BAKERSFIELD, CALIF., March 31, 1966. Hon. SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, DEAR SENATOR HOLLAND: I understand the bill, H.R. 12322, to provide for research and promotion funds on cotton has been referred to your subcommittee for consideration. On behalf of our more than 4,000 members from which we market in excess of 800,000 bales of cotton annually, I want to offer whatever assistance we can in presenting the need for additional funds that would be generated under H.R. 12322 so that we may continue to keep cotton a major agricultural commodity in the South and West. Our member growers, during the past 4 years, have voluntarily contributed in excess of $600,000 annually to support the Cotton Producers Institute which is engaged solely in research and promotion of raw cotton. Because of the difficulty of bringing the message of cotton directly to the growers throughout the United States, we have been unable to reach a voluntary contribution sufficient to carry on the urgently needed research and promotion. Your fine address to the delegates and members of the National Cotton Council in Jacksonville this year certainly was heartening to all of us, and we hope that we can continue to merit your confidence and support in our endeavor to raise additional funds which are sorely needed. I shall be glad to appear personally at the hearings or submit testimony if it can be of any benefit in the hearings in your committee and later in the full Senate Committee on Agriculture. Sincerely yours, J. RUSSELL KENNEDY, Executive Vice President, Calcot, Ltd. HANFORD, CALIF., April 22, 1966. Senator SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, Washington, D.C.: The California Cooperative Cotton Gins Association representing the cottongrower gins in California heartily endorse the research and promotion bill (H.R. 12322), as it passed the House of Representatives. We are glad the bill was referred to your subcommittee because of your interest and leadership in getting similar legislation passed on other agricultural products. It is imperative that this legislation be passed in time to apply on this year's cotton crop, as cotton's research and promotion needs were never more critical. Our association would very much appreciate your making our endorsement a part of the record of your hearings next week. KEN BUNDY, President, California Cooperative Cotton Gins Association. SACRAMENTO, CALIF., April 20, 1966 Senator SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, Washington, D.C.: California State Grange urges favorable consideration of cotton research and promotion legislation under terms of H.R. 12322 as it will implement self-help with producer-financed funds and point the way for individual effort in promoting a wider use of cotton products. This will benefit every segment of national economy. Request this wire as well as our letter of April 6 be placed in the records of your committee. J. B. QUINN, Master, California State Grange. SACRAMENTO, CALIF., April 6, 1966. Hon. SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, U.S. Senate, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR HOLLAND: As a member of the subcommittee considering H.R. 12322, we urge you to give it favorable attention. The California State Grange, at its 1965 annual session, adopted a resolution favoring the passage of congressional legislation that will submit to the cotton producers of the United States the proposition of $1 per bale production to be used solely for research and promotion of wider use of cotton products. We believe this a big step forward in self-help and if approved by the necessary volume of producers it will be the means of a renewed interest in this vital link of our agricultural and industrial economy. We believe one of the most effective ways of increasing the economic betterment of cotton producers is its wider use then maybe instead of restricting acreage we can look for increased plantings. Sincerely, J. B. QUINN, Master, California State Grange. COLUMBIA, S.C., April 12, 1966. Hon. SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, U.S. Senator, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR HOLLAND: This is written with reference to the cotton research and promotion bill (H.R. 12322) which I understand is now in your Subcommittee of the Senate Agriculture Committee. While our industry and this association are not directly concerned with this legislation as we are not producers, we feel that passage of this bill is vital to our survival as an industry. Unless cotton can be produced and consumed in quantity in competition to synthetic fibers, there will be no need for our existence. Therefore this association respectively requests that you do all in your power to get this legislation to the floor of the Senate as soon as possible in order that a referendum can be held prior to the harvest of the 1966 crop. The sooner we can secure the funds for research and promotion, the sooner we can get cotton back on a healthy road. Thanking you for your support, I am, Sincerely, HENRY B. THOMAS, President, Carolinas Cotton Warehouse Association. Hon. SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, RALEIGH, N.C., April 4, 1966. Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR HOLLAND: It is my understanding that your subcommittee will soon be considering H.R. 12322 which would authorize the creation of a self-help program among farmers for the promotion of increased cotton use both here and abroad. The board of directors of this organization, representing more than 20,000 cotton farmers of the two Carolinas, has endorsed this legislation as vital to the future of the cotton crop in the Southeast. It is our sincere hope that you will arrange a hearing on this proposed legislation as early as possible so that it might have a chance to apply to the 1966 crop. As you know, the House has already passed the bill. Our farmers have indicated time and again that they are anxious to do whatever is necessary to build a stronger cotton program, and I believe they will endorse the self-help research and promotion program by an overwhelming majority if given the opportunity to vote on it. I had the great pleasure of hearing you address the National Cotton Council meeting in Jacksonville, in January, and you are certainly to be commended for your interest and efforts in bettering American agriculture and the position of our farmers. Only recently I heard of the illness of your brother. I wish for him a speedy recovery. DEAR SENATOR: I understand that you are holding the hearing in regard to H.R. 12322, the cotton research and promotion bill. I am president of the Carolinas Ginners Association, and our association voted and went on record in favor and endorsing this act unanimously at our recent convention in Atlanta, Ga. We the Ginners Association wholeheartedly support the efforts of producer organization in trying to bring about this self-help legislation. I feel that in order for cotton to maintain its rightful place in the American economy a bill such as this is necessary to finance a adequate research and promotion program. I am in favor of the bill in its present language and would be reluctant to see any changes or amendments to it. You can consider this an official letter and I would offer it as testimony in support and endorsement of the research and promotion bill. Respectfully submitted, E. E. GASQUE, Jr., President, Carolinas Ginners Association. STATEMENT OF HOWARD ALFORD, PRESIDENT, FARMERS COOPERATIVE AND PLAINS COTTON COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, LUBBOCK, TEX. My name is Howard Alford. I am a cotton producer and am also president of Farmers Cooperative Compress and Plains Cotton Cooperative Association. On behalf of the membership of these two cooperatives, I am writing to express our support of H.R. 12322. Our cooperatives are operated by 23,000 cotton producers who are trying to sell their cotton in the most effective way they know how. We believe in the future of cotton and have our capital and our labor invested in its production and distribution. We do not intend to stand idly by while synthetics take our customers. We want to invest our own money in expanded programs to improve industry efficiency, to develop better products, and to tell the public about the advantages of cotton products. As a cotton producer I would prefer to see someone else pay the bill for the efforts that are needed. But I am realistic enough to recognize that this not going to be done. If processors put up the money to improve and promote our cotton, they will simply reflect the expense in the price which they pay us for our cotton. In that event, the farmer would pay the bill, but would have no voice in the way the money is spent. We favor a program that is paid for by producers and run by the producers. Only in this way will we have the freedom to see that it operates for the benefit of producers. Of course, if the demand for cotton products is good, then the whole cotton industry will prosper-producer and processor alike. I could write quite a lot about the reasons that I and the other cotton producers in our cooperatives support this proposal, but I think it is sufficient to point out that we contributed over $750,000 from our 1964 cotton crop to this program and we have collected over $900,000 from our 1965 crop to be used for research and promotion. We put our money behind our words. If This job is too big for our cooperatives and a few other groups to handle. the program is to succeed, it must have the support of the great majority of the producers across the Cotton Belt. We believe that producers will overwhelmingly support this program, but a uniform method of collection must be established. Such a collection system could be established satisfactorily under H.R. 12322. It is most important that the bill be passed in its present form, without amendments, so that it can be signed quickly and put into effect. Planting of the 1966 crop is already underway. Undue delay would be most harmful to the effectiveness of our research and promotion program. We urge prompt passage of this legislation so that collections can be made from the 1966 crop. We want to get on with the job. Senator SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, Chairman, Agricultural Subcommittee, Washington, D.C. EL PASO, TEX., April 20, 1966. DEAR SENATOR HOLLAND: This is to advise that our association, representing several hundred farmers in this far west area of Texas, is supporting H.R. 12322, a bill to provide a uniform collection of funds from cottongrowers for the purpose of financing research and promotion of that commodity, and which your committee now has under consideration. It is our recommendation, therefore, that this House-passed bill be given favorable and early consideration without amendment, and to respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the record of hearings you have announced for April 25 and 26. Respectfully submitted. EL PASO VALLEY COTTON ASSOCIATION, EL CENTRO, CALIF. Senator ALLEN J. ELLENDER, Chairman, Senate Agriculture Committee, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR SENATOR: The cotton producers of the Imperial County in California have supported the aims and goals of the Cotton Producers Institute since the very beginning. The growers have each year generously contributed the $1 per bale as voluntary assessment. The competition of manmade fibers and the modernization of the spinning mills are increasingly putting different demands on the growers of the natural cotton fiber. The farmers must produce the type of cotton in demand by the mills. Only through research can we quickly find the fiber wanted by the mills. Research will also help to find new uses and application of cottons. Our cotton producers also believe that the cotton farmers have been much too willing to depend on others to advertise and promote their product. It seems to us that for too long a time, as producers, we have overlooked the fact that a bale of cotton is absolutely worthless unless spun into readily salable goods. We always have and do deeply believe in the promotion of our products. In October 1965 the board of directors of the Imperial County Growers' Association unanimously supported the aims and goals of H.R. 12322. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the committee, we earnestly solicit your support of H.R. 12322. RUDOLPH MILLER, Executive Secretary, (For the Imperial County Growers' Association). MEMPHIS, TENN., April 18, 1966. Hon. SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR HOLLAND: At the request of the board of directors, Mid-South Cotton Growers Association, I have been instructed to notify you and members of your committee that directors of Mid-South Cotton Growers Association have unanimously voted full support to H.R. 12322. We would like for this notification to be made a part of the record on the above-mentioned legislation. Sincerely, MID-SOUTH COTTON GROWERS ASSOCIATION, OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA., April 20, 1966. Hon. SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, Senate Office Building, DEAR SENATOR HOLLAND: Since our letter to you of March 31, we understand hearings have been scheduled for April 25 and 26, on H.R. 12322, the cotton research and promotion bill. We of the Oklahoma ginning industry, would like to reiterate our stand in favor of this particular bill and state that Oklahoma's ginners went on record 100 percent in being in accord with what the producers are trying to do for the benefit of cotton. Our resolution, passed on March 18, at Oklahoma City, during our 49th annual meeting, reads as follows: "That, the Oklahoma Cotton Ginners' Association support the cotton research and promotion bill (H.R. 12322), now before Congress; and give producers full and enthusiastic support to the end that a uniform collection system will be in effect for the 1966 crop." We state further, that we in the Oklahoma ginning industry support H.R. 12322, without further amendments and request this letter be made a part of the official records of the hearing before the Senate Agriculture Subcommittee. We are most anxious to do whatever we can to be of assistance. Sincerely yours, OKLAHOMA COTTON GINNERS' ASSOCIATION, LUBBOCK, TEX., April 21, 1966. Hon. S. L. HOLLAND, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: Our sales organization is responsible for the marketing of over a million bales of American cotton per year. As we carry out this responsibility, we are in day-by-day competition with the salesmen who represent synthetic fibers. We see firsthand the inroads that are being made into the markets for which our members produce. We have complete confidence in the fiber which we are selling. For most uses, cotton has superior properties. Its versatility is unequaled. We believe our competitive losses to synthetic fibers are due primarily to the superior job which the manufacturers accomplish in the fields of promotion and research. In our view, if cotton is to survive, the industry must utilize the tools of modern merchandising. We strongly recommend the enactment of H.R. 12322 in its present form, without amendment. Passage of this legislation is vital to the successful marketing of the American cotton crop. We hope these views will be made a matter of public record. PLAINS COTTON COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION. General Manager. STAMFORD, TEX., April 20, 1966. Senator SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, Senate Chamber, Congress of the United States, DEAR SENATOR: Cotton producers in the rolling plains of Texas wish to submit the following statement for the record regarding the Cotton Research and Promotion Act (H.R. 12322): The Rolling Plains Cotton Growers is a producer organization representing a geographical area of 31 counties in the rolling plains of Texas. There are approximately 21,000 farmers with a total cotton allotment of some 1,258,437 |