The CHAIRMAN. All right, Arkansas is well represented on this committee by one of the finest Congressmen I have ever known. He is chairman of the Cotton Subcommittee. He is intensely interested in the welfare of cotton farmers and in cotton as a commodity. And if they thought that you were doing the job that should be done, it seems to me that there should be a major contribution, rather than decreasing it. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, I have an answer. Whether it applies to Arkansas would be in question. Mr. DeVancy, I think, made reference to a division in our ranks between Farm Bureau organizations and the Cotton Council boys, and probably that had a considerable bearing on the enthusiasm or participation, or whatever you might call it, in these programs. That is a mere guess. Mr. POAGE. Mr. Huddleston. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. Is it not a fact that as long as you retain the present program, that you have such competition between the gins that it forces first one and then another gin out of the program? Mr. HUDDLESTON. I do not think there is any question but what this, sir, if you realize that a gin on this side of the road would return a dollar bill more seed money than the one across the road, it would be an item in competition; yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. And as long as the gins have the option, they cannot protect themselves, can they? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Not likely. Mr. POAGE. But if each gin made that deduction, then no gin could come in and say he was conducting a fire sale and that you could get your cotton ginned for $1 less at that particular gin. It is true you could get your dollar back in either gin, but no gin would be in a position then to say that he was giving you a dollar reduction; is that not right? Mr. HUDDLESTON. That is true. Mr. POAGE. And is that not exactly what this bill tries to do-to enable every gun in the United States to make this collection without destroying its own business? Mr. HUDDLESTON. It probably is, but let me add this now, since this has been opened up. In my personal judgment this is not the sole recourse that the cotton industry has as far as financing a program. Now I suggested to some of the Cotton Council fellows, let us subject more of our growers to the same excellent sales pitch that convinced me it was a good proposition to buy it. Let us accentuate the positive. Let us work this thing in a salesmanship way, so that when you would win a contribution to this program, having won him you would not have to browbeat him to collect and then chase him to death to get your money back. Mr. POAGE. Mr. Huddleston, I come back to the practical method of collecting. If you will assume a farmer in my country who wants to contribute, who feels that this is a good thing, as many do feel that it is a good thing, and who would have no objection to having a dollar taken off of each bale. Now Mr. Jones is running a gin over here, only 3 miles away, and he says, "I will do your ginning without making that deduction." In effect he is ginning it for $1 a bale less than Mr. Teague is ginning it for over here. Now, is there not considerable pressure on that cottongrower sitting here where Mr. Gathings is, in between them, is there not considerable pressure on him to haul his cotton over there and get it ginned for $1 a bale less? Mr. HUDDLESTON. I would not even question that statement, sir. Mr. POAGE. And have not a great many cotton farmers done exactly that in the last 2 or 3 years? Mr. HUDDLESTON. I am told that. Mr. POAGE. Following it just a little step further, Mr. Jones has quit the program this year. Do you think that Mr. Teague is going to charge that dollar next year? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, now, you are working around to an answer that I would be glad to give you. Mr. POAGE. I am not working around to anything. I am just asking you do you think that Mr. Teague's gin is going to charge that extra dollar next year, after seeing Mr. Jones' gin pick up this business this year? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Congressman, I would not even argue the point with you. It is too obvious, the results, the conclusion. Mr. POAGE. All right, if it is obvious, then we must admit that the whole existing program has broken down, must we not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. If there is a weakness in the program, that is it. Mr. POAGE. And that weakness does not go to the question of whether the individual farmer is interested in promotion or not, but it goes to the competitive situation between the gins, and that competitive situation between the gins is accentuated as our cotton crop is reduced; as we retire 35 percent of our acreage and put some more of it in the soil bank, there is going to be less cotton for Mr. Jones to gin and for Mr. Teague to gin, and if they are going to keep their gins open, the economic pressure is on them to make still further inducements, is it not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. And they are now placed in a position where they have less opportunity to cooperate with the cotton council than they ever had in the history of ginning, have they not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. Now should we not recognize those facts of life and should we not meet those conditions that have developed in the last few years? Mr. HUDDLESTON. We have got to meet them, but not in this way. Mr. POAGE. How do you suggest we meet them? Mr. HUDDLESTON. As I suggested a while ago. If we can do a job of selling on the individual or group cotton farmers, that is why I bought the program in the beginning, because I was shown the facts, and I was convinced that that was a worthy undertaking. I am one of their supporters, strong supporters. That is the weakness in this whole compulsory proposition, in my judgment, is one of compelling a person to do something in his own mind which he has decided he is not willing to do. Mr. POAGE. The reason that gin-the reason Mr. Teague is not willing to go on in making that deduction is because Mr. Jones ceased to make it a year ago. That is right, is it not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. It is a competitive situation. And once one gin in the United States starts the reduction, it has to spread, does it not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. There is no question there is a competitive factor there. Mr. POAGE. And that competitive factor is far more severe right now than it has ever been in our history, is it not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. In ginning. Mr. HUDDLESTON. And that is where this question of volume that I mentioned a while ago comes into the picture. Mr. POAGE. The question of what? Mr. HUDDLESTON. The question of a volume. Mr. POAGE. Yes, that is where the question of volume comes in. Mr. HUDDLESTON. That is right. Mr. POAGE. And we all know that the volume for each and every gin in the United States is going to be rather materially reduced this next year. Mr. HUDDLESTON. No question about that. Mr. POAGE. That being true-and we know that the pressure is going to be on to get out of the program-should we not take some steps, now, to get a workable program? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Mr. Poage, I happen to live 10 miles from town and a mile from the highway, and somehow or other I have failed to acquire this atmosphere of compulsion that some people have undoubtedly taken under their wing. Now I have a hard enough time making my children do what I want done, and frankly I indulge in just as few programs as I know how to indulge in where I have to do something that does not meet with my judgment and satisfaction, and in my judgment this proposal would make many people do things that they in their best judgment do not consider they should do. The CHAIRMAN. Such as what? Mr. POAGE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Such as what? What does this program make the cotton farmer do that he ought not to do? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, I thought that had been pretty well covered. They deduct $1 a bale of his cotton. The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Of course he has recourse to recover it. I will grant you that. The escape is there. But he has no choice as to whether or not that $1 a bale is deducted from that cotton, the sale of that cotton, or the loan value of that cotton, if I understand it correctly. The CHAIRMAN. That is right. Mr. POAGE. Now you just pointed out that that is essential to prevent this competitive situation from developing between these gins. But how is the farmer hurt? I come to you. This morning I questioned Mr. Randolph a little. We were trying to adjourn, and I admit my mental arithmetic was not real sharp, but I think I got over to most of you what is involved here. Now will you tell us just how this farmer is hurt? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, I enjoyed your arithmetic on that. 60-855-66—8 Mr. POAGE. I know you enjoyed it. Let us get the correct arithmetic now. Mr. HUDDLESTON. I enjoyed that arithmetic. Mr. POAGE. Let us get the correct arithmetic now. Mr. HUDDLESTON. And the source of that 5-percent money is interesting. Mr. POAGE. Let us get the correct arithmetic. What interest rate do you pay? You borrow money, do you not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. No, sir. Mr. POAGE. I do. Mr. HUDDLESTON. I do not. Mr. POAGE. Well, I do. I am paying 612 percent. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, you are in a pretty good bracket. Mr. POAGE. Well, I have got a pretty good salary. I do not think I would get it if I did not have a pretty good salary, but I have got a pretty good salary and my credit entitles me to get 612-percent money from the citizen bank at Waco. Mr. HUDDLESTON. That is fine. Mr. POAGE. And I get it. Now let us use 612. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Six percent figures easier. Mr. HUDDLESTON. That is half a cent on a dollar a month. Mr. POAGE. It figures a good deal easier. Now, you are a big cottongrower, are you not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. I am, on delta standards, a small cottongrower. Mr. POAGE. Well, on American standards you are a big one. You grow 800 bales, do you not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. No, sir. Mr. POAGE. You said you contributed $800. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, 800 bales but not that many acres; yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. What is that? Mr. HUDDLESTON. That many bales but not that many acres. Mr. POAGE. I said 800 bales. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, I am sorry. Mr. POAGE. You grow 800 bales of cotton. Now that is many many times the average production in the United States, many times the average production. You are going to put in $800. That is all you are going to put in, is it not, $1 per bale? That is $800. Now, the interest on that at 6 percent, is that $48 a year? Mr. HUDDLESTON. It is $4 a month. Mr. POAGE. $48 a year, that is right. Now that is $4 a month. You get your money back. Now you, as one of the biggest in the country, you could lose $4. This man who puts in 10 bales would be about the average, it would cost him just over 4 cents, between 4 and 5 cents, something less than a nickel. Now, that is how bad he is to be hurt, is it not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. That is true; yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. All right. Now, the average man is going to be hurt something less than a postage stamp, something less than the value of sending one letter. He is going to be hurt something less than the value of one letter, and yet the great Farm Bureau of America comes up here and says this is one of the most dangerous things that has come before the Committee on Agriculture in modern days, that we are going to rob these poor little farmers of the price of a postcard at least. Now, that is all you are going to take, is it not? What other monetary loss is going to be sustained by any cottongrower? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Nothing, except the matter of a principle, sir. Mr. POAGE. Nothing except what? Mr. HUDDLESTON. The matter of principle. Mr. POAGE. I come back to the proposition now as to the practical monetary loss, this tremendous tragedy, this burden we are imposing on the American farmer is going to be something less than the value of a stamp on a letter or just about the value of a postcard. Now, do you really think that that is such a burden that we ought to jeopardize that man's chance of developing a profitable crop? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, I think you have oversimplified it to some extent, sir. That means a postage stamp or a postal card per bale I think is what you are referring to. Mr. POAGE. No, I am talking about the 10-bale man-the 10-bale man. The CHAIRMAN. Or the 800-bale man. Mr. POAGE. The 800-bale man would be out $4 all told. The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Mr. POAGE. This man is a big farmer and it will cost him $4, the cost of a trip downtown. Now the little man who has got 10 bales has $10 invested for 1 month, Mr. Chairman. Call it 10 percent on his money. Ten percent of his $10 would be $1 in a year, would it not? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Yes, sir. Mr. POAGE. And in 1 month you divide that by 12 and it is a little over 8 cents. If he pays 10 percent for his money, he still cannot have a cost of as much as a dime. It will be less than a dime-about the cost of an airmail stamp. All that this great burden is going to cost him The CHAIRMAN. Let us emphasize the point. You are talking about interest and he is talking about principle. If you want to talk about principle, it seems to me Mr. Poage has completely exploded all this myth about principle. Mr. HUDDLESTON. Well, I am sorry, sir. The CHAIRMAN. There is nothing immoral about this bill, is there? Mr. HUDDLESTON. Not immoral. The CHAIRMAN. I can show you, if you sit in here long enough and listen to the rest of these hearings, you will find out where your organization has approved bills and programs of exactly the same kind. Mr. HUDDLESTON. What is that? The CHAIRMAN. The same kind of bills and the same kind of programs. Even Mr. Shuman this morning approved the tobacco program. We have Tobacco Associates in your area. I recognize the gentleman from Kentucky. He will show you a promotion effort today being made on tobacco. And I have not heard a chirp out of any of them. Mr. POAGE. The farm bureau has been approving the wool bill in the wool States ever since it was passed, have you not? Not in Mississippi, I do not mean that, but in the wool-growing States the farm bureau has approved the bill, have they not? |