CHAPTER 8. PROGRESS IN ADMINISTRATION-Continued. Information prepared for both the farmer and the gen- VII. WHAT THE EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN_ Considerable measure of success attained in progress toward immediate goals-Administration has been responsible, reasonably efficient and effective-Progress toward long-time objectives has been as rapid as could be expected-Democratic procedure the surest and safest even though less rapid in attaining its ends. CHAPTER 9. CONCLUSION_ I. THE PROGRAM AS AN AID TO RECOVERY_ The Agricultural Adjustment Administration program II. THE PROGRAM AS AN AID TO AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION AND Conservation of the Nation's soil resources continues as APPENDIXES APPENDIX A-SOIL-BUILDING PRACTICES APPROVED AS MEANS OF OBTAIN- Exhibit 1.-Approved soil-building practices, rates of payment Page 226 243 247 247 248 251 Exhibit 2.-Schedule of soil-building practices approved under 255 APPENDIX B-DATA ON DIVERSION AND ON SOIL-BUILDING PRACTICES CABRIED OUT UNDER THE 1936 AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM: Exhibit 3.-Diverted acreages with respect to which payments were made under the 1936 Agricultural Conservation Program, by States and regions___ 258 Exhibit 4.-Number of applications filed, acreage of cropland cov- 259 Exhibit 5.-Acreage of specified soil-building practices carried out 260 Exhibit 6.-Acreage of terracing, listing, controlled summer fal- Exhibit 7.-Acreages on which specified fertilizers and lime were Exhibit 8.-Range-building practices carried out on livestock 261 262 263 APPENDIX C-DATA ON DIVERSION AND ON SOIL-BUILDING PRACTICES CAR- RIED OUT UNDER THE 1937 AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM (Pre- Exhibit 9.-Diverted acreages with respect to which payments were made under the 1937 Agricultural Conservation Pro- gram, by States and regions (Preliminary). Exhibit 10.-Soil-building practices carried out under the 1937 Agricultural Conservation Program, by States and APPENDIX D-STATISTICS ON SURPLUS-REMOVAL OPERATIONS OF THE FED- ERAL SURPLUS COMMODITIES CORPORATION: Exhibit 11.-Purchases by the Federal Surplus Commodities Cor- 272 Exhibit 12.-Purchases by the Federal Surplus Commodities Cor- Exhibit 13.-Purchases by the Federal Surplus Commodities Cor- poration, by States, commodities, and sources of funds, July 1, 1937, to May 6, 1938_. APPENDIX E-DISBURSEMENTS, JANUARY 1, 1937, THROUGH JUNE 30, 1938, BY STATES, COMMODITIES, AND OBJECTIVES: Exhibit 14.-Agricultural conservation payments January 1, 1937, Exhibit 15.-Rental and benefit payments January 1, 1937, through June 30, 1938, by State and commodity-. Exhibit 16.-Administration of Sugar Act of 1937, January 1, 1937, Exhibit 17.-Payments for purchase and diversion of agricultural commodities January 1, 1937, through June 30, 1938_ Exhibit 18.-Total expenditures, January 1, 1937, through June 30, Exhibit 19.-General administrative expenses, January 1, 1937, Exhibit 20.-Miscellaneous expenditures January 1, 1937, through APPENDIX F-DATA ON PARTICIPATION AND ESTIMATED PAYMENTS EARNED, 1937 AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM (Preliminary): Exhibit 21.-Estimated payments earned by classes of payment and by crop classifications, 1937 Agricultural Conserva- tion Program, by States and regions (preliminary) __ Exhibit 22. Data on participation and estimated total payments, 1937 Agricultural Conservation Program, by States, Territories, and regions (preliminary). Exhibit 23.-Estimated number of payees receiving net payments falling within specified size-of-payment groups, 1937 Agricultural Conservation Program, by regions_-_- Exhibit 24. Data on participation and estimated payments to be earned on 1937-38 sugar beet and sugarcane crop, 1937 Sugar Program, by States and Territories (preliminary). APPENDIX G-MARKETING PROGRAMS: Exhibit 25.-Marketing agreements, licenses, and orders in effect Exhibit 26.-Annotated compilation of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, as amended, the Agricul- tural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended, and acts relating thereto_-_- Exhibit 27.-Annotated compilation of Agricultural Marketing Exhibit 28.-President Roosevelt's message to Congress on sugar Agricultural Adjustment 1937-38 CHAPTER 1 THE BACKGROUND OF AGRICULTURAL In the years since the founding of the United States the country has changed from a nation of farmers to a nation in which only onefourth of the population lives on farms. As late as 1870 more than half of the gainfully employed in the United States were in agriculture; by 1930 the proportion had fallen to a little over a fifth. This change has been due to a variety of causes. There has been an expansion of commercial and distributive services as manufacturing and processing took precedence over cultivation of crops and extraction of natural resources from the earth. A division of labor has developed in which farmers concentrated on raising foodstuffs and fibers while city workers took over many of the other tasks formerly performed on self-sufficient farms. An increase has taken place in services of transportation, communication, and government which the existence of large urban areas made progressively necessary. Underlying all these has been the advance of technology and invention. I. EVIDENCES OF THE NEED FOR AGRICULTURAL ADJUSTMENT This general transition from an agricultural to an industrial nation is a normal development and does not in itself warrant national programs to assist agriculture. There are, however, a number of factors, some inherent in the present economic structure and some historical, which have operated to throw agriculture out of adjustment with the rest of the economy and to thrust upon it a disproportionate burden of readjustment. The inability of agriculture to make this readjustment as part of its normal operations is evidenced in many ways. On either a total or per capita basis rural money incomes are low in comparison with urban money incomes. Although noncash income which farm families receive from such sources as products raised on the farm and the use of farmhouses lessens the discrepancy which appears in the cash-income figures, the difference between the taxable resources in rural and in urban areas is clearly indicated by marked contrasts between rural and urban educational standards and public health services. The difference in remaining incomes available for family living is indicated by relatively smaller numbers of automobiles, radios, telephones, and household appliances in use among farm as contrasted with city families. This lower level of rural as compared with urban income is traceable, in part, to the smaller proportion of farm population in the productive age group. The country districts support, during the years of dependency, large numbers of children who move to the city when they reach working age. At the other end of the scale, the country districts have more people over 65 than do the cities. Security, however, although on a standard of living lower than the city standard, is apparently greater on the farm than in the city. This is attested by the large-scale movement from industrial to rural areas during the depression. Further evidence of the need for adjustment is to be found in the continuous loss of soil fertility and actual physical destruction of the soil itself. These soil losses are attributable partly to purely individualistic competition in the sale of soil fertility. To some extent, soil losses are also a natural result of unfortunate systems of land tenure, and large fixed charges contracted for during land booms. Soil destruction is due partly to the low level and instability of farm income which have frequently made it difficult or impossible to maintain soil resources. Evidence of the unusual difficulties of agriculture is to be found also in the recurrent farmer movements. The weakened position of agriculture as compared to industry was apparent after the Civil War. The Granger movement of the 1870's with its demand for the regulation of the railroads and for antitrust legislation, and the Populist movement of the 1890's with its demand for currency reform, reflected the pressure on agriculture of systems of transportation, distribution, and credit dominated by the nonagricultural groups. The acute disadvantage of agriculture following the World War galvanized the agricultural group into new types of action. The cooperative movement was extended in an effort to give farmers some of the types of advantages enjoyed by industrialists through the device of the corporation. The farm organizations, new and old alike, became increasingly concerned with the collective aspects of agriculture's problems. II. SOURCES OF AGRICULTURAL DISADVANTAGE The factors which underlie the difficulties of agriculture and which have made it advisable to take steps for positive assistance to agriculture may be outlined as follows: In the first place, production in many commodities tends to be highly irregular. This irregularity flows from such influences as the relative inelasticity of the demand for farm products and from the lack of organization of the farm business. The inelasticity of demand causes prices to be high in years of low production and low in years of large production. To the numerous small-unit producers in agriculture the market for their products appears almost infinitely elastic in the sense that production adjustment on the part of an individual producer cannot affect the prices he receives. As a result, farmers as a group tend to overexpand when prices are high. This . is a particularly unfortunate tendency when the high prices are |