Weekly Radio Report: Wheat Referendum Update

Item

Other Media

c031_031.mp3

c031_031_tr.txt

Transcription (Scripto)

Read Full Text Only (TXT)

Extent (Dublin Core)

5 Minutes, 50 Seconds

File Name (Dublin Core)

c031_031

Title (Dublin Core)

Weekly Radio Report: Wheat Referendum Update

Description (Dublin Core)

In this weekly radio broadcast Congressman Bob Dole addresses the possibility of Congress being in session the rest of the year. He discusses farm legislation that he helped to produce, as well as the four basic principles that should be in all agricultural bills. He ends the broadcast discussing the wheat subcommittee, and how they need to move forward with wheat legislation.

Date (Dublin Core)

1963-06-26

Date Created (Dublin Core)

1963-06-26

Congress (Dublin Core)

88th (1963-1965)

Topics (Dublin Core)

See all items with this valueWheat farmers

Policy Area (Curation)

Agriculture and Food

Creator (Dublin Core)

Dole, Robert J., 1923-2021

Record Type (Dublin Core)

radio programs

Rights (Dublin Core)

http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/

Language (Dublin Core)

eng

Collection Finding Aid (Dublin Core)

https://dolearchivecollections.ku.edu/index.php?p=collections/findingaid&id=84&q=

Physical Collection (Dublin Core)

Collection 031, Box 1

Institution (Dublin Core)

Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS

Archival Collection (Dublin Core)

Dole Audio Reels Collection, 1960-1979

Full Text (Extract Text)

This is Congressman Bob Dole with my weekly radio report from Washington. First of all, I wish to thank this station for carrying my weekly program as a public service broadcast, and secondly, as in the past, I certainly want to invite the comments and suggestions and criticism from those who may be listening to our program. I might add that if you have any particular subject that you think should be discussed in light of current affairs, or any legislative matter that you feel should be discussed, I certainly trust that you will convey this information to me, because we want to make our programs of interest, and of course, we want to make them factual and fast-moving so that you'll have some idea of what's happening in Congress.

Now I said fast-moving, this certainly isn’t descriptive of the way Congress is moving at this time — in fact, there's more and more speculation that Congress will be in session perhaps all year. As one of the junior Members of Congress — far be it from me to predict when we will adjourn — though I do understand from discussions with some of those who, perhaps, should know that we will be here many, many weeks to come.

Now on last Friday, many Republican Members discussed farm legislation — in fact wheat legislation — before the wheat subcommittee, of which I am a member. As I have discussed prior here to on this program, on May 23 — two days after the referendum — a bill along the lines that was worked out by myself, along with the cooperation of Congressman Albert Quie of Minnesota and Congressman Don Short of North Dakota, was introduced by 20 Republican Members. I might add that this legislation was worked on many, many weeks prior to the May 21 referendum, and was introduced on May 23, not simply as a political expedient, but because we had been working on this long before the farmers made their decision on May 21st. At any rate, on last Friday I made a statement to our wheat subcommittee, of which I'm a member; Congressman Short also testified, and Congressman Quie was a chief spokesman for the entire group. Two other Kansans have introduced similar legislation: Congressman Bill Avery and also Congressman Bob Ellsworth.

I really feel that the legislation introduced by the 20 Members of Congress on May 23rd does represent a significant improvement over any program advanced by the Administration. While some of the 20 bills introduced vary in certain details and in certain areas, the basic principles involved in all the measures are the same — and actually, there are about four basic principles.

First, the program would be voluntary. Price support in diversion payments would be available only to those who retire acreage from production. If the person didn't want to come into the program, he would not have to participate in the program, and I do believe that if we've learned anything from the May 21 referendum, it is that the wheat farmers of America want a voluntary program. And this is true, of course, of wheat farmers in Kansas.

A second basic principle is that our program would require land retirement and conservation as a condition of eligibility for program benefits. A minimum 20% would be required with an optional — [correcting himself] an additional 30% reduction allowed. I might add that for those who would retire their land for periods of three to five years, there is an incentive payment paid because we feel that the only answer — or at least one answer — is to keep the land out of production for long periods of time.

The third basic principle is that it would use only payment-in-kind for making diversion payments. The Secretary [of Agriculture] could, however, advance the producer the cash in anticipation of the sale of grain, but there would be no direct payments as provided under the present feed grain program.

And the fourth basic principle is that our program is based on a market economy. The CCC [Commodity Credit Corporation] release price for surplus grain and inventory could not be less than 105% of current support price, plus reasonable carrying charges. And when the supply of grain is back to a normal supply, this released buys would be 115% of the current support price plus reasonable carrying charges, and Commodity Credit Corporation would be required to make a market purchases for grain, which has been sold as being out of condition.

Now, let me say that we've had hearings now for several days in our wheat subcommittee, and as I told the chairman — the [wheat] subcommittee chairman — last Friday, I think our committee should now meet — our subcommittee should meet in executive session, make a determination whether or not we will have wheat legislation, and should find out from the Administration if they intend to support wheat legislation. Year after year the wheat farmers of America become involved in a guessing game with Congress, and the loser is always the wheat producer — and winter wheat areas, who many times, works to ground and sows his wheat without knowing just what the program may be. And I say we should make it clear to the farmer whether or not there will be wheat legislation, and then let him know one way or the other. And I think it's about time that the Administration forgot — [corrects himself] forgets — the defeat on May 21st and makes a real effort to join with other Members of Congress — Republican members — in supporting a reasonable program.

Thanks for listening, our time is up.

This is Congressman Bob Dole with my weekly radio report from Washington. First of all, I wish to thank this station for carrying my weekly program as a public service broadcast, and secondly, as in the past, I certainly want to invite the comments and suggestions and criticism from those who may be listening to our program. I might add that if you have any particular subject that you think should be discussed in light of current affairs, or any legislative matter that you feel should be discussed, I certainly trust that you will convey this information to me, because we want to make our programs of interest, and of course, we want to make them factual and fast-moving so that you'll have some idea of what's happening in Congress.

Now I said fast-moving, this certainly isn’t descriptive of the way Congress is moving at this time — in fact, there's more and more speculation that Congress will be in session perhaps all year. As one of the junior Members of Congress — far be it from me to predict when we will adjourn — though I do understand from discussions with some of those who, perhaps, should know that we will be here many, many weeks to come.

Now on last Friday, many Republican Members discussed farm legislation — in fact wheat legislation — before the wheat subcommittee, of which I am a member. As I have discussed prior here to on this program, on May 23 — two days after the referendum — a bill along the lines that was worked out by myself, along with the cooperation of Congressman Albert Quie of Minnesota and Congressman Don Short of North Dakota, was introduced by 20 Republican Members. I might add that this legislation was worked on many, many weeks prior to the May 21 referendum, and was introduced on May 23, not simply as a political expedient, but because we had been working on this long before the farmers made their decision on May 21st. At any rate, on last Friday I made a statement to our wheat subcommittee, of which I'm a member; Congressman Short also testified, and Congressman Quie was a chief spokesman for the entire group. Two other Kansans have introduced similar legislation: Congressman Bill Avery and also Congressman Bob Ellsworth.

I really feel that the legislation introduced by the 20 Members of Congress on May 23rd does represent a significant improvement over any program advanced by the Administration. While some of the 20 bills introduced vary in certain details and in certain areas, the basic principles involved in all the measures are the same — and actually, there are about four basic principles.

First, the program would be voluntary. Price support in diversion payments would be available only to those who retire acreage from production. If the person didn't want to come into the program, he would not have to participate in the program, and I do believe that if we've learned anything from the May 21 referendum, it is that the wheat farmers of America want a voluntary program. And this is true, of course, of wheat farmers in Kansas.

A second basic principle is that our program would require land retirement and conservation as a condition of eligibility for program benefits. A minimum 20% would be required with an optional — [correcting himself] an additional 30% reduction allowed. I might add that for those who would retire their land for periods of three to five years, there is an incentive payment paid because we feel that the only answer — or at least one answer — is to keep the land out of production for long periods of time.

The third basic principle is that it would use only payment-in-kind for making diversion payments. The Secretary [of Agriculture] could, however, advance the producer the cash in anticipation of the sale of grain, but there would be no direct payments as provided under the present feed grain program.

And the fourth basic principle is that our program is based on a market economy. The CCC [Commodity Credit Corporation] release price for surplus grain and inventory could not be less than 105% of current support price, plus reasonable carrying charges. And when the supply of grain is back to a normal supply, this released buys would be 115% of the current support price plus reasonable carrying charges, and Commodity Credit Corporation would be required to make a market purchases for grain, which has been sold as being out of condition.

Now, let me say that we've had hearings now for several days in our wheat subcommittee, and as I told the chairman — the [wheat] subcommittee chairman — last Friday, I think our committee should now meet — our subcommittee should meet in executive session, make a determination whether or not we will have wheat legislation, and should find out from the Administration if they intend to support wheat legislation. Year after year the wheat farmers of America become involved in a guessing game with Congress, and the loser is always the wheat producer — and winter wheat areas, who many times, works to ground and sows his wheat without knowing just what the program may be. And I say we should make it clear to the farmer whether or not there will be wheat legislation, and then let him know one way or the other. And I think it's about time that the Administration forgot — [corrects himself] forgets — the defeat on May 21st and makes a real effort to join with other Members of Congress — Republican members — in supporting a reasonable program.

Thanks for listening, our time is up.

This is Congressman Bob Dole with my weekly radio report from Washington. First of all, I wish to thank this station for carrying my weekly program as a public service broadcast, and secondly, as in the past, I certainly want to invite the comments and suggestions and criticism from those who may be listening to our program. I might add that if you have any particular subject that you think should be discussed in light of current affairs, or any legislative matter that you feel should be discussed, I certainly trust that you will convey this information to me, because we want to make our programs of interest, and of course, we want to make them factual and fast-moving so that you'll have some idea of what's happening in Congress.

Now I said fast-moving, this certainly isn’t descriptive of the way Congress is moving at this time — in fact, there's more and more speculation that Congress will be in session perhaps all year. As one of the junior Members of Congress — far be it from me to predict when we will adjourn — though I do understand from discussions with some of those who, perhaps, should know that we will be here many, many weeks to come.

Now on last Friday, many Republican Members discussed farm legislation — in fact wheat legislation — before the wheat subcommittee, of which I am a member. As I have discussed prior here to on this program, on May 23 — two days after the referendum — a bill along the lines that was worked out by myself, along with the cooperation of Congressman Albert Quie of Minnesota and Congressman Don Short of North Dakota, was introduced by 20 Republican Members. I might add that this legislation was worked on many, many weeks prior to the May 21 referendum, and was introduced on May 23, not simply as a political expedient, but because we had been working on this long before the farmers made their decision on May 21st. At any rate, on last Friday I made a statement to our wheat subcommittee, of which I'm a member; Congressman Short also testified, and Congressman Quie was a chief spokesman for the entire group. Two other Kansans have introduced similar legislation: Congressman Bill Avery and also Congressman Bob Ellsworth.

I really feel that the legislation introduced by the 20 Members of Congress on May 23rd does represent a significant improvement over any program advanced by the Administration. While some of the 20 bills introduced vary in certain details and in certain areas, the basic principles involved in all the measures are the same — and actually, there are about four basic principles.

First, the program would be voluntary. Price support in diversion payments would be available only to those who retire acreage from production. If the person didn't want to come into the program, he would not have to participate in the program, and I do believe that if we've learned anything from the May 21 referendum, it is that the wheat farmers of America want a voluntary program. And this is true, of course, of wheat farmers in Kansas.

A second basic principle is that our program would require land retirement and conservation as a condition of eligibility for program benefits. A minimum 20% would be required with an optional — [correcting himself] an additional 30% reduction allowed. I might add that for those who would retire their land for periods of three to five years, there is an incentive payment paid because we feel that the only answer — or at least one answer — is to keep the land out of production for long periods of time.

The third basic principle is that it would use only payment-in-kind for making diversion payments. The Secretary [of Agriculture] could, however, advance the producer the cash in anticipation of the sale of grain, but there would be no direct payments as provided under the present feed grain program.

And the fourth basic principle is that our program is based on a market economy. The CCC [Commodity Credit Corporation] release price for surplus grain and inventory could not be less than 105% of current support price, plus reasonable carrying charges. And when the supply of grain is back to a normal supply, this released buys would be 115% of the current support price plus reasonable carrying charges, and Commodity Credit Corporation would be required to make a market purchases for grain, which has been sold as being out of condition.

Now, let me say that we've had hearings now for several days in our wheat subcommittee, and as I told the chairman — the [wheat] subcommittee chairman — last Friday, I think our committee should now meet — our subcommittee should meet in executive session, make a determination whether or not we will have wheat legislation, and should find out from the Administration if they intend to support wheat legislation. Year after year the wheat farmers of America become involved in a guessing game with Congress, and the loser is always the wheat producer — and winter wheat areas, who many times, works to ground and sows his wheat without knowing just what the program may be. And I say we should make it clear to the farmer whether or not there will be wheat legislation, and then let him know one way or the other. And I think it's about time that the Administration forgot — [corrects himself] forgets — the defeat on May 21st and makes a real effort to join with other Members of Congress — Republican members — in supporting a reasonable program.

Thanks for listening, our time is up.