May 14, 1948
To the Congress of the United States:
I wish again to call the attention of the Congress to the need for agricultural legislation. This need arises in large part by reason of the approaching expiration date of some of our wartime statutes. Furthermore, there is need for continued improvement in our permanent legislation designed to maintain a sound and prosperous agriculture.
It is now nearly three years after the end of the fighting in the second world war. Most of the farmers of the United States are in an excellent economic position. Cash farm income last year reached a record high level of more than $30 billion. Farm mortgage debt has dropped 25 percent since 1941. The standard of living of most farmers, which rose steadily in the years before the war, has continued to improve.
This situation is in sharp contrast with what happened after World War I. Eighteen months after the end of fighting in that war farm prices had begun to fall; they dropped 50 percent within one year. Soon, farm mortgages were being foreclosed all over the country. The long, agonizing agricultural depression had already begun.
To a certain extent the strong position of American agriculture today is a result of high domestic demand and the very great need abroad for our agricultural products following this war. To a very large extent, however, our farmers can properly attribute their present prosperity to the sound and far-reaching agricultural legislation which was enacted in the years before the war. This legislation was necessarily modified to meet emergency conditions during the war, but it still constitutes a sound legislative base for continuing agricultural prosperity.
As we look ahead, it should not be our purpose to overturn this sound legislative base, in which our farmers have expressed their confidence time and time again, in order to start down some new path. Instead we should concentrate our attention on necessary extensions and improvements in the programs we already have.
The fundamental national policy underlying our agricultural legislation has been and should continue to be one of organized, sustained, realistic abundance. A policy of abundance includes some factors that lie outside the field of agriculture. The maintenance of high levels of employment and the maintenance of export outlets are prime essentials. At the same time, it should be recognized that continuing abundance is possible only if we maintain a strong agriculture-strong in physical resources and strong in human resources.
To carry out this policy, our various agricultural programs have been designed to achieve these principal objectives:
Sound and lasting economic well-being for our farm population, with parity of prices and income in relation to the rewards in other fields of human effort.
An agriculture that will supply all the kinds and quantities of agricultural products needed for domestic consumption, for sufficient carry-over stocks, and for export under present and rising standards of living.
Use of our basic agricultural resources, soil, water, and forests, in such manner as
will insure their permanent maximum
productivity.
Improved levels of nutrition and living for all our people.
Ever-increasing efficiency in production and distribution.
A better living for small farmers, tenant farmers, share croppers, and farm labor.
The nature of the steps we should take at this time in order to continue our progress toward these objectives is clear.
First, the Congress should enact legislation providing on a permanent basis for a system of flexible price supports for agricultural commodities.
A vital part of the legislation under which our present price support programs are carried on expires December 31, 1948. In my last two messages on the State of the Union I have urged that the Congress extend appropriate price support legislation.
The Congress has not yet acted, and today farmers do not know what levels of price support or what methods of support will apply to large portions of many crops already planted or to others which must soon be planted. Even less is known about the policy which will apply to next year's crops or to milk and other livestock products for which farmers must plan their output long in advance.
In recent years we have learned the value of price supports as a means to assure the maintenance of farm income in the face of uncertain market conditions, and to adjust production to current market needs without disastrous results to farm prices.
The present price support legislation was directed toward expanding farm production during the war. Its results were nothing less than remarkable. During World War II farm output was increased approximately one third, as compared with an increase of ten percent in World War I. Since hostilities ceased, output has continued at record levels, which has enabled the United States to give essential aid to the recovery of free nations in many parts of the world.
Now we must look ahead to a farm price support policy geared to our improved farm economy. Many shifts in production will have to be made, and flexible price supports will help us make them in an orderly manner. This will require authority to make prompt adjustments in support levels in line with current and prospective supply and demand conditions. It will also require flexibility in the choice of methods or programs that are designed to be most effective for individual commodities, that avoid waste, and that help bring about needed adjustments in production, distribution, and consumption.
Second, I urge that the Congress give full support to the continuance and expansion of our program of soil conservation.
For many years we were prodigal with our soil. In recent years we have made great progress on the slow process of rebuilding. But we are still far from our objective. Too much of our cropland now in use is being eroded. Much of our pasture and range-land is still being over-used. Our saw timber supply is being used half again as fast as it is being replaced. Our streams are muddy, and as a result the useful lifeterm of many of our dams and reservoirs is being shortened by unnecessary deposits of silt. We have not yet conquered the flood menace on most of our rivers.
On all these fronts we have a tremendous responsibility to do more than we are doing to conserve our soil, water and forest resources. The programs we have instituted in the past decade have represented great steps forward. But I must point out that our past efforts will be wasted if we fail to continue and intensify our programs now and in the future. I urge the Congress to provide in full the funds needed for these programs.
Third, I recommend that the Congress continue and strengthen programs to assure, adequate consumption of agricultural products.
Earlier Congresses have provided for an extensive research and marketing program designed to improve the distribution of farm products and develop new uses for them. This is a sound program, and should continue to be strongly supported.
Furthermore, the government has taken steps to encourage export markets for a number of important commodities. Such actions are being taken, as they should be, in cooperation with other countries. Primary examples of this policy are the various trade agreements which have been made under the terms of the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act and the International Wheat Agreement now before the Senate for ratification.
We must continue these measures to assure strong normal markets for agricultural commodities. At the same time the health of our people requires us to consider other methods to move products into consumption. Our present school lunch program is an example of such a program, which is providing better nutrition for millions of our school children. In addition, I believe that we should start now to develop a practical program to use agricultural surpluses to improve the diets of low-income families, and have it ready on a stand-by basis in case of need. We must never again allow our people to go hungry while agricultural surpluses are going to waste.
Fourth, we need to consider other means for assisting farmers to meet their special problems. For example, we must support and protect farm cooperatives. We must continue to work toward a sound system of crop insurance.
Furthermore, we should assist the improvement of living standards in rural areas. I have recommended measures to provide better health services to farmers and farm communities. I have recommended measures to improve the housing standards of farm families. I have recommended that the Government assist the States to furnish adequate primary and secondary education for all children--and this will have especially beneficial results in rural areas. Rural electrification should go forward as rapidly as feasible, to bring the benefits of electricity to more farms.
All of these measures will aid our farm families to maintain a standard of living befitting their essential position in our society. They will be of special importance to the millions of small farmers whose incomes are below a reasonable standard, even in this time of general agricultural prosperity.
All the measures I have recommended are essential for the future welfare of American agriculture. They should be enacted as promptly as possible.
It must be our firm purpose to maintain an increasingly healthy, productive and prosperous agriculture in the United States. This is a basic requirement for progressive advancement of the welfare and prosperity of our own Nation. It is also a vital element in our contribution to world recovery and peace.
HARRY S. TRUMAN
NOTE: For the President's statement upon signing the Agricultural Act of 1948, see Item 155.
To the Congress of the United States:
I wish again to call the attention of the Congress to the need for agricultural legislation. This need arises in large part by reason of the approaching expiration date of some of our wartime statutes. Furthermore, there is need for continued improvement in our permanent legislation designed to maintain a sound and prosperous agriculture.
It is now nearly three years after the end of the fighting in the second world war. Most of the farmers of the United States are in an excellent economic position. Cash farm income last year reached a record high level of more than $30 billion. Farm mortgage debt has dropped 25 percent since 1941. The standard of living of most farmers, which rose steadily in the years before the war, has continued to improve.
This situation is in sharp contrast with what happened after World War I. Eighteen months after the end of fighting in that war farm prices had begun to fall; they dropped 50 percent within one year. Soon, farm mortgages were being foreclosed all over the country. The long, agonizing agricultural depression had already begun.
To a certain extent the strong position of American agriculture today is a result of high domestic demand and the very great need abroad for our agricultural products following this war. To a very large extent, however, our farmers can properly attribute their present prosperity to the sound and far-reaching agricultural legislation which was enacted in the years before the war. This legislation was necessarily modified to meet emergency conditions during the war, but it still constitutes a sound legislative base for continuing agricultural prosperity.
As we look ahead, it should not be our purpose to overturn this sound legislative base, in which our farmers have expressed their confidence time and time again, in order to start down some new path. Instead we should concentrate our attention on necessary extensions and improvements in the programs we already have.
The fundamental national policy underlying our agricultural legislation has been and should continue to be one of organized, sustained, realistic abundance. A policy of abundance includes some factors that lie outside the field of agriculture. The maintenance of high levels of employment and the maintenance of export outlets are prime essentials. At the same time, it should be recognized that continuing abundance is possible only if we maintain a strong agriculture-strong in physical resources and strong in human resources.
To carry out this policy, our various agricultural programs have been designed to achieve these principal objectives:
Sound and lasting economic well-being for our farm population, with parity of prices and income in relation to the rewards in other fields of human effort.
An agriculture that will supply all the kinds and quantities of agricultural products needed for domestic consumption, for sufficient carry-over stocks, and for export under present and rising standards of living.
Use of our basic agricultural resources, soil, water, and forests, in such manner as
will insure their permanent maximum
productivity.
Improved levels of nutrition and living for all our people.
Ever-increasing efficiency in production and distribution.
A better living for small farmers, tenant farmers, share croppers, and farm labor.
The nature of the steps we should take at this time in order to continue our progress toward these objectives is clear.
First, the Congress should enact legislation providing on a permanent basis for a system of flexible price supports for agricultural commodities.
A vital part of the legislation under which our present price support programs are carried on expires December 31, 1948. In my last two messages on the State of the Union I have urged that the Congress extend appropriate price support legislation.
The Congress has not yet acted, and today farmers do not know what levels of price support or what methods of support will apply to large portions of many crops already planted or to others which must soon be planted. Even less is known about the policy which will apply to next year's crops or to milk and other livestock products for which farmers must plan their output long in advance.
In recent years we have learned the value of price supports as a means to assure the maintenance of farm income in the face of uncertain market conditions, and to adjust production to current market needs without disastrous results to farm prices.
The present price support legislation was directed toward expanding farm production during the war. Its results were nothing less than remarkable. During World War II farm output was increased approximately one third, as compared with an increase of ten percent in World War I. Since hostilities ceased, output has continued at record levels, which has enabled the United States to give essential aid to the recovery of free nations in many parts of the world.
Now we must look ahead to a farm price support policy geared to our improved farm economy. Many shifts in production will have to be made, and flexible price supports will help us make them in an orderly manner. This will require authority to make prompt adjustments in support levels in line with current and prospective supply and demand conditions. It will also require flexibility in the choice of methods or programs that are designed to be most effective for individual commodities, that avoid waste, and that help bring about needed adjustments in production, distribution, and consumption.
Second, I urge that the Congress give full support to the continuance and expansion of our program of soil conservation.
For many years we were prodigal with our soil. In recent years we have made great progress on the slow process of rebuilding. But we are still far from our objective. Too much of our cropland now in use is being eroded. Much of our pasture and range-land is still being over-used. Our saw timber supply is being used half again as fast as it is being replaced. Our streams are muddy, and as a result the useful lifeterm of many of our dams and reservoirs is being shortened by unnecessary deposits of silt. We have not yet conquered the flood menace on most of our rivers.
On all these fronts we have a tremendous responsibility to do more than we are doing to conserve our soil, water and forest resources. The programs we have instituted in the past decade have represented great steps forward. But I must point out that our past efforts will be wasted if we fail to continue and intensify our programs now and in the future. I urge the Congress to provide in full the funds needed for these programs.
Third, I recommend that the Congress continue and strengthen programs to assure, adequate consumption of agricultural products.
Earlier Congresses have provided for an extensive research and marketing program designed to improve the distribution of farm products and develop new uses for them. This is a sound program, and should continue to be strongly supported.
Furthermore, the government has taken steps to encourage export markets for a number of important commodities. Such actions are being taken, as they should be, in cooperation with other countries. Primary examples of this policy are the various trade agreements which have been made under the terms of the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act and the International Wheat Agreement now before the Senate for ratification.
We must continue these measures to assure strong normal markets for agricultural commodities. At the same time the health of our people requires us to consider other methods to move products into consumption. Our present school lunch program is an example of such a program, which is providing better nutrition for millions of our school children. In addition, I believe that we should start now to develop a practical program to use agricultural surpluses to improve the diets of low-income families, and have it ready on a stand-by basis in case of need. We must never again allow our people to go hungry while agricultural surpluses are going to waste.
Fourth, we need to consider other means for assisting farmers to meet their special problems. For example, we must support and protect farm cooperatives. We must continue to work toward a sound system of crop insurance.
Furthermore, we should assist the improvement of living standards in rural areas. I have recommended measures to provide better health services to farmers and farm communities. I have recommended measures to improve the housing standards of farm families. I have recommended that the Government assist the States to furnish adequate primary and secondary education for all children--and this will have especially beneficial results in rural areas. Rural electrification should go forward as rapidly as feasible, to bring the benefits of electricity to more farms.
All of these measures will aid our farm families to maintain a standard of living befitting their essential position in our society. They will be of special importance to the millions of small farmers whose incomes are below a reasonable standard, even in this time of general agricultural prosperity.
All the measures I have recommended are essential for the future welfare of American agriculture. They should be enacted as promptly as possible.
It must be our firm purpose to maintain an increasingly healthy, productive and prosperous agriculture in the United States. This is a basic requirement for progressive advancement of the welfare and prosperity of our own Nation. It is also a vital element in our contribution to world recovery and peace.
HARRY S. TRUMAN
NOTE: For the President's statement upon signing the Agricultural Act of 1948, see Item 155.