The Wheat War

In North Dakota red, white and blue billboards urge farmers to protect freedom by voting no. In Colorado bright yellow broadsides urge farmers to protect their incomes by voting yes. In every wheat-growing state in the union, wheat farmers are being assailed by posters, pamphlets, newspaper ads, broadcasts, bumper stickers and speeches, all intended to influence their votes in the May 21 national wheat referendum. Never in the history of U.S. agriculture has a crop referendum stirred such torrential efforts at persuasion. The wheat farmers will be voting on whether to accept or reject Agriculture Secretary Orville Freeman's drastic control program designed to cope with the wheat surplus (TIME cover, April 5). If two-thirds of those voting approve the plan, it will become mandatory for the entire 1964 wheat crop. The Agriculture Department will tell each wheat grower how many acres of wheat he can plant and how many bushels he can market under a complex "certificate" plan. And what does the farmer get out of it? A high support price of $2 a bushel on most of his wheat, plus "diversion payments'' on the acreage he takes out of wheat production. If the plan fails to get a two-thirds majority, a relatively meager support price of about $1.25 a bushel will be available for growers who voluntarily restrict themselves to assigned acreage quotas. Other farmers will be free to grow as much wheat as they choose without any price-support help at all. Secretary Freeman has repeatedly said that the market price of wheat would fall to $1 a bushel, but his figure is a mere guess. At any rate, he says the issue before the farmers is plain and simple: $2 wheat or $1 wheat. "Two-Bit Politics." The Chicago-headquartered American Farm Bureau Federation, biggest of U.S. farmer organizations, insists that the real issue is "freedom to farm." If the Freeman plan wins, says the Farm Bureau's President Charles Shuman, the Federal Government will proceed to extend strict controls over all segments of U.S. agriculture. If the wheat farmers reject the plan, he argues, Congress will pass less restrictive wheat legislation. The Farm Bureau insists that Congress would not let the price of wheat fall to $1 a bushel, dismisses Freeman's $1 warnings as "two-bit politics." In an effort to help Freeman's case, President Kennedy declared at his press conference last week that he was "sure" Congress would not enact new wheat legislation this year if the farmers vote down the Freeman plan. Freeman has fought hard to assure victory on May 21. The Agriculture Department has declared that it is not attempting to influence the outcome, but the department's publications explaining the wheat plan have made it abundantly clear to farmers that Freeman thinks they would be fools to vote against it. Under Freeman's guidance, six U.S. farmer organizations formed a National Wheat Committee to harvest yes votes. The committee has recruited townspeople in wheat areas--bankers, merchants, lawyers, local officials--to help persuade the farmers. In Keenesburg. Colo., for example, the Citizens State Bank placed in the local newspaper an ad warning farmers that the bank will have to tighten credit to wheat farmers if the Freeman plan is voted down. "Blackjack Tactics." Freeman's battle for yes votes has brought charges that he is violating the spirit of the law requiring the Agriculture Department to merely present the facts, pro and con. After Freeman recently assured Congress that he had not tried to influence the wheat farmers' votes, Montana's Republican Congressman James F. Battin charged him with duplicity, called for his resignation. Last week the House Republican Conference issued a statement accusing Freeman of "half-truths" and "blackjack tactics." Freeman, the Republicans charged, was trying to turn the referendum into a "pressurendum." Freeman has an unforeseen ally on his side--the dry weather that has afflicted great stretches of the Great Plain this spring. Western Kansas saw its driest April since 1887. Six counties in Colorado have asked for governmental drought assistance. As some observers see it, many wheat farmers who might otherwise vote against Freeman will look at their parched fields and decide that they are going to need all the federal help they can get. So far, nobody has accused Freeman of rigging the weather.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.