STATEMENT OF MRS. ESTHER M. COPPOCK, WASHINGTON, D. C. REPRESENTING CONSUMERS' UNION

Mrs. COPPOCK. My name is Esther M. Coppock. I represent Consumers' Union, which is a nonprofit organization whose purpose is to furnish unbiased, usable information to help families meet their buying problems. It has about 55,000 subscribing members. The organization maintains a large technical staff which tests various products to be found on the open market and publishes its findings in a monthly magazine.

'Nutritionists agree that a certain amount of fat is necessary to a minimum adequate diet. Oleomargarine is one source of supply of this energy-rich fat in the normal diet in the form of a table spread. It is digestible; it supplies, when fortified, not less than 9,000 units of vitamin A per pound; it contains as many if not more of the essential fatty acids as any other table spread. In addition, it is considerably less expensive than butter, the only similar type of product.

Further, the production of oleomargarine is rigidly regulated by the Pure Food and Drug Act. Labeling is required stating the source of fats, the fortification with vitamin A, the addition of coloring and preservative. Standards have been set up regulating the ingredients. In a survey published in April 1943, Consumers' Union found that none had less than the required minimum of 80 percent fat or more than the required maximum of 16 percent water. Melting point of the fats, the percent free fatty acids were in all cases well within the required range. Label statements were checked. None of the packages was short weight. Most brands had added preservative (up to 0.1 percent benzoic acid or benzoate of soda) and flavoring ("diacetyl"). Three of the twenty-one brands were made of mixed animal and vegetable oils. The remainder were made of only vegetable oils. The prices ranged from 17 to 28 cents per pound, uncolored.

These facts prove that oleomargarine is a pure, wholesome, and inexpensive food which meets nutritional needs. The existing discriminatory taxes and licensing fees on oleomargarine should be removed because they work a hardship on all consumers, especially those in the low-income groups.

They are also unfair to sellers, especially small grocers. The requirement of the $6 a year license fee for a retailer selling uncolored margarine means that approximately two-thirds of the grocers in the country do not sell margarine. The higher fee of $48 a year for selling colored margarine means that it can be found on sale in very few places in the Nation. Such restriction of the sale of a pure food product constitutes an unwarranted trade barrier. It is intolerable that prejudicial taxes should be levied against oleomargarine simply because it competes with butter. If oleomargarine is not a wholesome product it should not be sold under any condition. If it is a wholesome product, there should be free and unrestricted sale of it.

This vital element of fat in the daily diet must be supplied. If the consumer cannot afford to buy butter and cannot find oleomargarine in the grocery store, he goes without. Every housewife has been peppered with a barrage of information and exhortation as to the necessity of feeding her family an adequate, well-balanced diet. It is indefensible that one of the sources of the basic elements of a good diet

is taxed in such manner as to make it difficult to obtain and inconvenient to handle.

Senator ELLENDER. You live in Washington?

Mr. COPPOCK. Yes.

Senator ELLENDER. Have you any idea of what percentage of stores in Washington handle oleomargarine?

Mrs. COPPOCK. I would guess that a large percentage of stores in Washington do handle oleomargarine, but I think in rural areas, and in the poorer districts, where there is a very small volume of trade, that you would find stores that do not.

Senator ELLENDER. Thank you.

Mrs. COPPOCK. When oleomargarine is bought in the grocery store, under the present law in 999 cases out of 1,000 it is bought uncolored, in other words white, with a little envelope of orange coloring enclosed in the carton. This must be mixed carefully in order to make the margarine yellow. Mixing is an unnecessary and time-consuming step. Because of the color-test provisions of the Brigham Act of 1931 many oleomargarine manufacturers actually bleach the oils which are components of the final product in order to avoid the prohibitive tax of 10 cents per pound and the additional license fees on the wholesaler and retailer who sells colored oleomargarine.

The manufacturers should be allowed to either produce a yellowcolored margarine by the use of the natural color of the oils or by the small additional step of mixing the artificial coloring at the plant (as is often done with butter). The product should reach the retail market in a state ready for immediate use. The 10 cents per pound premium on this service at the present time is exorbitant and unfair discrimination.

The housewife buys oleomargarine knowingly. The label on the carton tells her far more about its contents than the label on a carton of butter.

At this point I would like to say I brought some cartons of butter and oleomargarine, and as you see, even the coloring has the Federal Trade Commission specifications on the back of it. On the inside paper of the package every ingredient is given. It is on the outside of the package.

Senator ELLENDER. So a person does not buy it blindly?

Mrs. COPPOCK. You know exactly what is in it. On the other hand, I brought some cartons for butter. This one says it is AA grade-no score on the outside. The quarters inside that carton gave the fact that it was 93-score butter. It wasn't officially marked, just marked 93-score butter.

This package says it is churned from sweet, not sour cream. On the inside it tells you how to calculate to determine when it was packaged, but it does not tell you what the score is.

This is 89-score butter. There is nothing on it whatsoever to tell you. In order to find it is 89-score butter you have to go to the manager (it happens to be a Safeway brand) and ask what it is, and he is very willing to tell you what it is, but there is absolutely no information whatsoever for the consumer.

Senator ELLENDER. Can you tell us the difference between 89-score butter and 93-score, or whatever term is used?

Mrs. COPPOCK. Well, 93-score butter meets the Federal specifications for the best butter. I am not familiar with all the technicalities,

but I believe to be either 92- or 93-score butter it must be churned from sweet cream.

Senator ELLENDER. Is there any difference in the prices?

Mrs. COPPOCK. Yes, all the price ceilings, dollars and cents ceilings, specify 93- and 92-score butter for the District, and there is a lower price for 89-score butter.

Senator ELLENDER. Well, if you were to go to the average store and buy a pound of butter, is there anything at all on the labels to indicate that the price paid is for 92- or 93-score butter?

Mrs. COPPOCK. I know of one store in the city which advertises 93-score butter.

Senator ELLENDER. What I have in mind is, is there anything on the label that would indicate to you whether or not the butter comes within the category of a high-priced rather than a lower-priced product?

Mrs. COPPOCK. No, nothing on the outside, occasionally on the inside.

Senator ELLENDER. So there is a lot of room for chiseling, if a merchant desires to do it?

Mrs. COPPOCK. Yes. In addition, you can find butter without any printing whatever on the inside quarters.

Senator ELLENDER. Thank you.

Mrs. COPPOCK. The housewife buys oleomargarine because she finds it available, or because she must stretch her ration points, or, most often, because she cannot afford to pay the price for butter, which is approximately double that of oleomargarine.

Although she and her family know that they are eating oleomargarine, she still expends the extra time and labor to color it yellow. Why? The housewife colors it yellow to make it more attractive and therefore seemingly more palatable and digestible. We have all been conditioned all our lives to a yellow spread on our bread. The butter industry recognizes that fact when it adds yellow coloring to the pale winter butter. Therefore, the housewife wants oleomargarine colored yellow. However, the coloring process requires from 10 to 20 minutes of work kneading the color into each pound of fat. It is a messy and tiresome job; more important, it is wasteful. It is estimated that each mixing wastes at least a tablespoon of fat left on the utensils, the sides of the bowl and in the transference from package to bowl and back to the container in which it is to be kept. The current salvage campaign urges that we waste not even a single teaspoon of fat. A tablespoon lost out of each of the 614,000,000 pounds of oleomargarine sold in 1943 is a serious and unnecessary loss of some of our fat re

sources.

In conclusion, I strongly urge in the name of Consumers' Union the repeal of the discriminatory taxes against the sellers of oleomargarine at all levels, and the repeal of the 10-cents-per-pound tax on the sale of oleomargarine colored yellow.

Senator ELLENDER. Thank you, Mrs. Coppock. Mrs. Schorske, will you give us your name in full, and your present occupation?

STATEMENT OF MRS. ELIZABETH SCHORSKE, REPRESENTING LEAGUE OF WOMEN SHOPPERS

Mrs. SCHORSKE. My name is Elizabeth Schorske. I represent the League of Women Shoppers. Our membership is about 3,000, and we pay dues to support the organization, which represents for the housewives their consumer interests. Our headquarters is in New York City, and we have about 7 other branches. Our total membership in the District is about 300, and from the District we operate in such matters as this.

Senator ELLENDER. Do you handle the business of this organization strictly through membership dues?

Mrs. SCHORSKE. Yes. I am a member of the legislative committee. The League of Women Shoppers supports the repeal of the tax imposed by the Federal Government on margarine. This tax has a detrimental effect on the manufacture, distribution, and availability to the shopper of this product. In many areas the housewife is given no choice as to table spread, and almost nowhere can she buy colored margarine.

For the housewife to color her own margarine consumes valuable time; and when this operation can be performed so inexpensively and efficiently by the industry, there seems little point in all of us turning dairy maid and churning in the yellow coloring.

We prefer butter to margarine, but particularly now when there is not sufficient butter to go around, margarine can be used as an adequate substitute. Another wartime factor to be considered is the economy and efficiency with which margarine can be produced. Although we are not experts in the production field, we are aware that figures exist, which have already been recited to you gentlemen, pointing out what vast savings in land and manpower accrue in producing an equivalent amount of margarine as compared with butter.

It is our understanding that the essence of the free-enterprise system is the ability of the consumer to exercise her preference between a choice of products. This taxation of margarine is the almost solitary exception and is definitely discriminatory.

Moreover, it seems to us absolutely essential that the low-income group have this choice of table spreads. The difference in price, 50 percent, and ration points between butter and margarine is so great that butter is often prohibitive for the low-income groups, and no table spread at all is the result. This is pretty poor diet. From the nutritive standpoint the Pure Food and Drug Act protects those consumers who do use margarine as a butter substitute. In the case of fortified margarine, and 90 percent of all margarine is fortified, there is scientific evidence for the position that it is as nutritive as butter.

The consumer group in our organization made a survey based on the weekly low-cost marketing list recommended by the Bureau of Home Economics at the end of May. This low-cost marketing list represented a minimum, only the barest minimum, of foods essential to provide a family of four in Washington with a diet meeting only the minimum nutritional standards. The cost of this minimum diet was $11.40 per week. This amounts to approximately $600 per year. In the year 1941, city families in the United States with an average

income of $1,671 spent $558 or nearly one-third of their income on food, and families with an income of $2,103 spent $674 for food. Since prices have increased considerably in the last 2 years, it is reasonable to conclude that a family of four today would require an income of at least $2,000 to provide this minimum diet. Taking Washington, a city with comparatively high wages, for an example, the number of people whose incomes are less than $2,000 would still run into the thousands. Obviously, with such a narrow margin available to obtain a minimum nutritional standard, low income groups cannot afford to pay twice the amount for butter as for a margarine of equivalent nutritional value.

Not only low income groups, but all housewives are interested in making their small contribution toward checking inflation by keeping cost of living and eating down. The availability of a cheaper product in usable form would be a great assistance to us.

In conclusion, let me reiterate that margarine deserves the same treatment as all other products. It is inexpensive, nutritious, and it is needed desperately now. We consumers want it.

Senator ELLENDER. Thank you. Mrs. Johnson, will you give your name and occupation for the record?.

STATEMENT OF MRS. THOMASINA WALKER JOHNSON, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE NATIONAL NONPARTISAN COUNCIL ON PUBLIC AFFAIRS OF ALPHA KAPPA ALPHA SORORITY

Mrs. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, I am Mrs. Thomasina Walker Johnson, legislative representative of the national nonpartisan council on public affairs of the Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority. Our national headquarters are located at 961 Florida Avenue NW., Washington, D. C.

The Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority is the oldest Negro college women's organization in America. Its membership is 6,000 college and university women in 152 chapters in 46 States. Each one of our members is a leader of some kind in her community-teachers, social workers, lawyers, physicians, dentists, and professional women in all walks of life.

and

The women whom I represent are homemakers and consumers, it is from this point of view that I wish to present testimony. We wish to go on record in support of the favorable report of this committee of S. 1744 and the passage of this bill in the Congress.

As we go into our post-war economy, it will become increasingly important that there be a "more efficient utilization of the agricultural resources of our Nation" as is stated in this bill.

We believe that the free use and distribution of any wholesome food is most important during wartime and equally as important during peacetime.

We believe that it is not in the best interest or tradition of our American way of life to impose obstructions to the distribution of any wholesome, nutritious, and inexpensive food product.

We believe that oleomargarine along with all other foods should be subject to the same type of regulations and safeguards as all other foods. However, this is not the case. There is no other food that is