Page images



The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the House to the bill (S. 1968) to strengthen the wheat marketing quota and price support program, submit the following statement in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the conferees and recommended in the accompanying conference report:

House action was on H.R. 7246, following which the Senate bill was taken from the Speaker's table and amended by striking out all after the enacting clause and substituting the language of H.R. 7246 as passed by the House. The amendment reported herewith combines the provisions of the Senate bill and the House amendment and was agreed to by the conferees as a substitute for the House amendment,


The overall effect of the bill as agreed upon by the conferees and reported herewith will result in a wheat program for the years 1960 and 1961 which will

(1), reduce wheat production an estimated 200 million to 300 million bushels per year;

(2) result in a cash saving to the Government of an estimated. $150 million to $200 million per year.


The conference substitute contains the following major provisions of a temporary nature, applicable only with respect to the 1960 and 1961 wheat crops:

(1) provides price support at 80 percent of parity;

(2) reduces each farm acreage allotment by 20 percent below the allotment it would otherwise receive for the crops of 1960 and 1961;

(3) prevents the diversion of such 20 percent to any other crops receiving price supports by conditioning wheat price support on reducing the acreage of other price-supported crops below the 1957-58 average by an acreage equal to the 20 percent reduction in wheat acreage;

(4) provides a payment in kind (one-third of the average annual yield) on an acreage equal to such 20 percent, if such acreage is not used for the harvest of any crop nor grazed;

(5) imposes penalties on the actual yield of wheat from acres in excess of the farm acreage allotment (or double the normal yield if the actual yield is not shown);

(6) increases the marketing penalty on excess wheat from 45 percent of parity to 65 percent of parity;

(7) reduces the 15-acre exemption to 12 acres, and restricts it to farms which planted wheat in 1957, 1958, or 1959, and to producers who produce wheat on only one farm;

(8) removes the 30-acre limitation on the feed wheat exemption; and

(9) restricts to farms which are in compliance with their acreage allotments the right to withdraw and market wheat stored from a previous crop to avoid penalty.

The conference substitute makes the following permanent changes in the law:

(1) limits wheat price support operations to $35,000 per producer per year;

(2) repeals the 200-bushel exemption;

(3) prevents an acreage history penalty where, by reason of production failure, the producer has no marketing excess which he can store to avoid such a penalty;

(4) repeals the authority for price support to noncooperators with respect to any basic agricultural commodity; and

(5) repeals a provision requiring the county agent or the local committee chairman to maintain an additional copy of the acreage allotment list for each commodity.


The acreage reduction and price support provisions of the bill follow the House amendment, including the denial of price support on wheat if the diverted acreage is devoted to any other crop eligible for price support, a payment in kind if the diverted acreage is not used for the production of any crops whatever nor grazed, and limitation of price supports to the commercial wheat-producing area. The major differences between the House amendment and the conference substitute are that the level of price support is 80 percent (instead of 90 percent in the House amendment) and the required reduction in acreage is 20 percent (instead of 25 percent as in the House amendment).

The House provision providing price support for noncooperators if marketing quotas for wheat should be disapproved is not contained in the conference substitute. In its place, the conferees adopted the Senate provision which will have the effect of prohibiting price support to noncooperators with respect to any basic commodity. If marketing quotas should be disapproved, price support at 50 percent of parity would be made available only to cooperators. The conference substitute will make no change in the existing provision of law which fixes the minimum CCC resale price for wheat at 105 percent of the current support price, plus carrying charges.

In order to qualify for the payment in kind provided by the conference substitute, the producer is required, in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary, to designate an acreage on the farm equal to the 20 percent reduction in the farm wheat acreage allotment. A great deal of authority has been left in this matter to the discretion of the Secretary. The intention of the conferees is that an acreage of cropland approximately equal in productive capacity to the producer's wheat acreage shall be designated, but experience under the Soil Bank Act has shown that it is difficult to spell out this intention within the rigid framework of law. The conference therefore leaves it to regulation, which may be adapted to new cases or problems as they arise. The Secretary is authorized and is expected to issue such regulations

59014-59 H. Rept., 86-1, vol. 4

as may be necessary to effect the reduction in production contemplated by this provision.

The conference adopted the Senate provision relating to production of wheat on acreage in excess of acreage allotments. Under this provision any wheat produced on excess acreage will be considered farm marketing excess and subject to penalty. Under the House amendment, the marketing excess would have been reduced to zero if the total production on the allotted and excess acres did not exceed the normal production of the allotted acres.

The conference substitute contains the Senate provisions restricting the 15-acre exemption to 12 acres in 1960 and 1961. This permits any producer who has harvested wheat in 1957, 1958, or 1959, exceptproducers operating more than one farm, to take full advantage of the 12-acre exemption. The House provision would have restricted the exemption to 12 acres or the highest acreage planted on the farm in the immediately preceding 3 years.

The conference substitute makes no change in the provisions, common to both the Senate and House bills, permitting a producer to grow as much wheat as he wants if he uses it all on the farm where it is produced.

With respect to eligibility for voting in the referendum on wheat marketing quotas, the conference substitute follows the Senate bill, which made no change in existing law. Under the conference substitute, producers who will be subject to the marketing quotas upon which the referendum is held will be eligible to vote in that referendum. Thus, all producers who are affected by the temporary reduction in the exemption from 15 acres to 12 acres will be eligible to vote in the referendum to be held next July on the 1960 wheat crop.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

86TH CONGRESS 1st Session




REPORT No. 561


JUNE 18, 1959.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed.

Mr. DURHAM, from the Committee on Armed Services, submitted the following


[To accompany H.R. 6500]

The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 6500) to amend Public Law 85-818, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.


In the 85th Congress, the committee considered H.R. 11125, a bill to provide for the conveyance of 3.67 acres of land, a portion of Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., to the city of Valparaiso, Fla. The property to be conveyed to the city of Valpariso was restricted for use as a public cemetery.

In considering the bill, the committee took cognizance of the fact that the land to be conveyed is contiguous to an existing community cemetery, which cemetery has been used for many years and is now seriously overcrowded. In addition, the land is located a considerable distance from the main air base, is in an area which contributes little if anything to the use of this base, and consists of only 3.67 acres in a total base area of over 465,000 acres of land.

In view of the contemplated use of the land and the surrounding circumstances, the committee felt that the 3.67 acres of land should be conveyed to the city of Valparaiso without consideration. The bill was approved on that basis and referred to the Senate.

During its consideration of the bill, the Senate amended the bill to provide that the city would be required to pay fair market value for the land.

The bill, as amended by the Senate, was returned for House consideration late in the 2d session of the 85th Congress. Being of the

opinion that the fair market value of the land would be only nominal, and recognizing the time element and the need of the city of Valparaiso for additional land for cemetery purposes, it was proposed that the House agree to the Senate amendment. This was done, and the bill became Public Law 85-818.

Subsequent to the foregoing events, it has been determined that the fair market value of this parcel of land is not nominal. While the committee has no firm appraisal as to the fair market value, it appears that it could be several thousand dollars. The payment of such a sum by the city of Valparaiso would constitute a serious financial hardship and, depending upon final appraisal, might be impossible to accomplish.


In addition to the foregoing, it is noted that there currently prevails in the Senate a policy to approve transfers of this nature, for stated public purposes, by the payment of 50 percent of the fair market value. The purpose of H.R. 6500 is to amend Public Law 85-818 so as to make it conform to current congressional policy as to the consideration required in the sale of Government real estate for public purposes. Obviously, the city of Valparaiso, Fla., should not be required to pay any greater consideration for the conveyance of public lands for public purposes than is required of other governmental agencies.


Enactment into law of this measure will not involve the expenditure of any Federal funds.


The Department of Defense has no objection to the enactment of H.R. 6500, as is evidenced by letter dated May 21, 1959, from Assistant Secretary of the Air Force Lyle S. Garlock, which letter is set out below and made a part of this report. It will be noted that the Bureau of the Budget advised the Department of the Air Force that that office was of the opinion that the fair market value should be realized from the conveyance of the property and that such a transfer could be accomplished administratively under the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, if the land is surplus to the needs of the Government.


Washington, May 21, 1959.

Chairman, Committee on Armed Services,
House of Representatives.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to your request for Department of Defense views with respect to H.R. 6500, 86th Congress, a bill to amend Public Law 85-818. The Secretary of Defense has delegated to this Department the responsibility for expressing the views of the Department of Defense.

« PreviousContinue »