September 9, 1965
Page 23322
Mr. TALMADGE. . . . My program would permit a farmer to stay out of the program and plant up to 1½ times his farm allotment and sell his cotton at the world price without loans or any Government aid in any way, whatsoever.
But the most important feature of both the House bill and my program, Mr. President, would be the one-price system of loans at a level which would permit cotton to move into trade channels, plus direct payments to maintain farm income.
I hope I shall have the support of my colleagues in the Senate in the passage of a realistic cotton program which will save our cotton farmer, save our cotton industry and cotton trade, and help our entire national economy.
Mr. President, the first crop report of this season, issued a month ago, indicated that we shall have a record carryover of cotton next August 1 of 15,400,000 bales, a million bales more than the previous record of 1956, 10 years earlier.
We have now had the second crop report of this year. The yields are at an all-time record high. As a consequence, the carryover is expected to be more than 200,000 bales more than estimated a month ago, approaching 15,700,000 bales. Those who know cotton expect this increased yield to continue for years to come.
Under the program proposed by the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, we can expect larger carry-overs and new record highs as the years go by.
The production of cotton, ginning, warehousing, sale, transportation and spinning into cloth, the various garment industries in America, and all those who work in the garment industry, represent a very important segment of our economy. It provides livelihood to literally millions of people.
Farm areas and cities alike depend on the success of all phases of production, warehousing, manufacturing, spinning, sale, and the making of cotton into garments.
That industry is now at the cross-roads. If the Senate approves the committee bill as reported to it by a one vote margin, it will do irreparable harm to every man and woman associated with any phase of that particular industry. It will do irreparable harm also to the taxpayers, who now have stored in Government warehouses more than 11 million bales of cotton, for which there are no sales and no need. It should not have been produced under a reasonable, workable farm program which first places emphasis upon the private sector of our economy and, second, bolsters farm income by a system of compensatory payments.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. TALMADGE. I yield to the Senator from Maine.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I compliment the Senator from Georgia upon the amendment which he has offered and which has been supported by several other Senators, including myself. I believe that the amendment offers a fair and sound solution to the problems confronting us in the effort to control surplus cotton production and to assure a reasonable income to cotton farmers.
I have listened with a great deal of interest to the debate and discussion this afternoon conducted by the distinguished Senator from Georgia [Mr. TALMADGE], the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. PASTORE], the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. SALTONSTALL], and other Senators whose States are troubled by this problem.
It is interesting that we have heard a discussion conducted by Senators from New England, the original textile-producing States, and Senators from the South, the cotton-growing and new textile-producing States.
Last year Congress enacted a cotton program which was designed to remove the inequities of the old two-price cotton system. It was not a perfect answer to the problem. I much preferred the approach offered by the Senator from Georgia [Mr. TALMADGE ]. But it did provide a partial answer to the disadvantages under which our domestic cotton textile manufacturers had to compete in the world market.
This year the House of Representatives adopted the one-price cotton approach contained in the Talmadge amendment. Unfortunately, the Senate committee has rejected this approach.
Under the two-price system everybody loses. Cotton textile mills lose markets at home and abroad to foreign competitors and substitute fibers; workers lose jobs in cotton textile mills, and cotton farmers lose markets for their product at home and abroad.
Under the one-price system, as contained in the Talmadge amendment, farmers would be encouraged to reduce surpluses while being guaranteed a fair price for their product, cotton textile mills would be able to purchase cotton at the world price and compete at home and
abroad with foreign manufacturers and substitute fibers, American workers would face a brighter future in the cotton textile industry, exporters would be able to expand their sales of U.S. cotton in the world market, and consumers would pay lower prices for cotton products. All of this would be possible with less government red tape and regulation than we have had in the past.
I am not from a cotton-producing area, but I recognize the importance of cotton to the agricultural economy of this Nation. When we enact legislation designed to help the cottonmill worker in New England or the Southeast I think we should also try to help the cotton producer in the South, the Southwest and the Far West, especially the small farmers, wherever they are.
The amendment meets these objectives. It is good for the farmers, good for the cotton textile manufacturers and workers, good for the consumer and good for the taxpayer. I urge its adoption as the best answer to our cotton problems.
I sincerely compliment the distinguished Senator from Georgia for offering the amendment.
Mr. TALMADGE. I am grateful to my warm friend the able and distinguished Senator from Maine for his contribution.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
Mr. TALMADGE. I yield to the Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. DODD. I compliment the Senator from Georgia for the clear and lucid form of the amendment. I was not well informed on the amendment, but I am sure, after listening to the Senator from Georgia this afternoon, that I shall vote for it.
Mr. TALMADGE. I appreciate that statement. I thank the Senator.
Since the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. McINTYRE] had asked me first, I shall yield to him now; then I shall yield to the Senator from Alabama.
Mr. McINTYRE. I thank the distinguished Senator from Georgia.
I am pleased to support the amendment offered by the Senator from Georgia [Mr. TALMADGE] I and the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. PASTORE].
The purpose of the national cotton program, as I understand it, is to provide a reasonable return to cotton producers for their work and their investment. I do not quarrel with this goal. I approve it. But I do not approve of the method of support which is established by the committee amendment to H.R.9811.
If this is to be a national program of subsidies, then the cost should borne by the Nation as a whole. The procedure set out in the committee amendment, however, would place a heavy burden upon one section of our national economy, which would, in effect be driven out of business to support cotton producers. I refer to the men and women who work in, and manage, the cotton textile industry of America.
I see no a justification for forcing American textile workers to lose their income to protect the income of American cotton producers, especially when this goal can be accomplished in a manner which will actually improve the prospects both the cotton producers and the textile producers. It is for this reason I intend to support the amendment offered by the Senator from Georgia. I along with the Senator from Maine [Mr. MUSKIE], am happy to associate with the Senator from Georgia in offering the amendment.
Mr. TALMADGE. I thank the able and distinguished Senator from New Hampshire.