Yes on Hogs

The AAA's corn-hog program is supposed to be a voluntary arrangement which the Government leaves to the farmers to impose upon themselves. Nevertheless, before corn-hog raisers turned out last week to vote on continuing the program for another year, the Government conducted a high-pressure campaign to influence them favorably. The Department of Agriculture poured thousands upon thousands of franked letters and leaflets into rural mail boxes. For weeks more than 5,000 county agents had staged local "pep" meetings to point out the virtue of continuing a system which this year paid 35-c- for each bushel of corn and $15 for each hog that farmers agreed not to raise. From Chicago, Edward Asbury O'Neal of the American Farm Bureau Federation gave solemn warning to those who thought they could make more money by unrestricted production. "Hog prices." he cried, "already are declining!" And AAAdministrator Chester Davis broadcast significantly: "The AAA does not intend to offer another corn-hog contract unless enough farmers show they want it to make a program workable. You may depend on that!"

Although Kansas and Nebraska were in the nay column by large majorities, last year 579,716 corn-hoggers voted 2-to-1 for the 1935 crop reduction program (10%-30% in acreage; 10% in swine). This year AAA officials have hinted that there might be no swine reduction in 1936. but that benefit checks would still be paid to those who agreed to curtail their corn crop, if necessary. Whether because of the Government's exhortations or the promise of its checks, last week's vote went 6-to-1 for continuing the corn-hog program another year.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.