Whereas we reaffirmed our position that the beef producers are directly concerned with the promotion of beef to bring about an increased consumer demand for beef through an augmented and enlarged producer program of education, research, merchandising, and promotion; and

Whereas the primary obstacle to financing an effective beef-promotion program is the restricting provisions of the Packers and Stockyards Act with respect to voluntary deductions from proceeds of sale of livestock at the public markets: Therefore be it

Resolved, That we support proposed legislation amending the Packers and Stockyards Act whereby any marketing agency may, upon request of a responsible State livestock producer organization, make voluntary deductions, not exceeding 10 cents per head on cattle, payable to the aforesaid livestock producers organization.

I just wanted to bring that in, because we in the American National have felt that something could be done if we would all get in and help ourselves.

Congressman Poage, at the time that we decided to do this and wanted this, your friend and my friend, Mr. Taylor was president of the American National Cattlemen's Association.

I might give just a few figures here for Congressman Hill's benefit. On the 16th of January this year, Mr. Hill, the Colorado Cattlemen's Association took a vote of their membership as to whether they would like to have some kind of a checkoff system, and I just got the figures here from the past president of the Colorado Cattlemen's Association.

In this vote there were 1,713 people that wanted this checkoff, there were 17 against it, and there were 280 that failed to vote on it. But it was nearly 10 to 1 for it in the State of Colorado. Mr. POAGE. You mean, 100 to 1?

Mr. COLLINS. One hundred to one, yes, that favored the checkoff system national, or on a State or national basis.

I am here to testify for the association that I represent. I traveled. in 20 States the last year and 3 months, and nearly every State that I have appeared in, they are extremely interested in some kind of a self-help promotion to help ourselves. We are not back here asking for any money. It is a deal that we think if we are given the opportunity to do it, that we can do it. And that is about all I have to say. It seems very simple. It is permissive legislation. And we feel like that if we are given this opportunity that we can go ahead and promote our product which we think is one of the best products in the world.

Thank you very kindly.

Mr. POAGE. We are very happy to have had you here.

Mr. COOLEY. Do you have a program to promote beef consumption? Have you already worked out the details of the program?

Mr. COLLINS. We have a National Beef Council now, Mr. Cooley. Mr. COOLEY. To whom would you turn this money over to? Who would be responsible for it? I understand we propose to leave that to some agency, to the Administrator of the Packers and Stockyards Act, to determine whether or not it is a responsible organization.

Mr. COLLINS. At the present time we have 18 State beef councils. And naturally I believe if this legislation is passed, I feel that every State would go ahead and organize a State beef council or a State meat council.

This pertains to cattle, hogs, and sheep.

Mr. COOLEY. The determination as to who is the responsible agency would have to be left to somebody.

Mr. COLLINS. Our original bill wanted the Department of Agriculture to approve. They didn't particular want to do it. They didn't want the responsibility.

Mr. COOLEY. What provision in the act is there that prevents you from using the checkoff, do you know?

Mr. COLLINS. I really do not know. I understand they are doing some checking off through the National Livestock and Meat Board.

Mr. POAGE. May I explain to the chairman the Packers and Stockyards Act was drawn back some 35 years ago to protect those who sell in the markets. And it provided that the agencies in the stockyards-neither the yards nor the packers or buyers could make check

offs.

They could not, except for the actual marketing expense. That is the way the law reads.

For that reason, the livestock people cannot make the same kind of deduction as the cotton and dairy people do make, and a great many other groups do make, where there is no law to the contrary.

The law was put there to protect those who slip into the market from having unreasonable or unfair deductions being made.

But it covers everything except the actual expenses of the marketing, the commission, and the feeding of the stock while in the market. Were it not for the provisions of the Packers and Stockyards Act, I do not think there is any reason that these people would be here at all, because they could do exactly what the National Cotton Council or the American Dairy Association has done.

Mr. COOLEY. What you are proposing is a voluntary checkoff?
Mr. POAGE. That is right.

Mr. COLLINS. That is right.

Mr. COOLEY. If a farmer objected to it he would not have to pay it? Mr. COLLINS. He could get it off. They would take it off, if he objected, they would return it.

Mr. COOLEY. I am in accord with the idea because we have exactly the same thing in the tobacco section. We finance it by voluntary checkoff at the warehouse, 10 cents an acre. If the farmer objects and asks for it to be returned, it is returned.

I do not think anybody has ever asked for it to be returned.

Thank you. That is all.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you.

Mr. JOHNSON. This referendum held in Colorado, was that limited just to the members of the association or was it all of the people that produce cattle?

Mr. COLLINS. It was members of the association.

Mr. JOHNSON. That is all. Thank you.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you, Mr. Collins. I am now going to ask Mr. Howard Wyman of Aurora, Ill., of the National Lamb Feeders Association to speak.

STATEMENT OF HOWARD WYMAN, AURORA, ILL., NATIONAL LAMB FEEDERS ASSOCIATION

Mr. WYMAN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Howard Wyman, of Aurora, Ill., representing the National Lamb Feeders Association.

For several years the lamb feeders of this Nation have realized the need for a unified action by the members of the sheep industry to do something about the problem they have in marketing lamb and wool. Attempts have been made by local and regional or State associations to help themselves with voluntary checkoffs. These have met with varying degrees of success but all have inspired the members to think of their problems as being industrywide-not just as it affects sheep but cattle and swine as well.

They have seen what a little of their own efforts can do to promote a broader use of lamb and wool when their local and State organizations conducted promotion work.

They have now seen what an industrywide promotional program can do as evidence by the work being done on their behalf by the American Sheep Producers Council, an organization of members from their own producers organizations using funds they approved by national referendum to be withheld from their wool incentive payment checks, payment of which was provided for a period of 4 years ending March 31, 1959, by the National Wool Act of 1954.

We like our present program but we feel legislation should be forthcoming now to enable us as an industry to continue the work we have started should the provisions of section 708 of the National Wool Act of 1954 not be extended.

Other agricultural products, to the best of my knowledge and belief, do not have governmental restrictions regarding voluntary checkoffs at their various marketing agencies.

Therefore, we of the sheep industry feel that we and the swine and cattle producers have been unintentionally discriminated against in the marketing of our agricultural products by a technicality in the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921.

It is for these reasons we favor the intent of the amendments to this act.

Also I would like to go on record that none of the lamb feeders' organizations, so far as I know, have any desire whatever to restrict the work of the National Livestock and Meat Board. We support them wholeheartedly.

Mr. POAGE. Thank you very much, Mr. Wyman.

Now, if there are no questions of Mr. Wyman, I want to call Mr. Colton from Vernal, Utah. I had understood he only wanted to file a statement, but I now understand he wants to make a statement.

We will be glad to have him do so.

STATEMENT OF HUGH W. COLTON, RANCHER, VERNAL, UTAH, VICE PRESIDENT, UTAH CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION

Mr. COLTON. Mr. Chairman, I just want to inform your committee that I represent an organization of about 4,000 cattlemen out in the State of Utah.

We have been trying to do something to help ourselves for the past several years. And we are very strongly in favor of this checkoff

program.

We had our State legislature to pass a similar law in Utah this year. We are very much concerned about the situation in which we find ourselves in the cattle business.

I did want to make this oral statement to you gentleman at this time. Mr. POAGE. Thank you.

We will now call Mr. Don Magdanz.

Mrs. DOWNEY (the clerk). Mr. Magdanz asked that this be inserted in the record.

Mr. POAGE. Without objection, that will be done. (The statement is as follows:)

STATEMENT OF DON F. MAGDANZ, TREASURER OF CORN BELT LIVESTOCK FEEDERS ASSOCIATION, OMAHA, NEBR.

I am Don F. Magdanz, of Omaha, Nebr., executive secretary-treasurer of the Corn Belt Livestock Feeders Association. In addition to this responsibility, I am also actually engaged in the feeding of livestock-cattle, hogs, and sheep-in eastern Nebraska; was raised on a farm, and spent most of my adult life in its operation.

The Corn Belt Livestock Feeders Association has repeatedly voted in favor of, and has been diligently working toward, the inauguration and establishment of a producer-sponsored-and-controlled program for the promotion of the demand for meat and meat products.

The organization envelops the entire Corn Belt region in the United States, an area that is noted for the production of high quality fed beef, pork, and lamb, and an area that annually feeds for market about 70 percent of the cattle that are fed in the United States, and produces about 70 percent of the hogs, besides marketing large quantities of lamb and veal.

I have been instructed by my association, members of which are men actually engaged in the feeding of livestock, to testify in behalf of this proposed legislation and to present the policy of the organization.

Our members feel that the decision of their organization is particularly noteworthy; first, because the Corn Belt livestock feeders will contribute a high percentage of the total funds that will be raised under the proposed promotion program; and second, because every one of its affiliated State and regional associations have endorsed the program and all are in accord with the action taken by the parent organization, the Corn Belt Livestock Feeders Association. At our most recent annual convention, held in Peoria, Ill., on February 7 and 8, the association unanimously declared that it believed the quality and nutritive value of red meat should be promoted and advertised, and since a satisfactory method of financing may not be permissible under the present Packers and Stockyards Act, while producers of other foods, not affected by the Packers and Stockyards Act, are able to finance a promotion program as they choose.

That the association make a determined effort to overcome obstacles to a voluntary deduction program at time of sale on all livestock, and encourage an amendment to the Packers and Stockyards Act, which would do no more than permit the deduction of 10 cents per head on cattle, 5 cents per head on hogs, and 5 cents per head on sheep and lambs on a voluntary basis with respect to both shippers and market agencies.

This action is another clear and forceful affirmation of the sincere desire of livestock feeders to be free and unhampered in the conduct of their own business without the interference or assistance of any governmental agencies.

The presence of this group of men here today, coming from most of the livestock-producing States in the Union, and representing every phase and specie of

the livestock producing and feeding industry is conclusive evidence of the profound interest of livestock people in this voluntary program of meat promotion. Mr. POAGE. We will now hear from our colleague, Mr. Metcalf, from the State of Montana.

STATEMENT OF HON. LEE METCALF, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA

Mr. METCALF. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to speak for the cattlemen of Montana in support of H. R. 3749.

I am sure you are well aware of the economic plight of our cattlemen-and of their efforts to help themselves. One such effort is an attempt to set up a nationwide program to stimulate and maintain. the consumption of beef.

The major obstacle to such a producer effort has been money. Regulatory statutes applying to many livestock markets have been construed as prohibiting the collection by marketing agencies of voluntary contributions to finance this program.

H. R. 3749 would amend the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921 to permit marketing agencies to deduct from the proceeds from the sale of livestock on a posted market a reasonable sum to carry on this program. The deduction would not exceed 10 cents per head for cattle or calves, and would not be more than 5 cents per head for sheep, lambs, or swine. It would be collected only when the marketing agency was requested to do so by an organization sponsored by the producers of the species of livestock sold.

Such a voluntary program has been in successful operation in Montana for more than 2 years. It should be extended. To me, this is in exactly the same category as the checkoff of union dues-and there should be no interference with the desires of the people affected. My file on this legislation includes support from the Montana Stockgrowers Association and the Montana Farm Bureau Federation.

I have a letter from Mr. C. T. Sanders, secretary-manager of the American National Livestock Auction Association, Broadway at 34th, Kansas City, Mo., which says in part as follows:

The cattle industry needs congressional clarification of this situation that is presently preventing its National Beef Council, and member State beef councils, from effectively carrying out their program to help their member cattle producers.

I also have a telegram from Mr. Bruce Mecklenburg, Montana representative of the National Lamb Feeders Association, Bozeman, Mont., which says:

Representative LEE METCALF,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

BOZEMAN, MONT., April 3, 1957.

On behalf of the Lamb Feeders and Wool Growers in Montana I am soliciting your support of the passage of a bill to amend Packers and Stockyard Act of 1921 to permit deduction for a self-help meat production program.

BRUCE MECKLENBURC,

Montana representative of the National Lamb Feeders Association. Mr. POAGE. Thank you, Mr. Metcalf. We will be glad to hear Mr. Munyon.

Mr. FULK. With your permission, we would like to wait a minute on Mr. Munyon. In checking over the list we find some had to leave. I see Forest Noel is here. Could we have him now? Mr. POAGE. We will be glad to hear from him.

91840-57- -5