Mr. McLAIN. We have all kinds of tables submitted to the Board, Mr. Chairman, on all of these commodities. This is one of the difficulties that you have, even in determining acreage allotments or price support. Of course, it all depends on the set of facts that you want to use. It depends almost completely on how much added funds you get in Public Law 480 and the proportion used for rice or how much rice you give away. We probably had several different sets of figures. We do generally with most of these commodities. The fact is that many times we have them set up a table with different set of figures in order to give us a picture of what the results would be. I would say, however, that the decision that was made was based on what we thought was fair and reasonable to rice, as compared to other commodities. I think the figures will back us up on that. Mr. THOMPSON. The 19 million hundredweight figure would have left rice in substantially the same position that it is now? Mr. MCLAIN. It wouldn't change it materially. Mr. THOMPSON. And the figures that were then arbitrarily set would put the rice industry to a considerable extent, out of business? Mr. MCLAIN. I think you would put it the other way, if you put it at 19 million, it would change the level of price support a little. Mr. THOMPSON. It would increase it a little. Mr. MCLAIN. Yes. Mr. THOMPSON. But instead of using a set of figures that would leave the rice industry substantially in status quo, at least for planning purposes, we arbitrarily take a set of figures that would put them out of business? Mr. McLAIN. I think we have ample proof that if you look at the Public Law 480 funds used for rice, you would agree that we have treated rice fairly. Mr. THOMPSON. Possibly so; we haven't run into them yet. The State Department tells us that they would like to have more rice for sale in India, Pakistan, I think, and Indonesia, and they say that they have put in the request for additional rice. If that rice were developed, the surpluses, by the end-what is it, the end of July when we start the thing, the 1st of August, those surpluses would be practically gone. Mr. MCLAIN. I think rice is the one commodity that if we would program, and out of proportion amount of funds available and under 480 we could probably find an outlet for all of it. Mr. THOMPSON. Why not do it rather than put the rice industry out of business or put so much of the rice industry out of business? Mr. McLAIN. Your area of the country, and all you good gentlemen here, have crop interests other than rice. We have to look at all commodities, as required by law. We don't think the law intends that a disproportionate share of the funds should be used for any one commodity. We have many of these commodities that are in the surplus situation. The cotton allotment coming up is going to be much below the present minimum. Wheat would be down, if it didn't have a minimum permanently on the statute books, to around 20 million acres instead 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 Mr. GATHINGS. Mr. Chairman, has that previously gone into the Mr. THOMPSON. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) Mr. THOMPSON. At this point, we will insert in the record table I. March 31, 1958, under title I, Public Law 480, in regard to signed agreements and agreements approved for negotiation. The next table, table II, shows agreements signed as of March 31, 1958. Table III gives the programs approved for negotiation but not yet You will notice the total quantity of rice from CCC stocks to be Mr. GATHINGS. How much is that in hundredweight, Mr. Dean? Mr. DEAN. The tables discussed will be submitted for the record. (The tables referred to are as follows:) TABLE I.—Title I, Public Law 480, commodity objective, rice, as of Mar. 31, 1958 TABLE II.-Agreements signed title I, Public Law 480, rice, as of Mar. 31, 1958 Million Mr. DEAN. Let's go back to 1956-57, the marketing year beginning How did your rice move? Mr. GATHINGS. That is what they want. Mr. DEAN. Let's take exports, dollar sales, for good United States For barter, as indicated by Mr. McLain's statement, one million Public Law 480, 15,552,000 hundredweight. Mr. GATHINGS. That goes to show the importance of the Public Law Mr. DEAN. Because funds were available under title I, Public Law 480. Title 2, Public Law 480, 558,000 hundredweight, which is another Section 402, ICA, none, and donations, 416; 2,915,000 hundred- The total from CCC inventory in export is 20,762,000 hundred- Keep in mind that all of these exports were under some type of Gov- ernment program except 2 million hundredweight. Mr. GATHINGS. Twenty million plus? Mr. DEAN. Let's go to the domestic movement, because that is an- other part of the total movement from CCC inventory. Our dollar sales, domestic, at the legal minimum, that is 105 percent of the current price support plus reasonable carrying charges, or mar- ket price whichever is higher was 803,000 hundredweight. Section 32 donations, 508,000 hundredweight. Section 416, domestic donations, 324,000 hundredweight. Total domestic, 1,635,000 hundredweight. Total export and domestic movement from CCC stocks for 1956-57 was 22,397,000 hundredweight, of milled rice. Mr. GATHINGS. I did not get the amount. Mr. DEAN. 22,397,000 hundredweight. Mr. GATHINGS. All right. Mr. DEAN. I will be happy to leave a copy of this table with you. TABLE I.—Dispositions of CCC-owned rice in fiscal years 1957 and 1958, |