feed prices. And then you hear from the corn people. You hear from the grain sorghum people. So we say, let's get it behind us. You want us to move it. time, Mr. Chairman. I hate to take up so much Here a few years ago we noticed on the Washington market here some broken rice in larger bags, 5- and 10-pound bags; I just wonder why you don't have those bags of broken rice for sale any more? Mr. MILLER. Congressman, the mills offer broken rice for sale to the trade. Ordinarily it doesn't move well. Sometimes in perhaps times of depression, perhaps times of uncertain circumstances, you can sell some so-called second-heads, as they call them, or we have a brand we call Wonder Bits of rice which is second-heads which we offer in larger packages. But, frankly, they just, they are offered wherever the trade will buy them, but they are always available from the mills, and it is just that they won't move under certain circumstances. Mr. GATHINGS. I had a letter from a fellow who had 7 children in his family and he said to me that he didn't want to buy a little old 1-pound package of rice; that he required a lot of rice for his folks. Mr. KRUEGER. He didn't want to discourage that. Mr. THOMPSON. Does that wind it up? Mr. GATHINGS. Yes. Mr. THOMPSON. I want to have my committee members hear this, and this is only subject to your approval, gentlemen. I would like to have Judge Satterfield and Mr. LeMay, or whoever in our shop is the proper one to do it, to draw us up a little bill embodying the $64,000 question I submitted to Mr. McLain, remove the escalator clause and leave this price support where it is, leave the acreage where it is, for next year. I don't know whether we ought to project it beyond that or not. Mr. SATTERFIELD. Let me ask this question, Congressman: I don't know whether you know of the rice industry group's testimony in the Senate here a couple of months ago in which all of the witnesses testified to the effect that they felt that the whole, both milling industry and producer groups, would go along with not a removal of the escalator clause, but suspension of it for 2 years-I mean 3 years, for an extension of the present acreage for 2 years. Now, do you want this bill drafted Mr. THOMPSON. Draw it that way. Mr. SATTERFIELD. Suspension of it, or repeal of it? Mr. THOMPSON. I don't care; whichever is the more proper thing. Probably suspension. Mr. SATTERFIELD. This was their testimony. Mr. SORKIN. We would prefer complete elimination. Mr. GATHINGS. I believe that some of these other commodities are planning on a 3-year program. Mr. THOMPSON. Three-year suspension. Mr. GATHINGS. Yes, 1959 through 1960 and 1961. Most of those programs are being considered now and cover 3 years. far Mr. THOMPSON. Let's leave it, then, to the General Counsel. I think that is the place to leave it and make it fit the rest of the program, so as possible. But I would like to have it in bill form and submit it to the rice industry. Let them look at it and see what they think. Can we do that? Mr. SATTERFIELD. Mr. Schoonover is from the General Counsel's Office. Mr. SCHOONOVER. We can work it out. Mr. THOMPSON. All right. Now, customarily we ask all those present if there is anyone else who wants to testify. It is late, but if there is anyone who wants to get something in the record, with the consent of my committee members, we will give them an opportunity to place it in the record at this point as their statement, or if they would like to be heard from, we will hear from them briefly now. Mr. GATHINGS. I think that is a good suggestion, Mr. Chairman. It may be that some of them might have a table or some other information that they feel would make this record complete. Mr. THOMPSON. Without objection, pertinent tables may be submitted in the record at this time. Also, without objection, all testimony may be reviewed by the witnesses for grammatical corrections and so forth. We don't generally try to alter any factual information, but it may be edited, if you so desire, and if so, Mr. LeMay will arrange for it. The record will be held open briefly for any of these submissions; it will be held open for a reasonable time. We seem to have wound this up at exactly the right moment because there goes the bell. Thank you very much for attending, gentlemen. The committee stands adjourned subject to further call. (Without objection by the chairman, the following letter has been inserted in the record:) AMERICAN RICE GROWERS COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, Hon. CLARK W. THOMPSON, Lake Charles, La., April 28, 1958. Old House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN THOMPSON: It is my understanding that your House Agriculture Committee will begin hearings tomorrow with respect to a continuing attempt to develop agricultural legislation during this session of Congress. This is to suggest to you that I, acting as chairman of the Rice Program Development Committee representing all rice producing States, would recommend the following legislation for rice as being acceptable to the industry and a possible compromise of the disastrous impasse which now faces us and which would be acceptable to the administration: 1. Suspension of the escalator clause with respect to the level of price support for rice for a period of 3 years. 2. A minimum increase of 10 to 15 percent in rice acreage allotments over the present 1,652,596 acres with the total allotment to be allocated on exactly the same basis as it is now distributed to the States, counties, and producers. 3. The level of rice price support to be at the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture at not less than 75 percent or more than 90 percent of parity. We believe that the above suggestions would provide a workable opportunity to indicate whether the program suggested by the Secretary of Agriculture will do the job anticipated and it will at the same time allow the Secretary to administer the present surplus without running the risk of artificially increasing the level of price support and possibly the acreage allotment in this or future years by the surplus disposal program. Sincerely yours, GEORGE B. BLAIR, General Manager. (Whereupon, at 12: 15 p. m., the hearing of the subcommittee was adjourned, subject to call.) PRICE SUPPORT PROVISION HEARINGS BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PEANUTS OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE EIGHTY-FIFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON H. R. 11098, H. R. 12224, H. R. 12545, and H. R. 12566 -23887 MARCH 26, MAY 15, 27, AND JUNE 9, 1958 Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture Serial XX UNITED STATES WASHINGTON: 1958 CONTENTS H. R. 11098. A bill to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 Matthews, Hon. D. R. (Billy), a Representative in Congress from the Merrill, James W., chief, Production Program Branch, Oils and Peanut Division, Commodity Stabilization Service, United States Department of Agriculture; accompanied by James E. Thigpen, director, Oils and Peanut Division.. Miller, Clarence L., associate administrator, Commodity Stabilization Service, United States Department of Agriculture; accompanied by J. E. Thigpen, director of Oils and Peanut Division, CSS, ÚSDA; Additional data submitted to the subcommittee by- Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C., Hon. True D. 17 PEANUT PRICE SUPPORT PROVISION H. R. 12545. A bill to amend the peanut marketing quota and price support provision of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 and the Agricultural Act of 1949, and for other purposes__ H. R. 12566. A bill to amend the peanut marketing quota and price support provision of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 and the Agricultural Act of 1949, and for other purposes. Ballard, Marshall, Jr., president, American Tung Oil Association____ Braswell, Marcus B., president, North Carolina Peanut Growers Burleson, Hon. Omar, a representative in Congress from the 17th Davis, Roy B., Jr., president, Virginia Farm Bureau Federation....... Duncan, John, president, Georgia Farm Bureau Federation. Forrester, Hon. E. L., a Representative in Congress from the State of Gravelle, Louis A., on behalf of the Peanut and Nut Salters Associa- |