OCR Text |
Show '"rnri 11 11 mr " i r ' " i iimhi i n m f m y m u n mm llli i Politics Seen as Key in Farm Subsidy Problem .Acceptable Compromise Lacking; Presidential Presiden-tial Veto Forecast for Any Bill Banning Use of 'Economic Stimulant.' By BAUKHAGE News Analyst and Commentator, -.i '(' I A h ' - - ' purely political. They say the Republicans Re-publicans naturally take the side opposite op-posite to the administration because they can win some farm votes as hampions of higher prices to farmers farm-ers if they take this stand. On the other hand, they believe that the anti-subsidy bill will bs vetoed eventually and the Democrats say the veto will be sustained. If so, the Republicans will not be criticized for supporting a measure which is defeated. And the Democratic support sup-port in the house agriculture committee, com-mittee, subsidy supporters say, was "bought" by allowing the present subsidies for the products grown in districts of the congressmen who supported the bill, to stand. The administration followers say that it seems strange for the Republicans Re-publicans to raise a cry against subsidies sub-sidies when tariffs are subsidies. They mention the'sugar "subsidy." ' As for complaint that the subsidy on agricultural products would not reach the farmer, they call attention to the milk subsidies at present in operation where the man who milks the cow gets the subsidy direct Meanwhile, we know that the cost of living has already gone up. We know that we need full production of foodstuffs. We know that many farmers can't get the feed required to raise the stock or to fatten it to its most efficient weight for slaughter. slaugh-ter. Payment of any money out by the treasury does mean more money in circulation but the subsidy proponents pro-ponents point to the kind of inflation we get when prices aren't controlled. The administration says it is better to control a few processors and distributors, dis-tributors, even if Uncle Sam has to snoop into their books to see he isn't cheated, than to let that vicious spiral of prices and living costs start to mount. In the next weeks you will hear a lot more of these arguments. Food Contribution The other day when I stepped into the broadcasting studio just as the Farm and Home Hour had ended, I found some cookies, some Brown Betty and a meat loaf sandwich waiting. wait-ing. These samples had been saved from a more elaborate layout of good things made with soy beans which had been the subject of the F & H broadcast. I ate them with pleasure. Although Al-though the meat loaf was 25 per cent soy grits, it tasted exactly like meat to me. The cookies and the Brown Betty were excellent. Soy flour and soy grits the bread had some soy flour in it are both on the market ready to contribute vitamins, mineral, protein, vim and vigor to our food, reducing the consumption con-sumption of scarcer and more expensive ex-pensive products. A saving of from 20 to 25 per cent in meat and still having almost identical food values is nothing to be sneezed at. Soy, it is pointed out, is not a substitute but a supplement to other foods and you would be surprised how many tasty dishes can be produced pro-duced with it. The Bureau of Human Hu-man Nutrition and Home Economics has a handy little pamphlet containing contain-ing recipes, and you can get one by writing to the bureau, care of the department of agriculture, Washington, Washing-ton, D. C. There are recipes for mint loaf, chile con came, suggestions for use of soy with vegetables when they are served as a main dish; soy in sauces and mixed with cereals to give a richer protein diet many suggestions sugges-tions for making what you have gc further and accomplish more. A Letter Frankly, when I get a letter that makes me real mad, I sometimes mention it on the air. I shouldn't ever do it, I suppose, because I usually usu-ally get a flood of sympathy which perhaps I don't deserve but one of the best replies I ever had was from a man in Spearfish, S. D., who wrote to me as follows: "Each morning at 11 a. m. MWT, I tune you in, Voic, may be mistaken, yet it seems to me that at times you think some of the letters you receive are 'hitting below the belt' which has always been considered cowardly and unjustified. But in a great many cases, if we don't hit below the belt, we fust make a total miss as it seems that some of the stuff that is put out for us to follow fol-low shows that there is NOTHING above the bell to hit at." WNC Service, Union Trust Building, Washington, D. C. The administration is in the midst of one of its fiercest contests to "hold the line" against stabilization. It is the old question of subsidies for farm products and it looks like a fight to the death. The house agriculture committee, with Representative Steagall and others swinging over to the Republican side, is backing the bill which would renew the appropriations appro-priations for the Commodity Credit corporation and cut out the subsidies to processors, distributors and some direct cash aid to farmers. The present legislation expires in January. Janu-ary. A presidential veto is taken for granted for any bill banning the use of subsidies. Administration supporters sup-porters believe that such a veto can be sustained, but they see a tough, bitter fight ahead. The key to the whole difficulty is violent partisanship. Successful politics pol-itics Is like successful living in the family, in the community, in' the world it depends on the ability to compromise. In this flghl, there eems to be no one able to work out an acceptable compromise. Already the feeling is bitter. Cost of Living Complicating the problem is, as usual, labor's insistence that the cost of living has gone up higher than statistics show, that the Little Steel formula is no longer a fair yardstick for wage increases since decisions of the War Labor board, plus insistence in-sistence of the director of stabilization, stabiliza-tion, hold down wages while the administration ad-ministration has not carried out its promises to roll back the living costs. The farm organizations and the processors and the distributors oppose op-pose the roll-back. They don't put it that way. They say they oppose subsidies for rolling back consumer prices. They argue that subsidies to increase production and support I prices in a free market are all right and are horses of another color. The President sees no difference. Subsidies which permit the government govern-ment to buy up commodities or make loans at a minimum price when the market price dips below that figure are all right, say the farm bloc, but, they claim, the "new" subsidies go further than that in that they mean payments direct to the processor and distributor and also buying and selling by the government. govern-ment. This, they claim, is In itself inflationary because it means payments pay-ments out of the treasury. They say they don't believe that the money . will get back to the farmer, that it means "grocery bills paid by the government," with very little real saving to the consumer, and finally, which is the real rub, it means too much government control. Subsidies and Votes Of course, there is the point that the politician doesn't like to mention nobody who depends on votes wants to be in a position later on of having to remove those benefits. Another An-other point, not stressed, is that subsidies sub-sidies to processors mean that the government has a right to look into the books of private industry. But to the President, it is subsidies subsi-dies or inflation. At a recent press and radio conference, the President said that he got the head of the Farm Bureau federation, Edward O'Neil, to admit that letting prices go up in a free market, which the government govern-ment says would have to be the alternative al-ternative of the subsidy if the farmer was to get the incentive for increased in-creased production, would mean a little inflation. The President then told the story about the man who took just a "little" cocaine. He soon became an addict. It was then that a woman reporter, report-er, known for her spicy questions, asked if the President didn't think that if his measure was carried we might become subsidy addicts. The President didn't seem to think so. He pointed out that agriculture has been getting subsidies since 1333. Whether or not there is danger in any of this mild economic stimulant which the administration feels is a wartime necessity, everybody admits ad-mits that runaway inflation must be avoided if possible. The whole complicated com-plicated machinery of stabilization was created to prevent it. The proponents of the subsidy plan say that the fight against them is |