STATEMENT OF HON. WILBUR D. MILLS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

Mr. MILLS. I appreciate this opportunity of appearing before the committee in behalf of the situation in our State, which is so similar to that described by Mr. Albert as prevailing in the State of Oklahoma. We have had this year a situation that is beyond any recollection I have of anything in the past unless it might be compared somewhat to the flooding that occurred in certain sections of my district in the year 1923 in the middle of August when many of our acres that were planted to cotton and other crops were completely inundated and the farmers lost the entire crop that year. In the meantime, I recall no situation where the farmers have been faced with such a complete loss of farming opportunity as appears to be the situation this year.

You have heard Mr. Albert describe the excessive rain and flooding that has occurred, not only in the State of Oklahoma, but in the States of Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, parts of Missouri, and parts of Kansas, I am informed.

This does constitute a disaster. The President, through the Department of Agriculture, has already declared a number of counties in these States to be disaster counties for purposes of the disaster loan. That has been alluded to also by Mr. Albert. It is one facet of possible relief for the people involved in this circumstance.

However, I want to emphasize the need that exists for some means of implementation of income during the course of this year, not only just the availability of loans but some other additional opportunity for cash income. These people will not have an opportunity within our State of seeking employment outside and off the farm. We do not have an excess situation so far as employment is concerned. There is nothing they can turn to. The jobs available are taken. Many of our people, I understand, are already in the process of trying to find employment in other States. Whether they succeed, I do not know. We naturally do not want them to have to give up their connection with the farm. We would like for them to be able to tide over through this circumstance in order to get a fresh start next year. Mr. Gathings referred to the fact that he and I introduced identical bills. We introduced them on June 10 of this year, H. R. 8031 by Mr. Gathings, and H. R. 8033, the bill of my own. These bills are in somewhat the same vein as Mr. Albert's bill. We are proposing to give farmers until July 15, 1957, to enter applications in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture for additional acreage in the soil bank. One of the conditions we would impose would be that whatever crops may have been planted, if any have survived the rain or the flooding, be completely destroyed so there would be no possibility of any of the land thus included in the soil bank being used for the production of any crop whatsoever.

I have had a number of statements, I do not want to burden the record, but in the 13 counties that comprise the district I represent there are about 8 counties in this circumstance. I have had letters from the members of the ASC Committee, county agents, county judges, other officials, farmers, from practically all the various sections of these eight counties, alluding to the great damage that occurred, urging that we do something to enable these people to have some opportunity of lasting out this year in the hope that next year their courage will permit them to make a new start.

We have been for about 6 years in rather serious circumstances in many of these States we are talking about. Drought for a long period of time with a little letup that enabled us to perhaps make 1 or 2 normal crops and then on top of that prolonged drought condition comes this excessive rain and flooding. Farmers have stretched their credit and they are not in a position to survive merely on the basis of the extension of additional credit. They must have some additional

cash.

We seized upon this because last year the soil bank was opened, as we were told by the people within the Department of Agriculture, to take care of emergency drought conditions. We sought the same relief this time through the Department of Agriculture because of the reverse, the excessive rain and flooding that had occurred. We were told that the Secretary would not take this action on his own volition, and we then introduced legislation to require him to do it.

We know it is not the purpose, within the Department of Agriculture, to use the soil bank as a disaster program or to use it as an insurance program. They have so stated to me that they do not like it for those two purposes. That is the reason they would not take this

action of their own accord.

We think the situation is so serious that the Congress should take this action of opening the soil bank in accordance with the program now in existance or, as Mr. Albert suggests, some program of a disaster-type program similar to the soil bank so that some of this acreage that certainly will not be in production can be put in the soil bank and some payments made to these farmers in lieu of the cash they would have derived in a normal year from the allotted acres in the support programs they could have received, that they could have planted, that they could have earned.

I have taken more time than I had intended of the committee. 1 hope in view of the seriousness of the situation that the committee may see fit to report some legislation that will attain the objective. we are seeking here this morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. POAGE. You have two bills; do you not?

Mr. MILLS. The other bill I would not call up this morning. That is H. R. 8032. The time has passed in my opinion for even the planting of rice. We thought we could have a chance of making a rice crop if we could plant rice up to the 20th of June.

I was suggesting there that we give for rice allotment the acreage that had already been given to a farmer for cotton because cotton normally has to be planted in our State by the 5th of June to have any prospect of making anything like a normal crop.

Mr. POAGE. Your bill and Mr. Gathings' bills, the Oklahoma bills and the rest, all contemplate a reduction in production just as truly as any of the land that has been signed up for the soil bank under the program?

Mr. MILLS. Yes; this is just as effective a curtailment of production as if the land had been put in the soil bank initially.

I might say a great number of farmers in my district did put land in the soil bank, and you will recall when the program was before the House not long ago, I did not vote as some did to discontinue the soil bank because I did not think it was psychologically the thing to do until we had a substitute for the program. I would not argue with it. I would like to remind my friends from the Midwest that when they

had on the floor of the House some weeks ago their program providing for emergency treatment of corn, that I supported that program along with them because they told me and I took them at their word that there was a real emergency that required some immediate attention to the corn situation.

I appeal to you on the basis that we do have such an emergency at the present time in these States. I would like for them to give us the consideration with respect to this emergency that I was trying to give to them with respect to their emergency situation.

Mr. POAGE. You are not asking for any payments to be made to anyone who produces a crop?

Mr. MILLS. Not at all.

Mr. POAGE. You are asking only that the man who has suffered a catastrophe may receive the same kind of payments that the man does who did not suffer the catastrophe if he does not produce a crop; is that right?

Mr. MILLS. That is right. I want these individuals to have some specific time within which they can make additional applications to put acres in the soil bank for the same treatment they would have received with respect to those acres had they put them in within the time limit already fixed by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Mr. POAGE. The Nation gets the same reduction, for which presumably we are paying, in reduced production of these commodities. Mr. MILLS. Our trouble is this, Mr. Chairman: That nature has taken care of the very thing that the soil bank was intended to take care of; namely, the retirement of these acres from production.

Mr. POAGE. But nature did not pay the farmer to take it out and you are asking that that fellow receive the same kind of payment that the other man received; is that right?

Mr. MILLS. We have not found a way to get nature to pay for these damages.

Mr. ANDRESEN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. POAGE. Yes.

Mr. ANDRESEN. Congress could not legislate to stop the floods.

Mr. MILLS. No, sir. I have been asked many times for support of some action to stop floods or control rains, but I have had to plead that Congress could not do those things. I do not know whether my constituency has always believed me. They sometimes think we can do more than we can.

Mr. ANDRESEN. I appreciate what the gentleman said about supporting the emergency corn program and also the continuation of the soil bank.

Have you made an estimate as to the cost of increasing the acreagereserve payments, that is what your bill refers to, if we adopt your bill for the 5 or 6 States in the South?

Mr. MILLS. I have no way to make an estimate on which I could ask you to rely.

Mr. ANDRESEN. There would be substantial need for increased appropriation for that purpose?

Mr. MILLS. I do not know whether or not an additional appropriation would be required because I do not know just how much is left for this year of the funds that have heretofore been made available, but there would be an additional expenditure certainly.

Mr. ANDRESEN. In view of the action in the House not so long ago wanting to discontinue the acreage reserve, you speak for the majority on money matters and tax matters, and what do you think the prospects are to get increased appropriations?

Mr. MILLS. I have never known the House to be niggardly with respect to emergency situations involving the expenditure of funds. It is necessary now for us to provide some $25 million additional money as a result of emergency situations that have come about and the Appropriations Committee never seems to hesitate where there is a real emergency in making additional funds available.

Mr. POAGE. Would the gentleman yield for this observation? I call attention to the fact that I think the House has been very niggardly on exactly that sort of thing right now. This Congress passed an authorization to carry out a deferred grazing program, but the House Appropriations Committee has refused to give us money to implement that program, although we need it now that the drought is broken more than we ever did.

Mr. MILLS. I had overlooked the situation.

Mr. ANDRESEN. Do you not suppose there might be some other direct measures that could be taken to provide the relief that is necessary rather than tying it in with the soil-bank bill?

Mr. MILLS. If there is any other way to do it, I would not object to it. I have been unable to conceive of any other way of giving them some additional income in accordance with some existing program or on the basis of their compliance with some existing program.

The only possibility that we are offered in talking this matter over with officials of the Department of Agriculture is additional credit. That, of course, will serve a purpose, but it will not serve the entire need that exists in these areas. People do not borrow themselves into a prosperous condition, we know that. They will need some cash income for the remainder of this year. That is the seriousness of this situation which prevails.

Mr. ANDRESEN. We are about to pass a foreign-aid bill. That is a direct method to assist people in other countries.

Mr. MILLS. Unfortunately, our folks cannot participate in that, as you know, and it is not subject to amendment to where we could consider them as foreigners for that purpose.

Mr. ANDRESEN. It takes in a good many countries in the world who would be recipients of foreign aid that Congress will probably

pass.

Mr. MILLS. Your point is if we could do it for people in other countries, we should be able to do it for our own people. I would agree with you if that is your thought.

Mr. ANDRESEN. Thank you.

Mr. POAGE. Are there any further questions?

Mr. MCINTIRE. I want to express appreciation for your giving us this report. It seems to me the problem comes primarily from the fact that when such disasters occur, we have a little machinery which can move in the way of giving assistance to people in dire need such as the Red Cross and some Government agencies, but when damage is done to farms there is only the means of extending some credit and not quite the same tools that there are for municipalities for supplying direct relief.

While this emergency is upon you folks, however, does it not point up the fact that there have been other emergencies, too, and that

nothing could be done in this field? I am thinking in terms of the floods and tornadoes which have hit the New England area, and nothing was done in assisting agriculture in those areas at all. By the same token, even the same machinery is not available to render immediate assistance here. I also would like to ask this. Reference

has been made by Mr. Albert and by you to the producers of the basic commodities. Are there not other people involved in this except producers of basic commodities or is that all that are concerned here?

Mr. MILLS. In the flooded areas, and in these areas of excessive rainfall, those who suffer the most are the ones who would, but who cannot, plant crops. Excessive rainfall, or flooding, may well affect a pasture or it may interefere or impede the production of milk to a certain extent, but in my own area that production is not within the areas, sufficiently at least within the areas that I am describing, to present a real problem.

Most of our problem is with respect to the individual farmers who would plant some crop that is under a supported program such as cotton or rice in my own section.

Mr. McINTIRE. It seems to me that in making the decision while the emergency is in your area, we should realize it has occurred in other areas before and will occur in other areas again. Our problem. therefore, relates to moving into this field not so much to meet the situation in the immediate area you folks are interested in, although I appreciate that is your problem now, but to cope with this kind of a situation from here on out, no matter where it occurs.

Mr. MILLS. You are correct. It would be well if we could have a long-range permanent program that would apply in all areas under circumstances such as exist in this area.

We are referring this morning in our testimony, however, to an immediate emergency situation, seeking relief of it on the basis of its being an emergency and only with respect to what exists this year. We are not undertaking to suggest that this is the answer in the future to a similar situation arising.

We are merely confining our suggestion to what exists now and for this year.

Mr. McINTIRE. Thank you.

Mr. HARRISON. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. POAGE. Mr. Harrison.

Mr. HARRISON. As I see the application of this legislation, would there be any way we could apply the surpluses we have at the present time as a relief measure to take care of those people who are in the flooded area? As I think it through, it does not apply so well for cotton as it does for wheat or corn or some other feed grains.

Mr. MILLS. We do have surpluses of the commodities, Mr. Harrison, that these acres would have been planted to had it not been for the excessive rain and flood. I had not thought in terms of the Government giving to a cotton farmer who could not plant his allotment the equivalent number of bales that he would have produced had he had a normal year or any percentage of a normal year. I had not thought in terms of doing that. That would give them, however, if it were pursued and enacted, income and to that extent it would take care of the situation that I am calling to the committee's attention, namely, the need for income by these farmers this year.

Mr. HARRISON. In the case of feed grains, too, many of them raise feed grains for the purposes of feeding livestock. If they could get