(6 of 7)
Waning Influence. There was a time when reduced income on the farm would soon make itself sharply felt in the whole economy. In 1956, despite the fact that farm income fell for nearly five years, the rest of the economy is at the greatest level of prosperity in history. Despite the dire warnings of farm-state politicos about the danger of "farm-fed farm-led depression," the 1956 conclusion is inescapable: since the U.S. economy has grown and shifted more to the industrial and away from the agrarian, the farm economy is no longer as critical a factor as it was two decades ago.
The same point applies to politics. Since urban population has grown and farm population has decreased, the "farm vote" is no longer the key factor that it once was. Many farmers now make at least part of their income at jobs in nearby towns (in 1955 U.S. farmers made 30% of their income from nonfarm sources), and are as likely to be affected by town political sentiment as they are to have an effect upon it. Don R. Massie, a paper-company salesman who is a Republican committeeman in Bloomington, Ill., says: "Farmers used to run everything in politics here. And now they don't amount to anything—but we've been trying to keep that quiet."
Corn Fed. All of this proves that the farm situation is neither economically nor politically as explosive as the clamor would indicate. Farm-state Congressmen who joined the stampede to vote for the Democrats' ill-conceived farm bill (TIME, April 23) have received relatively little mail about the President's veto. The reaction has been selective, largely by crop. Many Southern farmers are angry because the support prices on cotton and peanuts will be considerably below last year's. There is some anger and disappointment among wheat farmers because the wheat price support announced by the President (a national average of $2 a bushel), although 19¢ above the previously announced price, is 8¢ below last year's average.
The corn price situation is similar: the President's guarantee adds up to a national average of $1.50 a bushel, 10¢ above the previously announced level, but 8¢ below last year. Nevertheless, many corn farmers seem to be pleased. At a Senate Republican Policy Committee meeting last week, a colleague turned to corn-growing Illinois' corn-saying Everett Dirksen and cracked: "Ev, it looks as if Benson, of all people in the world, just re-elected you."
Since January farm prices have been edging up, and if the edging continues, the worry among farmers will ease a little. As rain fell over much of the farm belt last week, farmers were far more jubilant than they were over anything that Washington might do for support prices. As farm-area merchants know, when prices are rising, farmers start to look and then to smile and then to buy. Said one farm observer: "A farmer feels a lot better with hogs at $15 if they are on their way up from $11, not on the way down from $20."
Politically, the prospects for 1956 are that there will be some shift of farm votes from the Republican to the Democratic side, but no revolt. Some politicians think that the switch may be large enough to change some congressional seats, but barring plummeting prices or Act of God, there is no reason to believe that Dwight Eisenhower will not carry the farm belt in November.