "
restrict his power somewhat. But even the re- have power akin to that of a European dictator.
vised bills are very far-reaching in their implica- By modifying this clause so as to give farmers
tions and possibilities. a voice in the determination of licensing policies,
There is nothing in the proposed legislation to the congressional committees have made it
limit the terms of licenses except that in the doubly dangerous. The farmers should have
revised bills it is stipulated that no license shall every opportunity to pass upon proposals apply-
be issued except in aid of an executed or pro- to themselves. It is contrary to American prin-
posed marketing agreement. The Secretary of ` ciples to allow one economic group to exert
Agriculture may experiment with price control special influence over another group.
and production control ind mayi attempt a Uto-
pian improvement of a or con itions, provided
he believes that it would be "in aid of" a market- Interstate Commerce
ing agreementand would tend to accomplish the The evident purpose of the legislation is to
purposes of the Act and the restoration of normal facilitate governmental control of all industries
conditions. processing, handling and distributing agricultural
If he so willed, the Secretary of Agriculture, a products. The Constitution limits Federal au-
political appointee of the government, might thority to commerce among the states. This bill
take over under the original bill the virtual man- seeks to overcome this limitation.
agement of far-flung industries engaged in can- Recent decisions in milk cases have shown
ning, milling, brewing, distilling, meat packing, that the courts still recognize a constitutional
textile manufacturing, cotton seed crushing, soap bar to the infringement by the Federal govern-
making and the manufacture of sugars, feeds, ment upon the jurisdiction of the states or in-
tobacco products, various foods, fertilizers and fringement by the states upon the jurisdiction of
automobile tires, as well as truckers, commission the Federal government. The Supreme Court
houses, distributors, and retailers handling all held that the State of New York could not inter-
kinds of farm products. At the least, these in- fere with the retail sale of milk brought in from
dustries would be burdened with rules and regu- another state even when this sale threatened to
lations, intolerable bureaucratic supervision and disrupt a program designed for the economic
interference and the added costs of AAA admin- good of milk producers and consumers in the
istrators, accountants, investigators and lawyers. state. Simultaneously, the United States Circuit
Only lower profits, increasing losses and more Court of Appeals in San Francisco ruled that the
unemployment could result. Federal government could not interfere with the
The uncertainties involved in such a broad sale of milk within a state even though such sale
delegation of power to the Executive branch of threatened to disrupt a prbgram designed for the
the government would be very great. In some economic good of producers in a region embrac-
respects it might be more advantageous to the · ing several states.
owners of these industries to provide for outright The sponsors of the pending bill have stated
nationalization. Under such a program the ¤’ their purpose to make it possible to embrace
owners would receive compensation. If the in- within milk marketing agreements sales which
dustries were classed as public utilities, there are entirely within the boundaries of a single
would be definite laws for their guidance. If state. ‘
merely licensed to carry out objectives approved The bill amends the law so as to permit the
by producers of agricultural commodities, the licensing of processors and distributors of com-
industries would remain with their owners who modities "in the current of or in competition
would suffer losses incurred but would be re- with, or so as to burden, obstruct or in any way
stricted in the exercise of management. affect interstate or foreign commerce." The ex-
The authority to the Secretary to license an cuse for the change from "in the current of inter- ~
industry without even majority approval forms State or foreign c0mmerce" is that the other lan-
one of the most objectionable features of the bill. guage already appears in the marketing agree-
No warrant has been shown for the lodging of ment section as modified by the Jones-Connally
such vast power in the hands of an Executive Cattle Act in April 1934. The narrower defini-
8 9
tion of interstate commerce was used in both eteeeee the examination to Slleh books and
sections of the law as originally enacted in po*po1`s_os the Seerebnry "deeme releVant" nor a
May l933_ clause 1n theamended Senate bill restricting it
The change in definition is an line with other t° ’°l?°S€ when he eesie "¤e<=eeeery er pertinenv
efforts to stretch the authority er the Federal fvrmghee eny 1g>reteet1en_esamet"fiehi¤s expedi-
government over industry which is not involved tees by boebue _e~dm1n1Strat1Ve Oflleials.
in interstate eennneree Under the ordinary procedure of the courts
If the proposed language is tee bread under the Federal government now can obtain such
the Constitution, the courts eventually will in- ` rooords; os oro loglbnnetely required. General
validate it. In the meantime industries would authority te lnsbooo books and Pepere Would
be subjected to unjust and improper burdens for eee? opportunity fer 9~ dangerous abuse of au-
which there could be no adequate recompense. ohoooY>Porb1ouleYly by el Pelltleally-minded ad-
Tendencies in this direction should be checked. mlmstroooo
Nothing will be gained by flagrant disregard of
constitutional principles. Quotes and Allotments
The bill facilitates the re imentation of '-
Aeeeee te Beeke culture through a section resating to quotasaglffd
Evidence of a desire to dominate the affairs of allotments fer Predueeree Sales quotas or
processors and distributors is given by the sec- Ioorkoomg ollolimonbe beye been included in va-
tion of the bill making the books and papers of nous marketing egreemente and licenses under
licensees open to inspection by the Secretary of tho. exleeee loW» Porbloulerly Wlth reepect to
Aarleulture and hls agents. There ls no sueh fruits, vegetables and nuts. Specific authority
nrevlslen ln the existing lavv_ for such action, however, has been lacking. The
The bill provides that all parties to market- Prosoolf blu hss the effect ef eenflrmlrlg author-
ing agreements and all licensees shall furnish my Whloh hee boon eeeumed be exist but ie now
regular reports to the Secretary to enable him odmlttod te be open te question- The Quetee
to determine the extent to which the agreement ooo elletmeete ferm one methed ef eentrelling
or license has been carried out and has accom- prooooooo The l°oI`mo.of loorkotiog eereemeete
nllsheel the eleelareel nellev et the Aet, and to de_ permit processors and distributors to buy certain
ternnne Whether there has been anv abuse et amounts of a commodity, which allotments are
the privilege of exemption from anti-trust laws. prefered beekwe the eredeeere- The market
To ascertain the correctness of any such report for 8* product lo oxoeee ef Quetee or allotments
or to obtain information called for but not fur- IS: out er fromfho forms? Who refueee te Submit
nished, the Secretary is authorized "to examine hlmeelf te roglfoooooooor
anv berths, naners, reeerdst aeeeunts, eerresnen_ J. Greater consideration 1S shown farmers in the
dence, contracts, documents or memoranda with- oporolooo ef the quooo and elletmeet eeetiee
ln the eentrel (1) et any sueh nartvte sueh than is shown processors and_d1str1butors in the
marketing agreement, er any sueh lleensee, trern r operation of the licensing section. It is provided
vvhern sueh renert Was requested, and/er (2) et ~ that no marketing agreement or license shall con-
any person having, either dlreetlv er tndlreetlv, tam provisions for guotas or allotments unless
aetual er legal eentrel et er ever sueh nartv er the Secretary of Agriculture first determines that
such licensee, and/or (3) of any subsidiary of oooh provlslons oro foVo¥`ed by at least two-
any such party, licensee, or person." ohlrds ef the Produeemr either in number or
While it is stipulated that the information Volumo ef proouoo The Sooroosry ie required
thus obtained shall be kept confidential and shall to Suseeed the eeereeee ef any marketing
be disclosed only in a suit or administrative ogroomoot er hooooo er J°ho.ood ef s ourrenb
hearing involving a rnarketlna aareernent er period whenever _he_ finds its termination is
license, the Secretary of Agriculture is given the fovoroo loy. o mslomly ef Pl`oduoe1”e» Preylded
right to issue general statements based upon sooo mslomty hee predueed more than 50 per
such reports and to publish the names of alleged ooot ef the oommooltln
violators of agreements or licenses. Tho blu deee net preride soy spooioo Penalty
Neither a elause inserted ln H_R_ 7088 re_ for producers who exceed their allotments. It
10 11
would appear, however, that they would be sub- ,
ject, {gg ai penalty in amendments applying {,0 to I`€dl1C€ &CI‘€&g€ W€I‘€ 8rllOW€d 'l`»0 l`i&k8 311 Opl'»1OI1
Sugar Wgrg approved thg Cgngyggg in fOI` J0l1€ pl1I`Cl'18»S€ of COh`f»OI1 f»I`8»I1Sf€I'I`€d l3lC1€
May 1934_ Thggg amendments pygvjdgd for former Farm Board to the Secretary of Agr1cul-
quotas and allotments only of sugar, but a ture- In effect. the $OveI]nInenIg financed the
penalty clause requiring forfeiture of a sum i9»l`mel`S ln e SPeenIe·I»IOII In WhIeh Iihev were
equal to three times the current market value Yelleved of env POSSIhIe IOee·
of any excess over quotas and allotments was so The Pegylnenli of henenne In the fenn OI_eOIn'
phrased as to apply to the entire Aot_ modities 1S now proposed as a means of facilitat-
The quota and allotment system fgrmg one ing the distribution of accumulated stocks 111
phase of a control which, while benefiting some Yeele When PI`O‘IIIeIVIOn IS at eg low level-
individuals and groups, injures others. It might Rcgeldleee of env IiheOI`el?IOeI edventegee of
ruin some farmers whose yields would be cut too 9· Plen Ie? _e€lIIe·IIZIng eIIPPIIee OveI`_ e Pe¥`IOd of
low and whose sales of minor products would be Years, Pl`eVl0lIS eIihenIPI·S_I»O e·eeOInPIIeh this PIII"
eliminated entirely. It might also cause losses P0Se n9·Ve I`eSIIihed_ In fe»IIIII`e· ln en eeI`IIeI` ex"
to processors and distributors by reducing their periment of this kind under the Farm Board of
volume of business with a consequent increase the Hoover A&XP2·Ye1`S· _
dividual producers could be forced under gov- The existence of SIII`PInSeS» even Iihengh WII·h‘
ernment control against their desires and best held from the market, tends to depress prices.
judgment. Government purchases or loans at fixed prices
encourage overproduction. This in turn causes
¢¢ •• price declines and inevitable losses on store
Ever N°’me1G“‘n“v products. While the present adjustment pro-
Two amendments proposed by the administra- grams include agreements for acreage reductions,
tion are designed to make possible a trial of the which Were not possible at the time of the 0Pe1`8··
"ever normal granary" scheme. This plan son- tions of the Farm Board, there is no evidence
templates the holding by the government of that the devices set up will prove able to cope
stocks of various staple crops in times of surplus With the forces of nature.
production as a protection against periods of - These particular amendments furnish an illus-
crop shortage. The immediate reason for the tration of the fact that a program of control
inauguration of such a plan is the fact that the once begun is a process that must be continued.
government actually is holding considerable One piece of legislation leads to another. It is
stocks of farm commodities as security for loans. impossible ever to call a halt. The Hnal result
One of the amendments authorizes the Seere- is a network in which adverse effects offset those
tary of Agriculture to use proceeds from process- , Which are favorable.
ing taxes to purchase farm commodities pledged
for loans._ The other permits the use of these Subsidies from Customs Duties
commodities 1n payment of agricultural benefits
in place of cash. ‘ The new provision in H.R. 7088, under which
To some extent tax revenues already have the use of 30 per cent of gross receipts from
been used to acquire farm commodities pledged _ customs duties is authorized for various agri-
for loans under a provision of the Aot per- cultural subsidies, is an example of a type of
matting use or funds for removal or surpluses. legislation which is becoming too frequent. In
The proposed amendment makes explicit the a blanket authorization the Congress would dele-
authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to take gate to the EXeeIIhIve hmneh (II the gevemlnenll
over commodities on which loans have been made POWeI` to eeI`I`Y OIIII env OI` all of nllmemus
in connection with tts adjustment programs. selieniee which have been a subject of contro-
The proposal to permit the payment of agri- YeI`SY OveI` e Ieng PeI“IO‘I of Years- Hel`eli0I0l`e»
cultural benefits to farmers in commodities in In WOLIICI heve been hhOIIghI~ eSeenhIeI under
lieu of cash is an extension of the principle in- OIII` _eYeheIn of gPveI`nInenII Iihell the Congress
volved in the cotton option plan of the original OOneIIIeI` and ‘IeOIde IIPOII specific menenfes of
Act. Under that plan cotton growers agreeing IhIe ehe»I`neIeI`·
12 Under the terms of the new provision it would
13
be possible to divert more than $100,000,000 an- · fer Pork due tv the oormhog prvgram, which
nusuy from the Treasury for the payment of have caused consumers to sh1_ft_to cheaper meats,
benefits or losses on exportable basic agricultural heh end other foods, have 111JU{‘€d _1‘&th€1‘ than
commodities, for the purchase or lease of sub- hehehted the farmer? Nettme With 1tS d1`011ghtS,
marginal or grazing lends and for payments in , dust storms and similar manifestations of power
connection with limitation of basic agricultural has made e mockery of_Wheet and other adjust-
eommodities ment programs. In this country as elsewhere
The authorization is sufficiently broad to per- behehte accruing from ettempted ee0¤0H1i0
mit the adoption of the equalization fee and ex- Shortcuts have heeh of e temporary Qhefaptef
port debenture plans over Whioh the Congress and have been nullilied by subsequent 1njur1ous
fought in several successive sessions. effeete
Regardless of the possible merits of these Ne u.rgeh.ey hee beenlehewe fe? the eheetmehe
plans, the Congress should not evade its I.e_ of legislation conferring specific emergency
sponsibmty by suoh el general delegation of powers upon the Secretary of Agriculture. Noth-
powels e 1ng whatever has been offered to justify the
granting of blanket authority for an indefinite
Emergency POWers period. The sponsors of the amendments say
The American people are willing to confer thteethe ohleet IS to oompel eempliemce with
special powers upon the Executive branch of the exleemg lew by reeeleltmet mmermee The
government in times of emergency. The pend- actual effect Weuld be to give the Seereeefy ef
ing smendments would broaden existing suthop Agriculture arbitrary control over majorities.
ity. They do not constitute a measure to cover
only the period of an emergency. The legisla-
tion is virtually of a permanent character inas-
much as the Agricultural Adjustment Act will
remain in effect until such time as the President
"finds and proclaims that the national economic e
emergency in relation to agriculture has been
ended/’ There has been no suggestion of any
intention to declare the end of the emergency
even when economic conditions become more
s nearly normal.
The highly experimental nature of the present
law and the lack of proof of its economic success
thus far can scarcely justify any increase in T
existing powers.
Agriculture, industry and the consuming popu- l
lation have suffered from too much regimenta-
tion. Reduced cotton acreage and a pegging of ll
the price above world levels have resulted in a l
loss of foreign markets for our greatest export
crop. Foreign nations have increased their cot-
ton acreage very greatly as buyers have turned
from the high-priced American product. The
domestic cotton textile industry has been hard
hit by inability to compete in world markets
because of the higher cost due to the processing
tax. Restriction of cotton acreage has forced
share—croppers, tenants and farm laborers on the
relief rolls. Reduced production and actual de- j
struction of other farm commodities have .
resulted in imports of foodstuffs our own
farmers should have raised. Mounting prices
14 15