fled/elm 239 ' Legixlation Affecting the ' Rice Industry, 1933-56 éalaéw I956 ‘TEXAS AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION R. D. LEWIS. DIRECTOR. COLLEGE STATlONpTEXAS acreage allotments, marketing quotas, loans and purchase agreements, surplus supplies totaled s, SUMMARY The motive of government legislation in agriculture was to establish and maintain agric A on a par with other segments of the economy. The base period (1910-14) for the parity concept chosen because it was the most favorable period for which data were available, with the exc of 1917. However, price policies designed to establish parity levels for agriculture without adj simultaneously for differences in the dynamic growth and changes in other segments of the eco will encounter considerable difficulty in maintaining an equitable return for agriculture in its i ment in the national economy. This publication reviews major legislation pertaining to rice since the 1933 Agriculture =. ment Act. It cites the major legislative actions taken by the government toward establishing a1 of income to rice producers commensurate with other commodities produced within the agric = industry. Since rice was a relatively profitable crop during the period covered by major government, lation, there was no serious need for drastic government concern until after 1953. During and immediately after World War II, rice export markets were absorbing all exec’, stocks above the United States domestic requirement, and rice prices were at levels which enco 1 expansion in acreage and yields. This favorable situation for United States rice farmers ended the 1953 rice crop. . The recovery of rice production on an ever larger scale in foreign cou particularly since 1951, has reduced the flow of United States exports into foreign markets, r’, in a large carryover ofrice stocks and depressing domestic prices. "-- Despite government legislation and efforts toward stabilizing rice supplies and distribution, t l over 7 billion pounds from August 1, 1953 to August 1, 1955. The carryover on August 1, 1955 u times greater than the carryover of 150 million pounds on August 1, 1952. I The 1956 Agriculture Act represents another new effort toward alleviating the burden pluses and maladjustments in agriculture. a CONTENTS Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . Before and during World War I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Between World Wars I and II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. During and afteroWorld War H . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . , , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . .2? . I f Government Action since World War I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . Chronology of Legislation, 1933-56 . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary oi Marketing Quotas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Date of Proclamation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Authority to Terminate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Level at Which Established . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . , , . , . . . . . . Authority to Increase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Specific Referendum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . .. Penalties ior Noncompliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . Nonnal Supply and Acreage Allotments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . ., Summary oi Acreage Allotments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . When Proclaimed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . , . . . . . . . . . . >LevelatWhich Established . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. SpecialProvisionstorFarms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. Index of Rice Legislation and Principal Authority, 1933-56 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .j INTRODUCTION ice is one of civilization’s oldest cultivated ‘H and constitutes the basic diet of more people i" any other food. The cultivation of rice has traced back to 3,000 years before the Chris- i. era. Rice became a word-wide food at the .; of the seventeenth century, but did not be- 1e of commercial importance until the middle ‘he nineteenth century, when trade was de- ed with India. Vice became a major crop in the Western isphere between 1885 and 1900, particularly outhwest Louisiana and Southeast Texas, ly after the introduction of the wheat er. his publication reports the first of three ‘iies to evaluate the rice price support program. l- reports will include an economic appraisal , he rice industry and government rice pro- 1 s, and an economic model to determine the end and price structure of the rice economy, ding possible effects of governmental action. re and during World War I ‘=1 he area planted in rice ranged from slightly one-half million acres at the beginning of twentieth century to slightly over one million ’= at the end of World War I. Rice yields j ged approximately 1,500 pounds per acre dur- this period.‘ Farm prices per hundred pounds ed from $1.77 in 1909 to $4.27 in 1918. The 31y average production in the United States iediately preceding World War I was about illion pounds. j een World Wars I and 11 ~ he acreage and yield of rice did not change 1 eciably between the two World Wars. n the last decade prior to World War II, estic and territorial disappearance absorbed p of the total production of rice flowing ugh various domestic market channels. Al- gh domestic consumption increased 60 per- a from 1935 to 1955, this was a result of in- es in population rather than an increase in .capita consumption. uba was taking over two-thirds of the exports i}: this country prior to World War II. Domes- g consumption and territorial shipments ac- ted for 86 percent of the total disappearance, +0 exports to Cuba accounting for an additional 1 rcent. A Legislation Affecting the Rice Industry, 1933-56 JOHN A. KINCANNON, Assistant Professor Department 0f Agricultural Economics and Sociology During and after. World War H Rice prices increased 221 percent from 1940 to 1947 while production increased about 65 percent, Table I. With increased demand and shortages in major producing areas caused by the war, fol- lowed by high world prices, total world production has increased rapidly since World War II. The scarcity of rice relative to market demand has reduced world trade in rice from approximately 90 percent of the total cereal trade to approxi- mately 30 percent. This has complicated the dis- posal of United States rice stocks, since domestic per capita consumption always has been between 5 and 6 pounds. The United States depends on foreign outlets for approximately 50 percent of its total rice production which further complicates the disposition of the excess rice supplies. Most of the shift in the consumption of rice as com- pared with other cereals reflects an unstable condition of supply and relative prices rather than any material changes in diet preferences. About 35 percent of United States rice exports have gone to Asia since 1951. Japan is taking most of these exports and apparently offers the best prospect of a continuing volume market. The volume of rice exports from the United States is considered too small to influence world rice prices and trade materially. The long trend in United States rice prices, therefore, depends on the domestic and world price relationships relative to market demand. Since effective market demand following World War II exceeded available rice supplies, the average seasonal price for rice in the United States has equaled or exceeded support prices in every year since the price support programs for rice were started in 1941 (the year rice was added to the list of basic commodities) except in 1951, 1952, 1954 and 1955. For the past two seasons, rice prices have been lower than the levels of price support. This resulted in slightly more than 1.9 billion pounds being placed under loans and purchase agreements. Further acreage reductions seem necessary because of increasing foreign production, in- creased consumption of substitute cereals, re- latively high support levels for rice and the possibility of declining world prices. This un- favorable situation for rice is likely to continue unless some program is devised whereby large quantities (roughly 50 percent of United States production) can be moved through export chan- nels at prices below the support levels. More 3 United States rice may be moved into world markets provided it can compete on a price basis with other rice-producing countries. GOVERNMENT ACTION SINCE WORLD WAR I Shortly after World War I there was a grow- ing concern over the spread between the prices farmers paid and the prices they were receiving for farm commodities. Rice prices, for example, dropped 60 percent from 1919 to 1922. The growing disparity between farm and non- farm commodity prices accompanied by falling farm incomes, engendered pressure from farm groups for relief legislation and led to the for- mation of the “Farm Bloc” in Congress. President Harding called a National Agricul- ture Conference in 1922 to emphasize a “fair exchange value” for all farm products with that of nonfarm commodities. No action was taken on the conference recommendations. Despite continued efforts by the Farm Bloc to establish some type of price legislation, it was not until 1929 that a bill aimed specifically at sup- porting farm prices became a law. The primary objective of the Agricultural Act, passed by Congress in June 1929, was to promote an “order- ly” marketing of farm products. The average level of farm prices fell 64 percent from August 1929 to February 1933; rice prices fell 58 percent. TABLE 1. RICE, ROUGH: PRODUCTION, DOMESTIC UTILIZATION, EXPORTS AND CARRYOVER, 1930-55‘ a The contention that the only feasible W raise farm prices was to cut production 1' legislation being presented to Congress in i 1933; in May of that year the Agricultural. j ustment Act was passed. This Act endeavor“ raise the purchasing power of farmers to :1 level. 1 The Agricultural Adjustment Act wa clared unconstitutional by the Supreme Coui January 1936, and shortly thereafter C0. passed the Soil Conservation and Domestic ' ment Act. This Act aimed at diverting ac i out of surplus crops. Most of the principal provisions of the.‘ Act were rewritten into the basic Agricu Adjustment Act of 1938. The Agricultura justment Act of 1938 was the first Act primarily affected rice, and only then ‘extent of the conservation payment featu f established the provisions and framewor" acreage allotments and marketing quotas. " The principal provisions of the remained in effect until December 31, 1948}? Act of 1948 extended the level of suppo p 1949; that is, the level of supports c0 adjusted downward in 1950, whenever I supplies were in excess of total supplies. _ prevailed some dissatisfaction with the :§_ tural Adjustment Act of 1948, for fear tha f income might fall. The 1949 Agricultur justment Act again extended the date‘; flexible supports would go into effect. M . Season - A Year Production Exports Carryover price z, hundred _ _- - — — — — Million pounds — -— — — — — Doll 1930 20.218 V 16.759 4,552 1.386 1.7 1931 21,076 15.923 4,437 3,078 1.1 . 1932 18,729 17,846 2,879 1,982 - 1 1933 16,943 15,505 1,633 2.595 l. l_' 1934 17.571 18,953 1,988 785 1. ,_ 1935 17,753 17,965 1,369 1,296 If 1936 I 22,419 21,874 840 3,712 1 l‘ 1937 24,040 21,346 4.764 3,147 1 p 1938 23,628 19,207 4,767 4,247 1. *1 1939 24,328 20,046 4,484 5,235 A 1 »l 1940 24,495 21.138 5,651 2,956 1. ., 1941 23,095 _ 19,571 6,552 567 3 ~" 1942 29,082 20,266 6,961 2,325 3 1”‘ 1943 29,264 21,316 7,069 1,828 3' 1944 30,974 20,001 10,201 1.558 1945 30,668 19,613 11,469 1,225 3 . 1946 32,497 20,162 12,291 596 ' 5" i 1947 35,217 22,037 13,055 748 5 1948 38,275 22,092 14,378 2,505 l, 1949 - 40,784 23,423 16,224 3.469 1950 38,757 25,693 13,167 4,519 1951 45,853 24,121 23,058 2.040 1952 48,260 25,121 25,122 1,515 1953 52,761 25.752 22.708 7,557 1954 64.514 27.839 14.385 29,900 1955 53.647 27.947 23,000 32.700 ‘1930-53 data from Rice. rough: U. S. supply and disposition. annually, 1909-54. Grain Divisi-n. Commodity Stabilizatii U. S. Department oi Agriculture, Washington, lune 1955. 1954 data irom the Wheat Situation, WS-147, page 33. U. S. ' j ot Agriculture. Agricultural Marketing Service, Washington. February 28, 1956. 4 i‘ ‘ Jblishing the Act of 1949, it was decided 'vely high level supports were to remain fin 1950. However, beginning in 1951, file support provisions of the 1949 Act uled to go into effect, but actually the upport remained at 90 percent of parity . he 1954 rice crop. The 1949 Act set the gilevels between 75 and 90 percent of jnd also provided that marketing quotas nced prior to January 1 for the ensuing I o ;ct of 1954 provided that the level of 5 be between 821A), and 90 percent of "r the 1955 rice crop, and beginning with _ rice crop, the level of support was to be =75 and 90 percent of parity, depending uch normal supply exceeds total supply. gricultural Act of 1956 was to formulate qte a soil bank program in two parts: {e reserve and the conservation reserve. ge reserve provided for payments for 1 reduction of rice acreages below acre- n ents. The conservation reserve provid- oving rice cropland from cultivation ing it exclusively to forage, trees, water Ir wild life. Compensation for acreage i the conservation reserve was to be in of annual payments equivalent to a return on the diverted land. ‘TCNOLOGY OF LEGISLATION, T. 1933-SB l. ess passed a series of acts between 1933 pertaining to agriculture. An index of ology is on page 15. This legislation y. rice in varying degrees depending on , . needs of this commodity. The follow- l ology summarizes provisions of indi- ts that apply to rice and also provides l. licies and operations that were carried Jesult of the legislation. i HON-1933 Law 10-73rd Congress—The original 1 al Adjustmet Act (of 1933) provided Y_ ent programs, financed by processing ‘l for disbursement of rental and benefit ‘I. These payements applied to rice only A tent of marketing agreements and AND OPERATIONS-1933 e time the Agricultural Adjustment Act goved and a rice program launched in f planting season for that year had passed rt crop already was in prospect. These ,= made it impracticable at that time to {crop production adjustment program as I by the Agricultural Adjustment Act. I tal or benefit payments were provided 933 crop. The marketing agreements that were entered into included provisions per- mitting producers to control the acreage planted to rice. LEGISLATION—1934 None POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1934 Since the delays and changes in the agreement made it impossible for growers in the Southern States to sign contracts before the 1934 rice crop was planted, no production adjustment program was undertaken that year. Nevertheless, antici- pating the control program, most of the growers actually planted according to their allotments. In response to the possibility of higher rice prices, growers probably would have expanded their plantings considerably if not prevented from doing so by acreage restrictions. " LEGISLATION—1935 Public Law 20-7415!» Congress—This law was an amendment to the rice section of the Agricul- tural Adjustment Act and set August 1-July 31 as the marketing year.‘ Another amendment specified that the weight to which the tax rate applied was to be the weight of rough rice when delivered to the processor. An exception to the Act was made where the producers processed their own rice. Under this condition, the weight to which the tax rate applied was the weight of rough rice when delivered to the mill. Public Law 320-74th C0n-gress—This was an amendment to the 1933 Agricultural Adjustment Act and pertained to the market agreements which were inaugrated for rice in 1933. cluded crop-control provisions for the 1934-35 crop of California rice producers. The 1934 agreement that covered rice produced in Ark- ansas, Louisiana and Texas also was revised. The De Ronen Rice Act was approved in March 1935 as an amendment to the 1933 Agri- cultural Adjustment Act. It provided for the elimination of the floor-stocks tax on clean rice. It included the issuance of tax payment warrants to pay a rough rice tax on rice for the 1933 and 1934 crops. These were warrants that had been purchased in compliance with provisions of the rice-marketing agreements and licenses, or which remained in the hands of growers. This Act was passed as a result of requests from growers for a rice program based on a processing tax and the benefit payment provisions of the 1933 Agricul- tural Adjustment Act. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1935 Approximately 190 million pounds of excess rice resulted from the 1934 crop. Domestic and territorial markets absorb about the same amount of rice each year, regardless of price. A possible solution to the rice disposal problem is govern- ment purchases for domestic and foreign distri- bution through relief agencies. Reduction in ex- 5 It in- ' ports resulted in further government action. A new program was initiated in April 1935 to provide a tax refund on exported rice. This made it possible for the United States again to export sufficient quantities of rice to eliminate surpluses and t0 maintain domestic prices above world price levels. Exports amounted to 76 million pounds in April, May and June, compared with 18 million pounds during the same months in 1934. United States rice stocks were reduced from the all-time high of 220 million pounds in August 1932 to about 77 million pounds by August 1935. In the fall of 1935 a rice program was develop- ed for 1936-39. This program included rice growers in Hawaii for the first time. ' LEGISLATION—1936 During January 1936, the Supreme Court, through the Hoosac Mills decision, declared the production control features of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 unconstitutional. Public Law 461-74th C0ugress—The Soil Con- servation and Domestic Allotment Act was en- acted in February to supplement the 1933 Agri- cultural Adjustment Act. The Act authorized payments to farmers for soil-conservation prac- tices and adjustment of acreage of soil-depleting crops, including rice. This constituted the pri- mary basis for rice programs relative to acreage allotments. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1936 United States rice shipments of milled rice in 1936 were 7.3 million pounds below 1935. United States’ rice exports of 80 million pounds in 1936 were considerably lower than any other year from 1933 to 1939. Average exports from 1936 to 1939 were 190 million pounds per year. However, exports from the United States in 1936 were only about one-fifth of those in 1937. LEGISLATION—1937 Public Law 170-75th C0ugress—This Act authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to make conservation payments to rice producers. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1937 The 1937 Conservation Program, announced in December 1936, authorized conservation pay- ments to rice producers at the rate of 22 cents per 100 pounds of the domestic consumption quota, provided the acreage of soil-conserving crops on rice land equaled 25 percent of the base acreage. LEGISLATION—1938 Public La/ur l30-75th Cougrcss-This Agri- cultural Adjustment Act was designed to continue the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, as amended, to conserve national resources, prevent the wasteful use of soil fertility and to preserve, maintain and rebuild the farm and 6 ranch land resources in the national p interest. It provided for an orderly and bal I flow of rice in interstate and foreign com ~. through storage of reserve supplies on loan~ also assisted rice producers in obtaining r; prices for rice as well as income parity. Acr allotment provisions of the Act made accep ‘I or rejection of the allotment, as a basis for duction of rice, voluntary with the prodi Section 303 of the 1938 Act authorized the S tary of Agriculture to make payments to rice, ducers. The purpose of this provision :f afford a return to the producer approxim, the parity price for rice in accordance 1 available funds. i Public Resolution 122-75th Congress ( Adjustment Act)—This Act was approved , 21, 1938, and funds were appropriated t0 E parity payments to rice producers who coope in the 1939 agricultural conservation progra’ POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1938 The Secretary of Agriculture was req to announce the national and state acreage ments for rice for the following crop year. i. allotments were apportioned to the rice-p z ing states on the basic of the rice acreage -d the preceding 5 years. The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 193 hibited the application of marketing quo ’ rice in the marketing year beginning Au 1938. It provided that if in later years the“- available supply (the preceding year’s car f plus the current year’s production, plus esti imports in the current year) of rice ex, normal supply (a normal year’s domestic‘= sumption in the preceding year, plus expo the current year, plus 1O percent of consu Q and exports) by more than 10 percent, mar quotas would be announced not later than l§ ber 31 in the year preceding the crop y, which marketing quotas were to be ope ' The marketing quotas, however, had to ” proved by two-thirds of the growersvotin referendum. " The Agricultural Adjustment Act of_'_ endeavored to stabilize the supply of rice.; stabilizing provisions of the Act included a_ adjustments, storage of surplus rice underf; and marketing quotas to regulate marketin" the supply was considered excessive. I LEGISLATION--I939 Public Law 159-76th C0ngrcss—This -.’ the Secretary of Agriculture to make pari ‘ ments to producers of rice pursuant to t’ visions of Section 303 of the Agricultural j ment Act of 1938. It provided, however, ' expending the appropriation, the rate of p to rice growers could not exceed the _ by which the average farm price of rice w; than 75 percent of the parity price; t p; payments were to be made to a farmer only, ) H: the acreage planted t0 rice for harvest ;_:nd in 1940 was not in excess of the farm allotment established for rice under the ural Conservation Program of 1939. ES AND OPERATIONS—1939 _' first year in which the rice program, he Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, fully effective was 1939. The program ;~ larger payments to rice producers than a’ the preceding year. Price-adjustment ts were made on the normal production yd acreage for rice at the rate of 12 cents "dred pounds. Soil conservation program ts to rice producers were made at the rate ‘ts per hundred pounds. -ATION-1940 tic Law 658-76th Congress-This Act *1 the Secretary of Agriculture to make ayments to rice producers under the pro- fof Section 303 of the Agricultural Adjust- ct of 1938. It provided that such pay- f~ made to a farmer only if the acreage _ to rice for harvest on his land in 1941 in excess of the farm acreage allotment hment under the Agricultural Conser- rogram. flic Law 716-76th C0ugress—This Act _ the Soil Conservation and Domestic nt Act, as amended, and the Agricultural y ent Act of 1938, as amended, to define It for rice as meaning to dispose of it or processed form, by voluntary or in- l, sale, barter or exchange. j ES AND OPERATIONS—194O e 892 thousand acres Were affected under pl Acreage Allotment Program. j ATION—1941 lic Law 144-77th Congress—This law Was -.to enable the Secretary of Agriculture to " rity payments to rice producers under the ns of Section 303 of the Agricultural Ad- j t Act of 1938. The Act provided for ts for rice to a farmer in full amount only creage planted in rice for harvest on his .1942 did not exceed the farm acreage allot- ‘tablished for rice under the Agricultural ation Program. The Act provided that if votment was exceeded, the parity payment Would be reduced by not more than 10 v for each 1 percent or fraction thereof by he acreage planted to the commodity was i: of such allotment. accordance with regulations for similar ns for plantings in excess of the acreage 1 t for the commodity on other farms, the of Agriculture also could provide for s in excess of acreage allotments, and to y other commodity for which allotments or limits were established under the Agricultural Conservation Program on the same or any other farm. If the sum of the prevailing basic-loan rate (or the average farm price, whichever is higher) for the crop year 1941 (the loan rate being the applicable rate of the payments announced under the Soil Conservation and Demestic Allotment Act, for the purposes of the 1942 Agricultural Conservation Program and the parity payments that were appropriated) exceeded an amount suf- ficient to increase the farmers’ returns to parity prices, then parity payments were to be adjusted to provide a return to producers equal to, but not greater than, parity price. ' Public Law 374-77th Congress-This Act was an amendment to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, and extended the provisions for the 1941 rice crop through 1946. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1941 Rice Was added to the list of basic commodities in 1941. The first loan program for rice was offered to producers during the 1941 crop season, and loans have been available every succeeding year. Commodity Credit Corporation loan pro- grams were operative each succeeding year ex- cept 1943, 1944 and 1946. Some 896 thousand acres were under soil- depleting acreage allotments in 1941. The sup- port level initiated in 1941 was supported at 85 percent of parity. LEGISLATION—1942 Public Law 674-77th Congress-This Act en- abled the Secretary of Agriculture to make parity payments to rice producers under the provisions of Section 303 of the 1938 Agricultural Adjust- ment Act. Funds were reappropriated out of the unobligated balance of the appropriations made under the Agricultural Appropriation Act for the fiscal year 1941 and 1942, and were to remain available until June 30, 1945. The Secretary was directed to make such additional commit- ments or incur such additional obligations as deemed necessary to provide full parity payments for rice in 1942. Section 8 (a) of the Stabili- zation Act of 1942 directed the Commodity Credit Corporation to make loans to cooperators at 90 percent of parity for rice harvested after Decem- ber 1941, and before 2 years after the end of hostilities. This period was extended, however, to December 31, 1948. To permit prosecution of the war, Section 8 (c) of the Act authorized sup- ports at not less than 90 percent of parity. Public Law 421-77171, Congrcss—This Act was aimed at furthering national defense and security by checking speculative and excessive price rises, price dislocations and inflationary tendencies. It provided that no maximum price be established or maintained for rice below the highest of any of the following prices as determined and pub- lished by the Secretary of Agriculture: (1) 110 percent 0f the parity price of rice, adjusted by the Secretary of Agriculture for grade, location and rice under subsection (b), 110 percent seasonal differentials or, in case a com- parable price has been determined for of such comparable price adjusted in the same manner, in lieu of 110 percent of the parity price so adjusted; (2) the market price prevailing for rice on October 1, 1941; (3) the market price prevailing for rice on December 15, 1941; or (4) the average price for rice from July 1, 1919 to June 30, 1929. POLICIES AND OPER'ATIONS—1942 The level of price supports was maintained at 85 percent of parity for 1942. Loans also were made on the 1942 crop. ' This was the first year a sizable acreage allot- ment increase was made; it amounted to 1.2 million acres. The government bought rice di- rectly from the Commodity Credit Corporation for foreign relief for the first time in 1942. LEGISLATION—1943 Public Law 129-78th Congress-This Act was passed to make appropriations for the Depart- ment of Agriculture for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1944, and for other purposes. It enabled the Secretary of Agriculture to make full parity payments for the 1942 rice crop under the De- partment of Agriculture Appropriations Act of 1943. The appropriation was to remain available until June 30, 1945. This appropriation was to be merged with the appropriation under the act of 1943 and the unobligated balance of the appropriation so merged, and Was to remain available until June 30, 1946. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1943 N0 rice loans, purchases or purchase agree- ments were made in 1943. The absence of such loan programs was a consequence of the seasonal average price being much higher than the average support level in 1943. There were 1.4 million acres under the conservation acreage allotment program. This was the last year that rice pro- ducers participated in acreage allotments under the conservation program. LEGISLATION—1944 None POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1944 No rice price support program was in oper- ation in 1944. Loan rates were not announced in 1944 because rice prices were above the sup- port prices. Slightly more than 1.5 million acres were seeded to rice in 1944. Production that year reached a record of 3.1 billion pounds on 14 thousand fewer acres than were seeded the previous year. 8 LEGISLATION—1945 None POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1945 A loan program was announced for the _ rice crop. The acreage seeded to rice W thousand acres over the previous year. i the exception of 1944 and 1950, rice acreag creased every year from 1939 through 1954. LEGISLATION—1946 None POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—-1946 No new support program was enacted in v The season average price increased to $5; hundred pounds in 1946. This was a 26 pe v increase over the 1945 price. The level of _ port, however, was set at 90 percent of pari - The 1946 acreage seeded to rice in the i} States was 5 percent greater than the pre year. ' LEGISLATION—1947 None POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1947 Loans were made available to rice prod in 1947, but again the season average price: $2.21 higher than the support price of B, Rice acreage in the United States in 194777 about 25 thousand more than the 1946 ac f World exports in 1947 were about 8 percent » than in 1946. This small increase was pe attributable to military relief which was in f in the world export figures that year for the; time. United States shipments increased 78? cent in 1947. - LEGISLATION—1948 Public Laiw 8.97-80th Congress-This authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to cise means of stabilizing prices of agric ' commodities. The Secretary was direct utilize any instrumentality or agency Wit under the direction of the Department of A' ture to stabilize rice prices through loan purchases. The prices received by produce, rice marketed before June 30, 1950 were‘; supported if the producers did not disap marketing quotas for rice for the marketing? beginning in the calendar year in which th was harvested. * POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1948 Purchase agreements were available Q producers for the first time in 1948. Ap‘ mately 153 thousand bags (100 pounds e the 1948 rough rice crop were placed under- and about 3.6 million bags were cove . purchase agreements. Slightly less than i cent of the total United States rice pro“, was placed under price support in 1948. f: season average price received by rice rs dropped from $5.97 per hundred pounds in to $4.88 in 1948. From 1941 through 1947, only one exception, the season average price ysed over the preceding year. The exception led in 1944 when the average was 3 cents ‘ ndred pounds less than in 1943. LATION-1949 .< blic Law 439-81st Congress—This Act jvored to stabilize prices through loans, ses and other rice operations. The 1949 Act '3 e basic authority for current price support yams. It became effective with the 1950 rice l The Act required the Secretary of Agri- e to support the price of rice at a specified tage of parity. Marketing quotas were ed in the event total supply exceeded the l supply by more than 10 percent. lotion 1,16 0f the Agricultural Adjustment 1949 permitted the Commodity Credit fration to donate rice stocks to specified outlets. This action was deemed necessary vent the waste of rice stocks before they ;be disposed of in normal domestic channels _ t impairing the price program. Under the rice could be sold abroad at competitive P prices. The authorized outlets included federal and private agencies. The rice had T» utilized in the United States in nonprofit p-lunch programs, for the assistance of ' persons and in charitable institutions, ing hospitals. Originally, Section 416 rized donations at the point of storage and lied that the recipient pay transportation her additional costs involved in moving the A IES AND OPERATIONS-1949 ‘ans were made in 1949 on 190 million s of rough rice and purchase agreements i made on 630 million pounds. About 20 n of the total United States rice production laced under price support in 1949. 1» United States season average price fell to in 1949. This was 78 cents below the 1948 ‘of $4.88, and $1.87 below the 1947 price of V. Season average prices in 1947 were higher uring any previous year. LATION—-1950 blic Law 561-81st C0ngress——This Act ted the marketing quota provisions of the Jltural Adjustment Act of 1938. Its pro- are explained in the summary of market- otas on page 11. IES AND OPERATIONS—1950 j»: on the 1950 rice cropcovered about 'llion pounds and purchase agreements were Ton 570 million pounds. Approximately 2 I. of the total United States rice production ‘laced under price support in 1950. This was 18 percent less than the quantity under price support in 1949. Acreage allotments under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 were proclaimed for the first time in 1950, and amounted to slightly less than 1.6 million acres. The 1950 season average price of $5.09 was 24 percent greater than in the previous year. LEGISLATION—1951 None POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1951 About 400 million pounds of rice were under loans in 1951' and purchase agreements were made on 180 million pounds. The quantity of rice placed under price sup- port in 1951 dropped to 1 percent of the total United States production. The 1951 season aver- age price of $4.82 was below the support price for the first time since 1941. Total United States rice production in 1951 was slightly over 700 million pounds greater than the production in 1950. This was the largest annual increase in rice production since the 1942 crop when 26 percent more rice was produced than in 1941. Export shipments in 1951 fell 5 percent below the 1950 level, while world exports increased about 78 percent. The second and last year in which there was an acreage allotment Without a marketing quota proclaimed for rice under the Agricultural Ad- justment Act of 1938 was 1951. Some 1.7 million acres were affected. LEGISLATION—1952 Public Law 585-82nd Ccmgress——This Act was intended to continue the existing method of com- puting plrity prices for rice. It also provided that the level of support to cooperators would be 90 percent of the parity price for the 1953 and 1954 crops of rice if producers approved market- ing quotas. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1952 Loans on the 1952 rice crop totaled about 21 million pounds, but no purchase agreements were made that year. The support level and season average price, amounting to $5.04 and $4.87, respectively, were slightly higher than in the preceding year. Only .4 of 1 percent of the total United States production of rice was placed under price support in 1952. There were no Commodity Credit Corporation inventory acquisitions through price support operations in 1952. United States shipments in 1952 increased 36 million pounds over 1951. United States exports reached an all-time high of slightly over 2.5 billion pounds in 1952. World exports of milled rice in 1952 increased 300 million“ pounds over 1951 exports. In 1952 rice producers had their most favor- able year relative to rice shipments and exports. The 1947 price of $5.97 was 78 cents per hundred pounds higher than in 1952. LEGISLATION—1953 Public Law 216-83rd Congress-This Act en- abled the President to furnish emergency as- sistance to friendly foreign governments to meet famine or other urgent relief requirements until March 15, 1954. The President directed the Com- modity Credit Corporation to make available I quantities out of its stock of rice, f. o. b. vessels for transfer to the designated sources. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1953 Because parity at the start of the marketing season was lower than at the time the support level was announced, rice was supported at 90 percent of parity in 1953. The support price dropped 20 cents below the 1952 support price of $5.04 per hundred pounds. About 150 million pounds of rice had been placed under loan through January 15, 1954, and 19.6 million pounds were under purchase agree- ments in conjunction with the 1953 program. World exports dropped to a low of 670 million pounds. This was 62 percent below the 1952 export figure. Shipments in 1953 were 13 per- cent below the 1952 shipments of 390 million pounds. _. LEGISLATION—1954 The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1954- 83rd Congress This Act allowed price supports for rice to remain at levels provided for in the Agricultural Act of 1949. These were to go into effect beginning with the 1955 crop, with the exception that for the 1955 rice crop the minimum level of price support would not be below 82.5 percent of parity. Milled rice was available for donation to domestic nonprofit school-lunch programs and welfare use authorized under the provisions of Section 416 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended by Section 302 of the Agricultural Trade and Development and Assistance Act of 1954. The cost of transportation to central points within the country was paid by the Commodity Credit Corporation. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1954 The 1954 season average price of $4.35 again was lower than the 1951-52 support prices of $4.92. A large increase also occurred in the num- ber of loans, purchase agreements and Com- modity Credit Corporation inventory acquisitions l0 in 1954. This reflected diminishing A market outlets, lower domestic market pric a record crop. Approximately half of the States production of rice has been exported, 1951. Because parity at the beginning of the m ing season was lower than at the time the s . level was announced, the price support lev again 90 percent of parity. Rice was seeded in 1954 on 2.5 million ; The record production, yield and carryo the 1954 rice crop necessitated imposing =~ allotments and marketing quotas. The Sec, of Agriculture proclaimed acreage allotmen marketing quotas on December 31, 1954.. rice acreage was reduced 24.7 percent f 1955 crop. Rice producers held a referend February 28, 1955 to decide whether mar quotas would be proclaimed on the 19 i" acreage allotment. The referendum carried - two-thirds majority necessary for approva ‘ voting by states was: Arkansas, 96.6 p Mississippi, 96.2 percent; Louisiana, 94.5 +3 Texas, 88.2 percent; Florida, 87.5 percent souri, 86.2 percent; South Carolina, 81.8 '4 and California, 62.1 percent. . Expenses of the Federal Goverment f, rice programs amounted to 35.3 million‘ from 1932 through 1954. This was .4 of 1 f of the total cost of government programs p», farm commodities in this period. i LEGISLATION—1955 i, Public Lau: 29-84th Congress-This »_ creased the national rice acreage allotmy 69 thousand, making a total of 1.9 millio allotted for the 1955 crop. ; Public Law 288-84th Congress-Th established the national rice acreage all for the 1956 rice crop. The acreage was not less than 85 percent of the final allot 1.9 million acres established for the 195 POLICIES AND OPERATIONS—1955 Both acreage allotments and ma ~ quotas were in effect during 1955. Rou; yield in 1955 was about 2,725 pounds per a approximately 14 percent more than yield of 2,389 pounds per acre. r1 Under the 1954 Agricultural Adjustm' the support level for the 1955 rice crop =' lot less than 82.5 percent of parity. H‘ the actual support level was 85 percent of * while the support price was $4.66 pert , pounds. The carryover on August 1, 1955 WA 2.7 billion pounds, compared with a car L‘ 750 million pounds in 1954. j l \ Approximately 1.5 billion pounds of t rice crop were placed under support as of ‘compared with 1.92 billion pounds of the __; e crop on January 1, 1955. Rice exports .1955 increased appreciably over those of Al rice supplies for the year beginning > 1 Were estimated at 7.73 billion pounds. LATION—1956 l cultural Act of 1956-84th Congress- ‘Title I of this law, the Secretary of Agri- ‘ is directed to execute a Soil Bank program ‘parts. The first part, the acreage reserve t , is applicable to growers of basic crops. 71:- are to be made for voluntary reductions lge below acreage allotments. The pro- in. to be effective with the 1956 rice crop to terminate after the 1959 rice crop. The i may enter into a contract with the _ry of Agriculture to set aside a designated ; his allotted acreage into a reserve acreage hich no crop will be harvested, and on ino livestock are to be grazed. The Secre- directed to establish a national acreage “ goal each year for rice and to determine, l the county Agricultural Stabilization ttee, the limit of participation of each n a manner calculated to achieve the na- oal. The total amount of compensation in ,= is limited to 750 million dollars. A rice ; is eligible for acreage reserve payments f he underplants his rice acreage allotment ' ifies that he underplanted (a) in antici- ' of complying with the 1956 acreage re- tor (b) because of adverse weather con- " or (2) he has complied with his soil rm allotment, but an acreage of the rice t‘ harvested because of destruction by na- . uses; or (3) the farmer is in an area 1 an established final date for rice is sub- 5 to May 28, and he plows or otherwise lly incorporates the crop into the soil, or tows or cuts the crop after May 28 and i,‘ June 3O or the established final date, ‘i er is later, but not later than July 31. lb imum and minimum acreage that a f may place in an acreage reserve has been Iled. national average rate for rice is $2.25 per .~ pounds. Payments for underplanting sed on normal yield on the designated A Payments for destruction because of lcauses or physical incorporation of the l: to the soil are based on appraised or j yield for the farm, but will not be less ' p61‘ QCPG. ' second part of the Soil Bank program is ervation reserve. Under its provisions Qrmers may contract with the Secretary of ilture for a minimum period of 3 years to _' designated rice cropland from cultivation Tdevote it exclusively to forage, trees, water or Wildlife conserving uses. Compensation for acreage placed in the con- servation reserve is to be in the form of annual payments equivalent to a reasonable return on the diverted land. The Federal G-overnment is to pay a share of the cost of establishing the conservation uses. The total compensation paid in any year under this program is limited to 450 million dollars. Farmers may participate in either or both the acreage and conservation reserve programs. POLICIES AND OPERATIONS——1956 World production of rice reached a record level in most countries relative to acreage and yield. The rice acreage in the United States was reduced another 15 percent below the 1955 acreage allotment. The acreage for the 1956 rice crop was established at about 1.6 million. Both acreage allotments and marketing quotas were established for the 1956 rice crop, and a minimum national average support of $4.50 per hundred pounds, or 83 percent of parity, was established. SUMMARY OF MARKETING QUOTAS Date of Proclamation Quotas are proclaimed not later than Decem- ber 31. If the Secretary of Agriculture deter- mines that the total supply exceeds the normal supply by more than 10 percent, he must proclaim marketing quotas for the rice crop produced in the following year, unless he dispenses with quotas under his emergency authority. Authority to Terminate The Secretary may terminate quotas when necessary to meet a national emergency or a material increase in export demand, or make a normal supply of rice available free of marketing restrictions. Level at Which Established No national marketing quota is determined, but a national acreage allotment is computed by the same formula used when only acreage allot- ments are in effect. Farm marketing quotas amount to actual production on the total rice acreage less the farm marketing excess. Farm marketing excess is equal to the normal pro- duction on the total farm acreage in excess of production on the farm acreage allotment; how- ever, if the producer fulfills production levels, it cannot be larger than the amount by which actual rice production exceeds the normal production on the allotted acreage. Authority to Increase The Secretary may increase quotas when necessary to meet a national emergency or a ll material increase in export demand, or make a normal supply of rice available free of marketing restrictions. Specific Referendum A referendum must be held within 30 days after the issuance of the marketing quota proc- lamation, and any farmer engaged in producing the crop harvested in the year immediately pre- ceding the referendum is eligible to vote. A farmer may vote for quotas for 1 year or vote for no quotas. For farmers to retain quotas, not less than two-thirds of the eligible farmers voting must approve. Results are announced February 15 immediately preceding the marketing year for which quotas are in effect if the vote is unfavor- able. Penalties ior Noncompliance 1. The amount of the penalty is 5O percent of the June 15 parity price. 2. Exempt from quotas are small rice farms and rice produced for experimental purposes on publicly owned agricultural experiment stations. 3. The penalty must be paid on all farm marketing excess. 4. Payment of penalty can be avoided or post- poned by storing farm marketing excess, delivery of excess to the Secretary of Agriculture or! his designee or disposition in a manner not inconsist- ent with the purposes of the Act. The producer has a reasonable period before harvest to adjust production. 5. If the farmer does not avoid or postpone the penalty, he may pay it before any of the crop is marketed, or the penalty may be collected by ......the buyer on each bag of rice not identified as penalty. Normal Supply and Acreage Allotments For purposes of determining the size of na- tional acreage allotment, normal supply is the estimated rice exports for the marketing year in which acreage allotments or marketing quotas will be in effect, plus estimated domestic con- sumption of rice for the preceding marketing year, plus an additional 10 percent of the total of carryover allowance. The Secretary may ad- just for trends in consumption and unusual con- ditions. SUMMARY OF ACREAGE ALLOTMENTS When Proclaimed Allotments are proclaimed every year, unless the Secretary dispenses with allotments under his emergency authority. "The Secretary may terminate or increase allotments when necessary to meet a national emergency or a material in- 12 crease in export demand. The latest date proclaiming acreage allotments is Decemberj preceding the crop year for which acreage all ments will be in effect. ' Level at Which Established NationaL-The national level is the numbe Y acres of rice which, when multiplied by the tional average yield of rice per acre in thf preceding years, will produce a new crop together with the number of bags of the old _ of rice carried over into the marketing quota ~‘ equal a normal supply. The allotment for k 1956 crop cannot be less than 85 percent of 1.955 allotment. State—National acreage allotment (less, serve of not to exceed 1 percent for old f1 with inadequate allotments because of insuffi, state or county allotments or because rice wa, planted on the farm during all of the prec 5 years) is apportioned to the producing sta I the basis of the average number of acres pl to rice in each state during the 5 preceding f (plus the acreage diverted under previous 5 cultural adjustment programs) adjusted f trends in acreage. Farm—-Two general bases for establi individual farm acreage allotments are pro g (1) Iiistorg/ of the pr0ducer—The state ac , allotment (less a reserve of not to exc percent for new producers) is apportion farms within the state using these stand’ past production in the state of rice by the. ducer on the farm, taking into conside acreage allotments previously established I! producer; abnormal conditions affecting ac f land, labor and equipment available for th’ duction of rice; crop rotation practices; an soil and other physical factors affectin production of rice. (2) History of the of The state acreage allotment (less a rese ;f not to exceed 3 percent for new farms t, reserve of not to exceed 5 percent for Q adjustments in county allotments for tre‘ acreage and for abnormal conditions aff plantings) is apportioned to counties in the; on the same basis as the national allotm apportioned to states. The county acreage‘; ment then is apportioned to farms with county on the basis of past production of l the farm, taking into consideration acreag‘ ments previously established for the farm i applicable standards set forth above. The i: of farm basis is used only when recommen the Agricultural Stabilization Conservatio committee and approved by the Secretary; Special Provisions for Farms New Farms—Not to exceed 3 percent.“ state allotment may be used to establish :‘ allotments for new farms (those on Whi was not planted in any of the 5 preceding,’ y‘ gbasis ‘of the applicable factors used for ‘hing allotments for old farm. ip-Farvns-l-Not to exceed 1 percent of the V} allotment may be used for apportionment " s receiving allotments which are in- "because of insufficient state or county allotments or because rice was not planted on the farm during all of the 5 preceding years. Small Farmnv-Acreage allotments or market- ing quotas do not apply to nonirrigated rice produced on any farm Where the acreage planted to nonirrigated rice does not_exceed 3 acres. 13 [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] INDEX OF RICE LEGISLATION AND PRINCIPAL AUIHCRITY, 1933-56 Principal authority ..t::;:zi. p.f;:::;:.. m» 23:22.22: °Z2§ZZZ‘.‘;’“ Pu-chw }P.I.. 1U‘, 73rd Congress M A P.L. 20, 74th Congress TP-L. 320, 74th Congress M :Part of 1933 AAA” P.L. 461, 74th Congress A CP P.L. 170, 75th Congress A CP ;P.I.. 430, 75th Congress A PP 'P.R. 122“, 75th Congress jP.L. 159, 76th Congress A PP CP ‘P.L. 658, 76th Congress A PP ‘P.L. 716, 76th Congress P.L. 144. 77th Congress M A PP L P P.L. 374, 77th Congress P.L. 421, 77th Congress P.L. 674, 77th Congress M A PP L P.L. 129, 78th Congress M A PP v Provision PL 374, 77th Congress M PP Provision PL 374, 77th Congress M PP L Provision PL 374, 77th Congress M PP Authority PL 144, 77th Congress M PP L PA P.L. 897, 80th Congress M PP L PA P.L. 439, 81st Congress M PP L PA »P.L. 561, 81st Congress M A PP L PA Provision PL 439, 81st Congress M A PP L PA ~ P.L. 585, 82nd Congress M PP L PA P.L. 216, 83rd Congress M PP L PA 1 AAA of 1954, 83rd Congress M PP L PA , P.L. 29, 84th Congress M A PP L PA A P.L. 288, 84th Congress . Ag. Act, 1956, 84th Congress See Legislation — 1956 ans Public Law. fiDeclared unconstitutional. 3P.R. means Public Resolution. 15 State-wide Researc The Texas Agricultural Experiment Stati- is the public agricultural research agen oi the State oi Texas, and is one oi Location oi iield research units in Texas main- t' d b th T A ' li l E ' i 1 sciliiln In tetoopeeliziinggliiglentdigs xpenme“ parts 0i the Texas Aé-M College Syst IN THE MAIN STATION, with headquarters at College Station, are 16 subject-matter departments, 2 i departments, 3 regulatory services and the administrative staff. Located out in the major agriculturt of Texas are 21 substations and 9 field laboratories. In addition, there are 14 cooperating stations A by other agencies, including the Texas Forest Service, the Game and Fish Commission of Texas, th Department of Agriculture, University of Texas, Texas Technological College and the King Ranch._i_i experiments are conducted on farms and ranches and in rural homes. RESEARCH BY THE TEXAS STATION is organized by programs and projects. A program of resear sents a coordinated effort to solve the many problems relating to a common objective or situation-f. search project represents the procedures for attacking a specific problem within a program. w THE TEXAS STATION is conducting about 550 active research projects, grouped in 25 programs clude all phases of agriculture in Texas. Among these are: conservation and improvement of servation and use of water in agriculture; grasses and legumes for pastures, ranges, hay, conservi improvement of soils; grain crops; cotton and other fiber crops; vegetable crops; citrus and other i cal fruits, fruits and nuts; oil seed crops—other than cotton; ornamental plants——including turf; bi weeds; insects; plant diseases; beef cattle; dairy cattle; sheep and goats; swine; chickens and tur mal diseases and parasites fish and game on farms and ranches; farm and ranch engineering; A ranch business; marketing agricultural products; rural home economics; and rural agricultural w‘ Two additional programs are maintenance and upkeep, and central services. RESEARCH RESULTS are carried to Texas farm and ranch owners and homemakers by specialists agents of the Texas Agricultural Extension Service.