OCR Text |
Show price supports which provide 90 of parity on basic commodities commod-ities through 1954. The GOP program further advocates an expanded and unified uni-fied soil conservation program with permanent and effective practices, administratively decentralized de-centralized and cleansed of politics; poli-tics; strengthened agricultural education, research and extension; exten-sion; improved farm credit sys- Senator Watkins Supports Eisenhower's Farm Program By SENATOR ARTHUR V. WATKINS (Special to The Milford News) General Dwight D. Eisenhower has promised the farmers of ' the United States a "positive, aggressive, farmer-run farm program" pro-gram" if ne is elected president. I concur with Mr. Eisenhower's view and I support completely the Republican party's platform which, on the subject of agriculture, in part says: tern freed from Federal domination; domina-tion; aid to farmers to strengthen their cooperatives, and an improved im-proved program of rural electrification elec-trification and rural telephone service with less federal control over the cooperatives. This is the program of the Republican Re-publican party in 1952. It is a program that I support and it is a program for farmers, by farmers, farm-ers, that American farmers want. It will give farmers an oportun-ity oportun-ity to exercise their initiative and business ability and it recognizes recog-nizes the importance of a prosperous pros-perous agriculture in a sound national economy. stabilize prices; it appropriated the largest sums in history for agricultural research; it enacted the Wool Act. This same 80th Congress favored Rural Electrification Electri-fication programs, appropriating more money for this program than the six previous Democratic Congresses; and in 1947-48 farmers farm-ers enjoyed their highest net incomes in-comes in history: $17.1 billion in 1947 and $15.7 billion in 1948. I have recited these Republican Republi-can achievements of the past merely to emphasize to farmers that the Republican party is a friend of agriculture and also knows the needs of the farmer. Republicans if elected in 1952 propose a sound, non-socialistic program for agriculture. This program recognizes the exceptional excep-tional risks involved in farming and we propose to continue the tration's Secretary of Agriculture, Agricul-ture, on Jan. 25, 1952. But what is the Republican program? First, we want to make farmers confident that Republicans Re-publicans want a prosperous agriculture ag-riculture with free and independent indepen-dent farmers. Such a program is fundamental to the national interest. The Republican party has a long and outstanding record of Administrations that have advocated advo-cated and legislated sound farm programs. GOP accomplishments accomplish-ments are too numerous to itemize item-ize here, but I do want to point out that the Homestead Act was passed in 1862 under President Lincoln; the Department of Agriculture Ag-riculture was created the same year; our basic reclamation law was adopted in 1902 under Theodore Theo-dore Roosevelt; the Capper-Vol-stead Act (1922) authorized Cooperative Co-operative Marketing Associations; Associa-tions; the Agricultural Marketing Act (1929) promoted the growth of cooperatives, and there were many others. The Republican 80th Congress enacted a new crop insurance program in 1948; it provided the Commodity Credit Corporation Corpora-tion with a permanent charter and a five billion dollar fund to "A prosperous agriculture with free and independent farmers is fundamental to the national interest in-terest . . We denounce the administration's ad-ministration's use of tax money : and a multitude of federal agencies agen-cies to put Agriculture under partisan political dictation and to make the farmer dependent on the government . . ." President Truman, Adlai Stevenson Stev-enson and the other Administra-11 Administra-11 tion vocalists make a great point , of telling the American pub'ic that "they never had it so good." jj That sounds rather peculiar in ! view of the report made by Sec-retary Sec-retary of Agriculture Brannan last January. Mr. Brannan said v '"the realized net income of farm operators in 1951 was about 15 r billion dollars . . . more than two billion below 1947 " Mr. Brannan was not satisfied in just laying to rest the you've-never-had - it - so - good ghost, he went another step further in his report and nailed the ghost's coffin shut when he said: "In terms of buying power, farm operators had less income from farming in 1951 than in any of the years 1942 through 1948. And we don't look for an increase in buying power this year." That was the bright outlook painted for Utah farmers by Mr. Charles Brannan, the Adminis- |