tailer that has the ability to completely pay out all of his floor plan obligations.

Our only solution is to sell out of our problems and in order to do so, our customers are going to have to have some help.

All these other problems relate to complicate other problems as far as capital is concerned. Accounts receivable has become one of the strongest problems that most of the businessmen in my area have related to me. Our customers just do not have the ability to pay the normal obligations. Repossessions are at an alltime high as far as the history of the area which I represent.

Farm sales are very predominant and this is further distressing the values and equities of the farmers and also of the farm equipment dealers and the value of their used products.

Many businessmen are experiencing very much difficulty in securing operating loans. Many of these individuals are at their borrowing limits. They have no other sources. Many are having to reorganize, either through SBA or taking on partners or just face up and liquidate immediately.

I have an insight to a very small area, but I think I can see the impact that it has on the entire economy. As I indicated, I worked for the International Harvester Co. for some 14 years and I know of the shutdowns, the slowdowns and all the layoffs that have been experienced by all farm equipment manufacturers. Imagine the impact this has had on our economy in lost salaries, in lost material sales, transportation facilities, and all the other related businesses.

As an example, in 1977 I purchased over $12 million worth of goods from one manufacturer alone. If the current trends continue, my results will be approximately one-third of that total.

Senator CLARK. We thank you very much for your statement as well. Senator Dole?

Senator DOLE. Well, I think they both made excellent statements and I agree with both witnesses that we are about on the-I do not know where we are on the football field, but we have not much time. Time is running out and hopefully on Monday we will be able to come up with something that will offer some immediate relief.

It is going to be difficult. I can see so many ideas floating around this committee of 18 already that unless we can jell on some one provision, we are going to have some problems. So I would hope that if you have spare time today, you might be trying to get together on a proposal or two proposals and then try to sell that to your Senator.

Mr. MAREK. May I take a couple of minutes, Senator Dole? We definitely oppose your Dole and Talmadge bill where he has put in these diverted acres. Very recently-I just heard about it yesterday. If I understand correctly, this is on a bid basis. I do not like it, it puts farmer against farmer. That is not good in my opinion and several other things we have heard in the opinions I called back home to last night.

We do like your bill which is sponsored by you and Senators Bentsen and Tower in our State on the escalated parity for temporary relief now. We do like that.

I would like to comment that in 1964 my brother's and my budget was $38,000 approximately on 1,600 acres of land. In 1975 our budget was over $300,000 on 25 acres of land.

We made a living in 1964 and then 1975 but then 1976 was followed by terrible losses. We also had very recently at our Christmas dinner three loaves of bread selling for $1 at a grocery store. Meanwhile, wheat did not go up, but bread went to three loaves for $1.07. To justify the 7 cents we would have had to make wheat go up to $2.25 bushel more than what it is now. And these loaves are selling at that price and many loaves, the first-class loaves, are selling for 56 cents.

Senator DOLE. As I said earlier, I think it is one criticism we are going to have on the land retirement bill. I do not say it is not unjustified. It is going to be all the stories appearing, that farmers are being paid for not planting wheat or not planting corn or not planting cotton, and it seems to me you go through either flexible parity or go through some other way. There may not be that payment. Hopefully, the market price would rise and there would not be any exposure at all. The Government would set aside the acreage because you think you are going to have some protection.

Mr. MAREK. We are willing to set aside if we can get

Senator DOLE. If you have some incentive?

Mr. MAREK. That is right.

Senator CLARK. Thank you, gentlemen.

Our last two witnesses appearing are Bud Bitner and Greg Suhler, American Agriculture Movement.

Senator DOLE. Before you start, I have read the statement.

Senator CLARK. Bud Bitner, you have 5 minutes each of you and you summarize any way you think. We will put your whole statement in the record, of course.*

STATEMENT OF BUD BITNER, AMERICAN AGRICULTURE
MOVEMENT; ACCOMPANIED BY GREG SUHLER

Mr. BITNER. Thank you very much. I take an indication from Senator Dole that he may very possibly be leaving. I would like to deviate from my statement and make a direct statement to Senator Dole in regard to what American agriculture supports at this time.

The American Agriculture Movement has adopted a resolution supporting the English bill as it was introduced in the House.

Senator DOLE. That is as introduced then?

Mr. BITNER. Yes; as introduced in the House and doing that is something that has to be done in the very, very near future to alleviate the severe credit crunch in the agricultural sector of this Nation's

economy.

We are not saying that loans will be the answer to our problems by any means. We do not want anyone to construe that we are here to get additional loans. Farmers must have credit to continue to operate.

We would also urge you Senators to do whatever you can do to speed up the process by which the existing laws can be made available to farmers. We are having calls daily by the dozens of people who are not being able to cut through the redtape in the SBA, FmHA loans. Senator DOLE. I might add just on the side. We are getting calls from farmers all across our State, particularly in western Kansas. We have some real problems. I am not certain there are some that can be

*See p. 481 for the prepared statement of Mr. Bitner.

29-974-78-15

helped at this point and you probably are getting many more than we are from all across the country.

Mr. BITNER. We have made a concerted effort to bring this to the Department of Agriculture and hopefully, we can begin to get some cooperation. But we are finding that the redtape is just insurmountable and that planting time is here. If these fellows are going to operate, they have got to have loans immediately, not 30 days, 60 days, or 120 down the road.

Second, the American Agriculture Movement has adopted resolutions supporting the variable parity concept as contained in Senator Dole's bill. We feel that it is something that would allow each individual farmer to enter a program or to stay out of it at his own choice, and at what level that he might choose; and it would curtail production we think significantly enough to bring a market price that would substantiate the set-aside levels. And instead of paying the people that really do not need to be paid, set-aside payments, it would provide to the producer.

Senator DOLE. What about the argument that the payment would not come quickly enough to help anyone? That is one argument against the bill because you have to wait until the harvest is over an average of 5 months to see what the market price was versus the target price.

Mr. BITNER. We have had indication from some of the news media that the set-aside program would probably take for the rest of the year to administer also. So I do not know where we are at in that issue. Perhaps you can tell us better.

Senator DOLE. It seems to me now-and I cosponsored the Talmadge bill-we are trying to figure some way out of the dilemma and some bipartisan effort and certainly we want to pursue that, but it seems to me the bid thing is going to be complicated too, as I see it.

Mr. BITNER. We very definitely are opposed to the bid system, but in addition to that, we think that could be resolved. But in addition to that, we feel that many of the people who would get into this program are not the people that are hurting today. It would be the people that are not the people that are actually producing the bulk of food and fiber. In many instances, particularly in my part of the country, it might be what we call the suitcase farmer, the fellow that really is not depending on agriculture to begin with.

We think that we need to address something that will give aid to the people that really have the need, not to the entire agriculture group. Senator DOLE. I do not want to keep interrupting, but is there support for this concept in other than wheat areas?

Mr. SUHLER. There certainly is, Senator. On the question of obtaining immediate help or help before harvest and all the straws were counted, we think that perhaps an appropriate short-term and intermediate credit approach could address this question and be complementary to your flexible parity concept.

Senator DOLE. Plus it seems to me that once it did become law, there is going to be an immediate impact on the market and credit is going to be a little easier to come by in any event because you should have the target price. You know, the bank is looking at something that is there, that is going to happen.

I do not know. Maybe it is just too simplistic. It seems so easy, I think it might work.

Mr. BITNER. We have visited a number of the other farm organizations around the Nation and find that there is support for this kind of concept, but we do realize that there is need for immediate action by the Senate to get something moving. But we also want to caution that the producer cannot accept just a piecemeal effort. It must be a concerted effort at this time. We have the support across the Nation from the entire population to do something to relieve the agricultural situation.

Most of you, I am sure, have seen the Harris poll indicating that 80 percent of the people polled favored doing something to alleviate the problem for agriculture.

We find that the labor groups across the Nation are also concerned with the need in agriculture, because they depend on us to provide the product that they produce. Really, they are in the farm business too in many instances. They produce a tremendous amount of goods and services as we do. And they feel the crunch the same as we do. And the rest of the economy will follow along in the same dire straits that we are in. If we do not get profit back in agriculture-gentlemen, that is what we are speaking of, to get profits back-we cannot repay these loans without profit.

Some people say that the consumer will be turned off by using the word "profit," but I really do not believe that. I think if we are in a capitalist society, a free enterprise society, then we are talking about profits. And we have seen the management by Government bring us from a good profit picture in a situation where we were obtaining many instances in certain commodities more than 100 percent of parity, down to in our area in wheat to as low as 40 percent parity this

summer.

And it is something that just cannot be tolerated, for the system to continue to exist. And that is the point that we really want to emphasize to you, gentlemen, is the urgency to take some action that will change the trend that we have been going through actually for the last 200 years.

We are getting down to such small numbers in agriculture that if we do not change that trend, the next step will either be big government or big business in agriculture.

And I think it is maybe a tossup which one is going to get in there first. But either one is not going to be efficient; not going to be anywhere as near as efficient as the American farmer. And this Nation and the world will not have food at the kind of prices they have today. So if we can only have a reasonable increase in the price of food today, then we can guarantee in the future that we will have reasonable food prices.

I understand there are a number of Senators proposing different bills that you will be working on this coming week. We first understood that you would be taking these up on Wednesday. We have a large delegation of people coming in on Wednesday.

Senator CLARK. We are going to be taking it up on Monday.

Mr. BITNER. We understand that that has been announced this morning. We wanted to let you know that there will be thousands of people coming here as scheduled on Wednesday to support this committee, to support the efforts to obtain a fair and reasonable price for agriculture.

Senator CLARK. Thank you. Greg Suhler.

Mr. SUHLER. I would like to add that throughout the hearings we have heard a majority of people indicate parity was what we wanted. There have been a couple of exceptions, but I think it is notable what those exceptions have been. The milk producers immediately come to mind. We have a goal of parity as our fair price. Those people who say that they agree that parity is nice but we have immediately in hand a program which is satisfactory to us. And generally speaking, as in the case of milk, that program that people can be satisfied with is one that they have had a hand in developing and administering themselves. And that sense of participation in one's destiny, I think, is as fundamental ultimately as the prices that we are to receive.

So I would like to take note that we want that participation of ourselves in what has been the American dream. We believe that this is the avenue to take to achieve that.

Senator CLARK. We thank you very much, gentlemen, for two very meaningful and concise statements.

The hearing is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m., the committee adjourned, subject to call of the Chair.]