OLEOMARGARINE TAX REPEAL THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1948 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. Mr. ANDRESEN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a unanimousconsent request. Several Members of Congress have expressed themselves to me that they would like to appear before our committee in opposition to the bills that we are considering. I would like to ask, Mr. Chairman, that they be permitted to do so after we hear the witnesses who are here and who are not Members of Congress, and they can appear at that time. If they do not appear, they may have permission to file statements. Mr. COOLEY. Would you amend that so as to include Members of Congress who would like to speak on behalf of the legislation? Mr. ANDRESEN. We have heard those at length. If the gentleman will look at the record, he will find we have heard them at length. Mr. COOLEY. Suppose there are some others who would like to be heard? Mr. ANDRESEN. They were given permission to file statements and testify before we heard the other witnesses. Certainly, I do not want to preclude any Member from submitting a statement, but I think the understanding with Mr. Poage and Mr. Pace was that statements could be filed for those who were for the bills and who did not personally appear. Mr. PACE. It was my understanding, Mr. Chairman, that those who were called were authors of the legislation and that there are numerous Members of Congress who otherwise would desire the privilege of appearing in person. Mr. ANDRESEN. I thought on the time that we are allotted now, we are supposed to have Mr. PACE. We do not propose to take up your time. The CHAIRMAN. I assume the request of the gentleman from Minnesota means that the members will have time after the opponents have completed their testimony within the agreed time limit. Is there any objection? The Chair hears none. Before we call the first witness, the Chair has a statement here by Mr. C. P. Key, master of the South Carolina State Grange, which he intended to file yesterday, but it was inadvertently overlooked. If there is no objection, the Chair would like to file that now as of yesterday and as a part of the presentation of the proponents of the legislation. (Statement of C. P. Key is as follows:) STATEMENT OF C. P. KEY, MASTER, SOUTH CAROLINA STATE GRANGE I am Mr. C. P. Key. I own and operate a general farm, specializing in cotton peanuts, and livestock. I am also master of the South Carolina State Grange, for which I receive no salary. The granges in all the major cotton and peanut States authorized me to submit this brief jointly with them. These States all contain millions of people living in rural areas far removed from supermarkets. It is necessary for hundreds of thousands of these people who own no automobiles to purchase the family supplies at the nearby crossroads store. Less than 50 percent of these crossroads stores can afford to buy licenses to permit legal handling of margarine. Therefore, in reality, the present Federal law deprives a large segment of the people of a staple food. They cannot afford butter at a dollar a pound, so buy fat back and use the fryings on bread, corn bread, and biscuits. It is not a case of butter versus margarine in the above instance, but complete depriving of both butter and margarine with a forced shift to fryings. Science has established that these fryings are devoid of vitamin A and further that vitamin A deficiency is common among these low-income groups. The collosal example of discrimination and Federal interference occurs and completes its cycle within the borders of South Carolina. In this State a local margarine plant converts South Carolina-grown cottonseed oil into margarine and resells it to South Carolina housewives. The South Carolina housewife sends via the South Carolina margarine factory 10 cents to Washington for each pound of cottonseed oil her husband and children produced and consumed. Perhaps more than 10 cents, since the colored margarine had to be sold through dealers and. stores paying high Federal license fees to sell the treated cottonseed oil grown in her back 40, and consumed on her tables. Why is it that Washington considers South Carolina leaders incapable of processing this farm crop for table use without interfering like a policeman demanding a high salary? Doubtless situations approaching this horrible example occur in other States in the cottonseed- and soybean-producing areas. If the Federal Food and Drug Administration is considered capable of administering the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act insofar as other foods are concerned why, under the same token are they incapable of administering the margarine sections thereof, when modified to remove the Federal tax. Intrastate commerce is not ordinarily interfered with by the Federal Government. Why do they consider it necessary to make an exception and single out margarine? This is purely a States' rights matter. Any chemist can easily and quickly determine in the laboratory whether a sample is margarine or butter regardless of the color of the sample. With modern food inspection and analysis deception and fraud can be completely controlled. If the Federal food inspectors, together with the State food and health officers, can't do this simple job with the excellent methods provided them by the research chemists, it's time to replace them and do the job as it should be done. The housewife deserves the privilege of purchasing margarine already_colored yellow without paying the Federal Government 10 cents per pound. To force the housewife to go into the kitchen and mix in her own yellow color is deplorable and totally inexcusable. It represents to the average lay American, poor judgment and inertness on the part of their political representatives to permit this to continue, with a result that confidence in the Government is lost. Mr. ANDRESEN. I would also like to request that the witnesses appearing against the bills be permitted to proceed with their statements before they are questioned, the same as the witnesses we have heard the last 3 days. The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection? Mr. POAGE. Mr. Chairman · Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Chairman, that was not followed. Mr. ABERNATHY. I think that ought to be left to the witnesses. If the witnesses desire to proceed without questioning, I will respect their wishes. Several times the witnesses were interrupted during their testimony. I do not think we ought to make an iron-clad rule like that. Mr. ANDRESEN. That is the procedure we followed under the hearing of the other witnesses, and I think we should treat both sides alike. Mr. ABERNETHY. I respectfully differ with the gentleman. The witnesses were interrogated during the presentation of their testimony. However, if they do not desire to be questioned until they finish their statements, it is all right with me... The CHAIRMAN. I think it has been the policy of the committee at all times to respect the wishes of the witnesses. Mr. ABERNETHY. It has. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair thinks it is always better to allow the witnesses to proceed without interruption until they have completed their statements because he thinks that avoids unnecessary questioning that might be indulged in otherwise. The Chair understands that Mr. Holman, the first witness, does desire to proceed without interruption. Is that correct? Mr. HOLMAN. I did not hear you. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair understands that you would prefer to proceed without interruption until you have completed your main statement? Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Chairman, it is entirely immaterial to me. I would be very glad to be interrupted if any member desires to do so. Mr. ANDRESEN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a point on that. Mr. Holman and other witnesses have come here to submit a prepared statement, a comprehensive statement. If there are interrogations in the course of that statement, it breaks up the continuity of their statement and since there is a limitation of time, we do not want any fillibustering around here to try to divert the witness from completing his statement before the committee. Mr. POAGE. Mr. Chairman, the record will show Mr. ABERNETHY. May I inquire who made that statement? Mr. POAGE. May I point out that the record will show, and I want anybody who doubts it to read the record, I believe, that every witness prior to yesterday was interrupted. I agree it is a good idea not to do so. I happen to have been one of the witnesses, and I know I was interrupted and I know that every witness prior to yesterday was interrupted time and again, although there was no agreement that they should be. It was done continually. Mr. ANDRESEN. We did not consider the distinguished gentleman from Texas a witness. Mr. POAGE. All right. The CHAIRMAN. Let the Chair make this suggestion: I think we have tried all the way through these hearings to permit the witness to proceed without interruption. As I understand, there is objection to having that as an iron-clad rule, but I hope that in the interest of orderly procedure we will as far as possible permit witnesses to proceed to make their statements without interruption. The first witness this morning will be Mr. Charles W. Holman, sceratry of the National Cooperative Milk Producers Federation. We will be glad to hear from you, Mr. Holman. 74354-48-15 STATEMENT OF CHARLES W. HOLMAN, SECRETARY, NATIONAL COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION Mr. HOLMAN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, we have furnished copies of this statement to every member of the committee, and I think you will find them in an envelope, as well as a table to substantiate the briefer statement. Our federation now consists of 84 member associations and about 600 submember groups. These associations are all farmer-owned and farmer-controlled dairy cooperatives with more than 430,000 farm families living in 47 States. The volume of whole milk equivalent handled by the members of the federation approximates 18,000,000,000 pounds which represents about 18 percent of all milk and separated cream that leaves the farms of America in commerce. I am filing for the record a list of our member organization with addresses and a list of the officers and directors of the federation. (The information referred to is as follows:) THE NATIONAL COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION, NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS, WASHINGTON 6, D. C. OFFICERS George W. Slocum, treasurer. John Brandt, president. W. P. Davis, first vice president. DIRECTORS W. H. Austin, Lake Cormorant, Miss. Honorary director for life: M. R. Moomaw, Canton, Ohio. H. H. Rathbun, New Hartford, N.JY. MEMBER ORGANIZATIONS Akron Milk Producers, Inc., 194 Carroll Street, Akron 4, Ohio. Arrowhead Cooperative Creamery Association, 224 North Fifty-seventh Avenue Central Grade A Cooperative, 315 College Avenue, Appleton, Wis. Central Missouri Milk Cooperative, Marshall, Mo. The Central Ohio Cooperative Milk Producers, Inc., 12 North Third Street, Columbus 15, Ohio. Challenge Cream and Butter Association, 929 East Second Street, Los Angeles 12, Calif. Chattanooga Area Milk Producers Association, 460 Dodson Avenue, Chattanooga, Tenn. Cheese Producers Marketing Association, Seventeenth Avenue at Illinois Central tracks, Monroe, Wis. Coastal Bend Milk Producers Association, Box 837, Corpus Christi, Tex. Connecticut Milk Producers' Association, 990 Wethersfield Avenue, Hartford 6, Conn. Consolidated Badger Cooperative, 116 North Main Street, Shawano, Wis. Cooperative Pure Milk Association of Cincinnati, Plum and Central Parkway, Cincinnati 2, Ohio. Dairy Cooperative Association, 1313 Southeast Twelfth Avenue, Portland 14, Oreg. Dairy Farmers Cooperative Association, Inc., Kentwood, La. Dairy Producers Cooperative, 703-713 South McDonough Street, Montgomery 5, Ala. Dairyland Cooperative Association, Juneau, Wis. Dairymen's Cooperative Sales Association, 451 Century Building, Pittsburgh 22, Pa. Dairymen's League Cooperative Association, Inc., 11 West Forty-second Street, New York 18, N. Y. Denver Milk Producers, Inc., 945 Eleventh Street, Denver 4, Colo. Des Moines Cooperative Dairy, 1935 Des Moines Street, Des Moines 16, Iowa. Dried Milk Products Cooperative, Eau Claire, Wis. Enid Cooperative Creamery Association, 402 West Walnut Street, Enid, Okla. Evansville Milk Producers' Association, Inc., 413 American Building, Evansville 8, Ind. Falls Cities Cooperative Milk Producers Association, 229 Bourbon Stock Yards Building, Louisville 6, Ky. Farmers Equity Union Creamery Co., 169 Grove Avenue, Lima, Ohio. Georgia Milk Producers Confederation, 661 Whitehall Street SW., Atlanta, Ga, Golden Guernsey Dairy Cooperative, 2206 North Thirtieth Street, Milwaukee 8, Wis. Guilford Dairy Cooperative Association, 1700 West Lee Street, Greensboro, N. C. Hi-Land Dairyman's Association, 700 Vine Street, Murray, Utah. Indiana Dairy Marketing Association, 401 Broadway, Muncie, Ind. Indianapolis Dairymen's Cooperative, Inc., 729 Lemcke Building, Indianapolis 4, Ind. Inland Empire Dairy Association, 1803 West Third Avenue, Spokane 2, Wash. Inter-State Milk Producers Cooperative, Inc., 401 North Broad Street, Philadelphia 8, Pa. Farmers Cooperative Creamery, Drawer No. 2, Keosauqua, Iowa. Knoxville Milk Producers Association, 508 Morgan Street, Knoxville 17, Tenn. Land O'Lakes Creameries, Inc., 2201 Kennedy Street NE., Minneapolis 13, Minn. Lehigh Valley Cooperative Farmers, 1026 North Seventh Street, Allentown, Pa. McDonald Cooperative Dairy Co., 617 Lewis Street, Flint 3, Mich. Prairie Farms Creamery of Bloomington, 103 North Robinson Street, Bloomington, Ill. Madison Milk Producers Cooperative Association, 29 Coyne Court, Madison 5, Wis. Manchester Dairy System, Inc., 226 Second Street, Manchester, N. H. Maryland and Virginia Milk Producers Association, Inc., 1756 K Street NW., Washington 6, D. C. Maryland Cooperative Milk Producers, Inc., 810 Fidelity Building, Baltimore 1, Md. Miami Home Milk Producers Association, 2451 Northwest Seventh Avenue, Miami, Fla. Miami Valley Cooperative Milk Producers' Association, Inc., 136-138 West Michigan Milk Producers Association, 406 Stephenson Building, Detroit 2, Mich. Milk Producers Federation of Cleveland, 1012 Webster Avenue, Cleveland 15, Nashville Milk Producers, Inc., 901 Second Avenue North, Nashville 3, Tenn. |