Agriculture: Farm Progress, February-August, 1970

The Farmers Union is a national organization of farmers dedicated to promoting economic and social justice. The Policy Statement is a guide for the organization's officers and representatives in dealing with legislation and government agencies. The Farmers Union also has a Washington office to provide assistance to members of Congress and other citizen groups.

The letter writer expresses their support for the new farm bill and its provision allowing farmers to graze cattle on diverted acres. They express hope that the Congressman will use his influence to keep this provision in the bill.

The Agricultural Act of 1970 was passed by the House of Representatives, and is now pending in the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. The Grange did not support the bill, as it would lower farm income and widen the gap between the price farmers receive and the cost of their inputs. The Senate Committee is scheduled to meet soon to take up the bill, but it is not expected to vote on it before the Senate adjourns in September. There is strong support in the Committee for the Food and Agriculture Act of 1965, on a continuing basis, with a $55,000 limitation.

The House Agriculture Committee voted on new farm legislation on July 21, 1970. The bill would become effective on the expiration of the existing Food and Agriculture Act of 1965, December 31, 1970. The bill was a bipartisan effort between Chairman Poage (D-Tex.) and the Ranking Minority Member Page Belcher (R-Okla.), but it does not embrace all of the objectives of the National Farm Coalition. The vote on substituting the new bill for the old one failed 21-13.

The writer is urging Congress to pass a farm program similar to the one currently in effect. Without such a program, many farmers will be forced to quit and seek jobs in cities, which would lead to large corporations controlling the farm market and raising food prices for consumers.

Elberg Sullivan, Chairman of the Oklahoma Division of Associated Milk Producers, Inc., writes to Congressman John Camp to express his gratitude for Camp's support of the recent Farm Bill. Sullivan notes that agriculture is facing many challenges in keeping up with the economy, and that Camp's support is essential in helping the sector survive.

The text discusses the possibility of changing the legislation for the Agriculture Conservation Program so that projects can be completed over a three-year period instead of just one year. This would be beneficial for farmers and communities in terms of solid waste disposal.

In his letter to Senator Bellmon, Carl G. Eling expresses his concern about the future of the Farm Program, and asks for information on pending legislation. He argues that agriculture is not the source of inflation, but the victim of it.

The author of the text is a farmer who is urging Representative Camp to support a good farm bill. The author argues that the current bill being proposed is not adequate and that it would be better to extend the current bill for another five years. The author also argues that prices for farm products have not increased significantly in the last 20 years, while production costs have more than doubled.

The writer expresses their appreciation for Representative Happy Camp's efforts to help farmers, and mentions their hope that he might be able to arrange a meeting between President Nixon and farmers in Oklahoma. They express their hope that the President will take action to help farmers with issues like higher prices for their products and lower interest rates.

The text discusses the possibility of advance payments for farmers being made available as soon as July 1st, and notes that this would be two months earlier than in previous years. It also mentions that there are a number of bills in the House Agriculture Committee which provide specifically for advance payments, and that the congressman will keep the farmers' comments in mind if and when any of these bills come up for debate and vote.

Constituent correspondence from John Happy Camp to a constituent, in which the congressman assures the constituent that he will keep her comments in mind when voting on legislation affecting farm program payments. The letter also mentions that the House Agriculture Committee is currently redrafting proposed legislation on the farm program, and that provisions have been made for advance payments to farmers for the wheat, feed, grain and cotton programs.

John Ogden writes to John Happy Camp to thank him for his recent letter regarding the advance payments on the farm program. He notes that the Department of Agriculture has advised that the full payment will be made as soon as possible after July 1, which is earlier than in previous years. Ogden also mentions that the House Agriculture Committee is currently redrafting proposed legislation on the farm program, and that provisions have been made for advance payments to farmers for the wheat, feed, grain, and cotton programs. However, he notes that it is not yet clear what the final form of the legislation will be.

Constituent correspondence from a constituent to their congressman, urging them to vote against a proposed farm bill. The constituent argues that the bill's payment limitations will harm farmers, and that the land retirement program is not satisfactory. They express hope that one day farmers will be free of government controls.

The Hobart Chamber of Commerce today endorsed passage of HR 18546, as reported out by the House Agriculture Committee, with a $55,000.00 limit per commodity, per farmer. The Board of Directors of the Hobart Chamber of Commerce believes that this bill will be beneficial to the people of this predominantly agriculture community.

The attached statement provides general information on the objectives of the proposed Agricultural Act of 1970, and explains why it is important to both rural and urban America. The Act is designed to meet the needs of farmers, consumers, and taxpayers, and to prevent an upward spiral in farm program costs. It will also keep farm program costs at acceptable levels and provide a reasonable ceiling on payments to individual producers.

The text contains a telegram from Emil L. Griesel, President of the Oklahoma Sheep and Wool Producers, to Happy Camp, a member of the US House of Representatives. In the telegram, Griesel urges Camp to support the Farm Bill (H.R. 18546), which includes the Wool Act, when it comes up for a vote.

The Oklahoma Farm Bureau is urging Congress to vote against the version of the farm bill that is scheduled to come up for a vote tomorrow. They believe that the bill as it is currently written would be bad for farmers in the long term, and would depress farm prices. They believe that the government should not be penalizing farmers for cooperating with its regulations.

The text contains a proposed amendment to the Agriculture Act of 1970 which would prohibit subsidy payments to anyone who does not comply with the minimum wage and maximum hours provisions of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, and certify that they are in compliance with all applicable employee health and safety laws. The amendment is carefully limited, and would only affect a small percentage of producers.

The text discusses the need for wheat legislation and the fact that the House Committee on Agriculture has approved the Wheat Research and Promotion Act. It also mentions that the Omnibus Farm Bill has been approved and that John Happy Camp is a member of the committee.