Dear
Uncle Joel: Thank you very much for your letter of the thirty-first.1 Last year you gave me some of Mr. Goeppinger's ideas. I assure you that I studied them carefully, and I know that you found some of them reflected in the program that we finally placed before the Congress.2
No one has worked harder than I to develop a sane, permanent program for assisting our agricultural community. In Washington I have had innumerable conferences ranging from one man to groups of thirty and more. During the past three years I have gone over the matter with the national heads of the Farm Bureau and the Grange, and with many directors of agricultural schools--and so on. While I have had little opportunity actually to visit farms, I have done so both in the Colorado and Pennsylvania regions, to absorb agricultural thinking.3
I bitterly regret that so many individuals have made the farm program a partisan political issue. Its proper solution is too vital to the welfare of the entire United States to handle it in such a reckless fashion.4
As to the present bill, I find it difficult to understand your present thinking and that of Mr. Goeppinger, when I recall the ideas that I had from you both last year.5 (Mr. Schuman, head of the National Farm Bureau, has sent me a telegram urging a veto in the strongest possible terms.)6
My great hope has been that the Congressional conferees would finally write a bill that, in its permanent effect, was somewhat in conformity with the program I placed before the Congress last January, and confine other measures to a one-year basis. Thus we could have both a good long-term bill, and an immediate rise in farmer income. As long ago as last January, I was urging speed!7 Such a program could have been acceptable, but as of now the bill includes three different prices for wheat and rice, it has two different parities to apply, it continues rigid price supports, and in several other ways contributes to the confusion that would be created by the attempt to initiate such a program in the country.8
In such things I try to follow one simple rule. First of all I try to get into my head the basic principles that apply to a problem and then develop a plan for implementing those principles.9
I am not so egotistical as to believe that my plan is always perfect, and I am always willing to accept a legislative program that is, in general, good; one that does not do unconscionable violence to the basic principles for which I stand. But when a bill turns up to be almost wholly bad, then it is a different story.
As you know, I believe that the progressive middle-of-the-road program of the Republicans is vital to the welfare of America. This does not mean, however, that there is a single thing that I would do to violate my own conscience, no matter how many votes were involved.
Incidentally, I might remark to you that if the voters determine next fall they want no more of me, you may feel regretful about the outcome of the election and you may feel sorry for anyone you want, except me. I personally have no ambition except to do my best to discharge the responsibilities the American people lay upon me. When they no longer want to lay any on me, there are a thousand other things I want to do--all of which would be much easier on me.
Thank you again for your letter--I am glad you wrote it. But I thought it only fair to give you my thinking in these matters for your information. I am more than disappointed that the prospects look so bleak for quickly attaining a decent program for the multitude of problems the farmers face. But I shall keep fighting for it.
As I promised in Kasson back in '52, I shall continue to work as hard as I know how until the farmer is getting 100% of parity for his products in the market place, and to do so without more government interference in the farmers' daily affairs than is absolutely necessary.10
Give my love to Caroline. Sincerely11
