« AnteriorContinuar »
The only State in the Union where we do not have farm membership is South Carolina. Incidentally, that is where this legislation originated, Mr. Chairman.
The volume of whole milk equivalent handled by the members of the federation approximates 18,000,000,000 pounds annually, which represents about 18 percent of all milk and separated cream that leaves the farms of America in commerce.
I am filing for the record a list of our member organizations with addresses, and a list of the officers and directors of the federation. THE NATIONAL COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS FEDERATION, NATIONAL
HEADQUARTERS, WASHINGTON 6, D. C.
John Brandt, president.
George W. Slocum, treasurer.
W. H. Austin, Lake Cormorant, Miss.
M. R. Moomaw, Canton, Ohio.
Honorary director for life: N. P. Hull, Lansing, Mich.
Akron Milk Producers, Inc., 194 Carroll Street, Akron 4, Ohio.
West, Duluth 7, Minn.
Columbus 15, Ohio. Challenge Cream and Butter Association, 929 East Second Street, Los Angeles
12, Calif. Chattanooga Area Milk Producers Association, 460 Dodson Avenue, Chattanooga,
Tenn. Cheese Producers Marketing Association, Seventeenth Avenue at Illinois Central
tracks, Monroe, Wis. Coastal Bend Milk Producers Association, Box 837, Corpus Christi, Tex. Connecticut Milk Producers' Association, 990 Wethersfield Avenue, Hartford 6,
Cooperative Pure Milk Association of Cincinnati, Plum and Central Parkway,
Cincinnati 2, Ohio. Dairy Cooperative Association, 1313 Southeast Twelfth Avenue, Portland 14,
Oreg. Dairy Farmers Cooperative Association, Inc., Kentwood, La. Dairy Producers Cooperative, 703–713 South McDonough Street, Montgomery
5, Ala. Dairyland Cooperative Association, Juneau, Wis. Dairymen's Cooperative Sales Association, 451 Century Building, Pittsburgh 22,
Pa. Dairymen's League Cooperative Association, Inc., 11 West Forty-second Street,
New York 18, N. Y. Denver Milk Producers, Inc., 945 Eleventh Street, Denver 4, Colo. Des Moines Cooperative Dairy, 1935 Des Moines Street, Des Moines 16, Iowa. Dried Milk Products Cooperative, Eau Claire, Wis. Enid Cooperative Creamery Association, 402 West Walnut Street, Enid, Okla. Evansville Milk Producers' Association, Inc., 413 American Building, Evansville
8, Ind. Falls Cities Cooperative Milk Producers Association, 229 Bourbon Stock Yards
Building, Louisville 6, Ky. Farmers Equity Union Creamery Co., 169 Grove Avenue, Lima, Ohio. Georgia Milk Producers Confederation, 661 Whitehall Street SW., Atlanta, Ga. Golden Guernsey Dairy Cooperative, 2206 North Thirtieth Street, Milwaukee 8,
Wis. Guilford Dairy Cooperative Association, 1700 West Lee Street, Greensboro, N. C. Hi-Land Dairyman's Association, 700 Vine Street, Murray, Utah. Indiana Dairy Marketing Association, 401 Broadway, Muncie, Ind. Indianapolis Dairymen's Cooperative, Inc., 729 Lemcke Building, Indianapolis
4, Ind. Inland Empire Dairy Association, 1803 West Third Avenue, Spokane 2, Wash. Inter-State Milk Producers Cooperative, Inc., 401 North Broad Street, Phila
delphia 8, Pa. Farmers Cooperative Creamery, Drawer No. 2, Keosauqua, Iowa. Knoxville Milk Producers Association, 508 Morgan Street, Knoxville 17, Tenn. Land O’Lakes Creameries, Inc., 2201 Kennedy Street NE., Minneapolis 13,
Minn. Lehigh Valley Cooperative Farmers, 1026 North Seventh Street, Allentown, Pa. McDonald Cooperative Dairy Co., 617 Lewis Street, Flint 3, Mich. Prairie Farms Creamery of Bloomington, 103 North Robinson Street, Blooming
ton, Ill. Madison Milk Producers Cooperative Association, 29 Coyne Court, Madison 5,
Wis. Manchester Dairy System, Inc., 226 Second Street, Manchester, N. H. Maryland and Virginia Milk Producers Association, Inc., 1756 K Street NW.,
Washington 6, D. C. Maryland Cooperative Milk Producers, Inc., 810 Fidelity Building, Baltimore 1,
Md. Miami Home Milk Producers Association, 2451 Northwest Seventh Avenue,
Miami, Fla. Miami Valley Cooperative Milk Producers' Association, Inc., 136–138 West Maple
Street, Dayton 2, Ohio. Michigan Milk Producers Association, 406 Stephenson Building, Detroit 2, Mich. Michigan Producers Dairy Co., 1315 East Church Street, Adrian, Mich. Mid-South Milk Producers Association, 1497 Union Avenue, Memphis 4, Tenn. Mid-West Producers Creameries, Inc., 224 West Jefferson Street, South Bend 2,
Ind. Milk Producers Federation of Cleveland, 1012 Webster Avenue, Cleveland 15,
Ohio. Nashville Milk Producers, Inc., 901 Second Avenue North, Nashville 3, Tenn. Nebraska Cooperative Creameries, Inc., Fifteenth and Webster Streets, Omaha 2,
Nebr. Nebraska-Iowa Non-Stock Cooperative Milk Association, 402 North Twenty
fourth St., Omaha, Nebr. New Bedford Milk Producers Association, Inc., 858 Kempton Street, New Bed
ford, Mass. New England Milk Producers Association, 51 Cornhill, Boston 8, Mass. North Carolina Milk Producers Federation, Box H-1, Greensboro, N. C.
The Northwestern (Ohio) Cooperative Sales Association, Inc., 22142 Detroit
Avenue, Toledo 6, Ohio. Paducah Graded Milk Producers Association, Inc., Route 1, Paducah, Ky. Peoria Milk Producers, Inc., 216 East State Street, Peoria 2, Ill. Producers Creamery Co., 555 West Phelps Street, Springfield, Mo. Pure Milk Association, 608 South Dearborn Street, Chicago 5, Ill. Pure Milk Producers Association of Greater Kansas City, Inc., 853 Live Stock
Exchange Building, Kansas City 15, Mo. Pure Milk Products Cooperative, 18 West First Street, Fond du Lac, Wis. Richmond Cooperative Milk Producers Association, 516 Lyric Building, Rich
mond 19, Va. Roanoke Cooperative Milk Producers Association, Inc., 508 Mountain Trust
Building, Roanoke 11, Va. Rochester Dairy Cooperative, Rochester, Minn. St. Joseph (Mo.) Milk Producers Association, Inc., 1024 South Tenth Street,
St. Joseph 26, Mo. Sanitary Milk Producers, 1439 Chouteau Avenue, St. Louis 3, Mo. Sioux City Milk Producers Cooperative Association, Inc., 511 Benson Building,
Sioux City 15, Iowa. South Texas Producers Association, Inc., 3600 Center Street, Houston, Tex. The Stark County Milk Producers Association, Inc., 212 Canton Building, Can
ton 2, Ohio. Tillamook County Creamery Association, Room 107, I. 0. O. F. Building, Tilla
mook, Oreg. Twin City Milk Producers Association, 2424 Territorial Road, St. Paul 4, Minn. Twin Ports Cooperative Dairy Association, 6128 Tower Avenue, Superior, Wis. United Dairymen's Association, 635 Elliott Avenue West, Seattle 99, Wash. United Farmers of New England, Inc., 86 Cambridge Street, Boston 29, Mass. Valley Milk Producers Association, McAllen, Tex. Valley of Virginia Cooperative Milk Producers Association, 41 West Washington
Street, Harrisonburg, Va.
My short testimony today is divided into two parts.
The first will be a discusion of the consumer opinion poll on oleomargarine, and the second a discussion of three amendments which we will propose to the pending legislation.
In the heat of any battle as emotional as the butter-oleomargarine controversy, statements and claims are often made without regard to fact. And I don't like to call it a butter-oleomargarine controversy. I think it is a case of the 26 oleomargarine manufacturers versus the 21/2 million dairy farmers.
As I say, in this type of controversy, statements and claims are often made without regard to fact.
Unfortunately, many such claims come to be accepted without further examination of the source, the basis, or the real principle involved.
For some time our dairy farmers have realized that the people of this country were being deliberately misled and confused by highpressure publicity for the repeal of oleo taxes. They have seen that it was incumbent upon them to seek out the true facts, before serious harm could result to the agricultural economy of the consumer's pocketbook.
Our dairy farmer population of 10,000,000 people has a big, but by no means the only stake in this battle. We have ample evidence to substantiate our belief in the soundness of present oleo controls. A large part of our testimony today is based upon scientific research
the results of which cannot be disputed, although they contrast sharplywith the misstatements, half-truths, and distortions put forth by the oleo interests.
I am sure you are familiar with the Gallup-poll figure which once showed that 69 percent of the population favored the repeal of oleo taxes. I do not for a moment question the correctness of that figure. Indeed, we ourselves have sponsored a poll which in part verifies it. Our poll, however, goes further than the Gallup-poll question. The data which we secured explains and modifies the results of that earlier poll.
We found that the public's reaction to the Gallup question on oleo tax repeal was similar to organized labor's first reaction to the TaftHartley Act.
And before proceeding further with this statement, Mr. Chairman, I would like at this point, with your permission, to ask the chairman to put on as a witness, to be “split in" in the middle of my testimony, Mr. Benson, the president of Benson & Benson, an organization of Princeton, N.J.
This is one of the great information- and fact-gathering organizations in the field of public opinion. And, may I say also, Mr. Benson is connected with the Gallup poll.
I would like to have him present his testimony, after which I will proceed to make comments on it.
The CHAIRMAN. Whenever you are ready.
The CHAIRMAN. Pull up a chair there, Mr. Benson. Will you identify yourself for the reporter, please?
STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE E. BENSON, PRESIDENT, BENSON &
BENSON, INC., PRINCETON, N. J.
Mr. Benson. I am Lawrence E. Benson, president of Benson & Benson, Inc., an independent research organization located in Princeton, N. J.
Mr. Chairman, I am appearing at this meeting today for the sole purpose of presenting the findings of an impartial public opinion poll conducted by our organization.
We were asked to conduct an independent survey dealing with issues involved in the butter-oleo problems, and to do it on an independent basis.
The particular survey results that I am presenting today, have to do with various issues on which we were seeking public opinion, and these results are really what we might consider part of a bigger study that is contemplated and actually in the process now.
Because of the time factor, however, we felt that it would not be possible to complete this larger survey, larger in the sense that the sample we were obtaining would be of greater number, in sufficient time.
The CHAIRMAN. Do you intend to tell us the technique of your survey?
Mr. BENSON. Yes; I thought I should do that. However, this bigger survey is in process now, so for all purposes the survey being presented today must be considered a test, or a preliminary survey.
In this test survey, we followed the same principles of modern scientific research that are used by leading public-opinion polling organizations today.
The study was designed to obtain impartial objective evidence and information on the various issues.
The technics used briefly were these:
A cross-section sample was designed, which would be representative of the entire population of the country. By that I simply mean that we wanted to be sure that all of the adult population 21 years of age and over, were represented in our sample in the true proportions in which the component groups are found in the population.
Groups such as men and women, people of various ages, people in different socio-economic groups, people residing in different sized cities, and in different regions of the country were all included.
We even stratified the sample to make sure that we got the correct proportion of people from the States in which colored oleomargarine can already be sold, and States in which it cannot.
We designed the questions, working out in our own way the wording of the questions, and put each question to a test in actual trial interview, to be sure that they were clearly understood by respondents, that they were simple enough for the average person to comprehend, and that they were as totally unbiased and as impartial as we could possibly make them.
The questionnaires, then, after we had tested them, and after we were satisfied that they would work and were impartial, were sent to interviewers throughout the United States, who did the actual interviewing in this survey
. These people were assigned to quotas of the actual types of people whom they were to interview, so that when the results were returned, we would have a cross-section of the actual component groups within the population.
The interviewing was done between May 1 and May 9.
When the questionnaires were all returned to us, they were coded and tabulated.
The CHAIRMAN. Would it be appropriate for me to ask how many interviewers there were and how many interviewed ?
Mr. Benson. Yes. There were 59 interviewers used throughout the entire Nation. This was set up on a national population basis. And the total number of interviews which these results are based upon are 608 cases, 608 interviews.
Perhaps it would be well for me to make a statement in regard to how reliable I think those findings are. In my opinion the chances are, putting it statistically, about 96 in 100 that the results of this survey would not vary by more than 6 or 7 percentage points from what would be found in the larger survey we are now doing, or if a total census were taken.
That, of course, assumes that they are done at the comparable time and that there is no trend in events that happened which would cause a trend in public opinion.
The survey dealt with these subjects: