Secondly, I am urging the committee to amend section 8 of the Reciprocal Trade Act. I have placed before you a copy of my proposed amendment to section 8 (a) of the Trade Agreements Act, or it would be an amendment to section 7 of H. R. 4294. This amendment, if I have your permission, I would like to read:

SEC. 7. (a) Subsection (a) of section 8 of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1951 is hereby amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 8 (a) In any case where the Secretary of Agriculture determines and reports to the President and to the Tariff Commission with regard to any agricultural commodity or products thereof, a condition exists or is practically certain to occur, requiring emergency treatment on account of imports of any agricultural commodity or products thereof, the Tariff Commission shall make an immediate investigation under the provisions of section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended, or under the provisions of section 7 of this Act to determine the facts and make recommendations to the President for such relief under those provisions as may be appropriate in the emergency. The President, on recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture, shall take immediate action, however, without awaiting the recommendations of the Tariff Commission if in his judgment the emergency requires such action. In any case the report and findings of the Tariff Commission and the decision of the President shall be made at the earliest possible date and in any event not more than 25 calendar days in the case of any perishable agricultural commodity or products thereof, including milk and all products of milk, and 60 days in the case of any other agricultural commodity or products thereof after the submission of the case to the Tariff Commission."

This is the new part of the amendment:

In the exercise of the authority conferred in this section, full consideration shall be given to (1) domestic production and consumption requirements, (2) the impact of imports of any agricultural commodity or products thereof on (a) normal marketing and storing of domestic products, (b) on any Government support or other program or (c) on the Government objective of achieving full parity prices for domestic agricultural commodities or products thereof in the market place: Provided, That notwithstanding the provisions of section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended, or any other law, the President, upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Agriculture, may (1) order further limitation on the quantity of imports of any such agricultural commodity or products thereof, or total suspension of imports of any agricultural commodity or products thereof, to meet the emergency situation and (2) proclaim the con- . tinuance of the emergency action, herein authorized, as long as the emergency continues to exist: Provided further, That any interested party may file an application for investigation, with respect to any agricultural commodity or any products thereof, under section 7 of the Trade Agreements Extension Act of 1951 or under section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, directly with the Tariff Commission and upon the filing of such application the Tariff Commission shall conduct an investigation and report its findings to the President within 25 days in the case of any perishable agricultural commodity or any products thereof or within 60 days in the case of any other agricultural commodity or any products thereof.

The last proviso, Mr. Chairman, gives any individual who is concerned or interested an opportunity to present a petition to the Tariff Commission which is not provided in section 22 or in any provision of the Reciprocal Trade Act.

This amendment seeks to spell out a program which still leaves discretionary authority in the hands of the Secretary, but it points the way to what is needed in this country and what the Secretary should follow in order to make a proper recommendation to the President with reference to the emergency that may exist.

I might say, Mr. Chairman, that whenever the Government finds it necessary to buy commodities under the support program, I consider that an emergency, because I do not want the Government in business

at all for any commodity, whether it be perishable products, like dairy products, or basic commodities. I want these commodities to flow through normal channels of trade into the American market without any dumping process from foreign production to depress the price in this country down to the support price.

So I would like to make it very clear that when the Government is forced to buy these perishable commodities, dairy products in particular, under the support program, I consider that this language creates the emergency that I feel exists. I trust that this committee

will be in a position to include this proposal with section 104 as a part of the Reciprocal Trade Extension Act.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I am also working on another proposal to amend section 22 to conform with the provisions of the amendment that I have just offered to section 8 (a) of the act. I will submit that to you and to the members of the committee within a few days. That is really a perfecting amendment.

Mr. ANDRESEN. At the present time, Mr. Chairman, the Commodity Credit Corporation owns over $3 billion worth of commodities under the support program. That goes all the way from tung oil and peanuts, tobacco, butter, cheese, whole milk powder, cotton, wheat, corn. Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. Would it be difficult for you, Mr. Andresen, to supply for the record a list of the major products that make up this figure? I do not mean the exact dollar amounts, but the major

ones.

Mr. ANDRESEN. I will attempt to get those figures and include them as a part of my remarks.

(The information is as follows:)

Commodity Credit investment in agricultural commodities (Mar. 31, 1953)1 [All figures in thousands]

? Includes 2.1 million bales cotton; 538.2 million pounds cottonseed oil; 335.3 million pounds cotton linters; 499.9 million pounds cottonseed meal.

Includes approximately 260.5 million pounds 1952 cottonseed oil which CCC is obligated to purchase from refiners.

Includes 94.6 million pounds butter; 38.7 million pounds cheese; 123.2 million pounds nonfat dry milk solids.

Includes 300 million pounds linseed oil held for account of the Secretary of Agriculture pursuant to sec. 304 of the Defense Production Act of 1950.

Mr. ANDRESEN. I might say the amount invested in dairy products is very small when you compare the amount of Government money in cotton, wheat, corn, and tobacco. Those are the principal items upon which most of the money has been spent.

Mr. JENKINS. How long has the Commodity Credit Corporation been operating, about 10 years?

Mr. ANDRESEN. The Commodity Credit Corporation went into operation in the thirties. It was one of those emergency measures to begin with.

Mr. JENKINS. It has been a very good institution, but has its cost been substantial?

Mr. ANDRESEN. No, it really has not cost so much money, if you consider that all of the commodities that have been given away the Commodity Credit Corporation has been reimbursed from appropriations made by Congress. I will cite just 2 or 3 of those items which are included in exports from this country.

Under the Marshall plan, Congress appropriated and the Government spent $1,600,000,000 to get rid of our wheat. They spent $1,200,000,000 to get rid of our cotton. They spent $450 million to get rid of surplus tobacco in this country. Those were giveaway programs. They spent a considerable amount in giving away our dairy products, not only under lend-lease, but also under the ECA program. The countries that received these gifts from us under the ECA program, including dairy products, are the countries now that have been rehabilitated with an expenditure of some 35 or 40 billion dollars from this country to produce not only manufactured goods, but also dairy products for shipment into this country.

With the price maintained under the support program for agricultural products, naturally this is the attractive market with a demand to ship them all into this country.

I will place as much information as I can get into the record on all of these items.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection that may be done.

Mr. CURTIS of Nebraska. When the Government spent so many millions and millions of dollars, you say, to give away a certain product, that was part of the budget of the foreign-aid program, was it not?

Mr. ANDRESEN. That was under the so-called Marshall plan foreignaid program. As you will recollect, the theory under the Marshall plan we had to do something to feed hungry people or they would turn Communist. I happened to be a member of the Herter committee. As chairman of the Committee on Food and Agriculture, I visited nearly all the countries that were to receive aid under the Marshall plan. With the exception of Germany, I did not find outstanding hunger as we were led to believe existed at that time, but there were hungry people, and I recognized that the hungry people would be susceptible to Communist influence. So when I came back from that trip, I offered an amendment to the Marshall plan, stating that two-thirds of the food we sent over there should be fed to hungry people through the Red Cross and church and charitable organizations, to stop them from becoming Communists.

I was defeated on that amendment because we learned at that time the administration did not intend to feed hungry people. So the food we gave in the figures that I have mentioned was given to the governments of the respective countries, and the governments sold those items of food, wheat, bread, and tobacco and dairy products, to the people who had money to pay for them. The hungry people did not have the money and consequently they still went hungry and we still have the threat of communism in many parts of the world that we had previously.

Mr. JENKINS. In that connection, the Commodity Credit Corporation very seldom sells any of its commodities in the market?

Mr. ANDRESEN. In the domestic market?

Mr. JENKINS. Yes.

Mr. ANDRESEN. I can point that out. I cannot give you the exact figures but I will be glad to put them in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered.

(The information is as follows:)

Purchase and disposal of butter under the dairy price support program, January 1949 through December 1951

1 Approximately 10 million pounds of butter were purchased prior to July 27 at 59 cents per pound for grade A. and 57 cents per pound for grade B.

2 No butter remaining in inventory. Difference between purchase and disposals due to contract tolerance which permitted deliveries slightly greater or less than contracted quantities.

Purchase and disposal of Cheddar cheese under the dairy price support program, January 1949 through December 1951