Page:GPO-CRECB-1937-pt2-v82.pdf/19

1937 Mr. McNARY. On that I call for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were not ordered.

Mr. McNARY. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.

The Chief Clerk called the roll, and the following Senators answered to their names:

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Seventy-seven Senators having answered to their names, a quorum is present.

The question is on the amendment offered by the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. ] to the committee amendment.

Mr. POPE. Mr. President, so far as this amendment is concerned it does not affect my State. My State does not produce corn for market.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for a moment?

Mr. POPE. I yield.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. In view of the fact that we have just had a quorum called for the purpose of having a vote upon this question, I feel that it might be proper for me to make a word of explanation in advance of the Senator's statement so that Senators who have just come into the Chamber may know what the proponents of the amendment desire to accomplish.

Mr. POPE. I wish to say to the Senator that I can speak only once on the amendment, and I shall lose my opportunity to say what I intended to say if I yield the floor. I should be glad to yield otherwise. I think what the Senator suggests would be the logical way of presenting the matter.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. I would be speaking in the Senator's time and would make my statement very brief.

Mr. POPE. Very well.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, the amendment on page 24, line 11, changing from 10 to 15 the percentage which governs the preliminary requirement before the marketing quota shall come into effect, goes to the heart of the problem presented by the bill. The Secretary of Agriculture has indicated that his theory is the establishment of an ever-normal granary. To that end he desires that there shall be a substantial carry-over of the various commodities which are dealt with in the bill.

With respect to every one of these commodities Senators will see, by looking at page 67, that there is a substantial carry-over, except in the case of corn. The normal supply of wheat is defined as a normal year's domestic consumption and exports plus 10 percent.

The normal supply of cotton is defined as a normal year's domestic consumption and exports plus 35 percent.

The normal supply of rice is defined as a normal year's domestic consumption and exports plus 10 percent.

The normal supply of tobacco is defined as a normal year's domestic consumption and exports plus 175 percent.

The normal supply of corn is defined as a normal year's domestic consumption and exports, with no excess to provide for the normal granary.

Corn is an essential element in the feeding of livestock. The interposition of these restricted quotas upon corn will have an inevitable and almost immediate effect upon the livestock industry. Those of us who are representing States which are active in the livestock industry believe that there should be at-least the same carry-over or a similar carry-over for corn as there is for the other commodities. So we have presented this amendment, which changes the figure from 10 to 15 in one part of the bill, and the companion amendment, which makes the provision for a carryover of 7 percent, making a total carry-over, as I understand, of about 2 or 3 percent greater than that which was originally provided.

The Department of Agriculture is in substantial agreement with this amendment. The House committee has reported a bill which contains the provision contained in my amendment.

Mr. POPE. Mr. President, how much time do I have on the amendment?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 12 minutes.

Mr. POPE. I hold in my hand the letter from the secretary to which reference has been made a number of times. The Secretary himself is from Iowa, a corn State, and I think his opinion on this point would be very valuable. I quote what he says in the letter:

Restoring the Pope-McGill bill's reserve supply levels to the committee bill would liberalize marketing quota provisions for the farmer, make the use of quotas less frequent, and reduce the degree of so-called compulsion to a lower and hence a more desirable minimum.

The original provisions of the bill, to which the Secretary referred, provided 10 percent for corn above the normal level as the point when marketing quotas might go into effect. The amendment of the committee contains the same figure, 10 percent. The only reason for putting it in italics is that the other portion was stricken out and the original restored. So the amount is 10 percent in the bill, which the Secretary approved.

With reference to the percentage in the normal supply level, before we calculate this additional 10 percent, the amount there was originally 5 percent for corn. The committee struck out the 5 percent. The Secretary recommends that in another part of the bill the 5 percent be restored. I think that ought to be cleared up, because the Senator from Wyoming has just said that his amendment was in accordance with the Secretary's letter. I think he is mistaken about that.

Mr. O'MAHONEY. I did not say that; I said it was in accordance with the views of the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. POPE. I have the Secretary's views very clearly expressed in the letter, and have referred to the letter. So if we desire to give value to the Secretary's opinion, then we should vote down the amendment of the Senator and keep the figure as it is in the bill.

I make this statement because many corn farmers have been in conference with us in connection with this matter. These corn farmers desire even a lower level than that contained in the bill and approved by the Secretary. I think their views should be given some consideration. I do not see either of the Senators from Illinois on the floor, but many farmers from Illinois have expressed themselves to that effect. Farmers from Iowa have expressed themselves in the same way. One of the Senators from Iowa favors the amendment. The other Senator from Iowa may express himself on the matter.

Mr. GILLETTE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. POPE. I yield.

Mr. GILLETTE. I do not think the Senator quite stated the position I took. I stated that personally I could see no objection to the amendment if it was in accordance with the wishes of the Department of Agriculture. From the statement the Senator has just made it apparently is not in accordance with the views of the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. POPE. I think that is entirely true. I want to be fair in this matter. So far as I am personally concerned, and so far as my State is concerned, I have no objection to the amendment of the Senator from Wyoming, but I do think that the interests of the corn farmer should be presented and that the Secretary's view should be made clear on this point. I rose, therefore, to make those matters clear.