0
What else can I help you with?
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938?
From Wikipedia:The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (P.L. 75-430) was legislation in the United States that was enacted as an alternative and replacement for the farm subsidy policies, in previous New Deal farm legislation (Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933), that had been found unconstitutional. It also responded to the success of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act passed in 1935.See the related Wikipedia link below for more information.
Which two New Deal programs did the Supreme Court rule unconstitutional?
The National Recovery Administration and the Agricultural Adjustment Agency, both part of the New Deal, were accused of being unconstitutional. Small business owners felted disadvantaged by big businesses, who had a part in the drafting of the NRA's codes. Organized labor was upset because they were effectively shut out. In the Supreme Court case Schecter vs. United States, the agency was ruled as unconstitutional. The Agricultural Adjustment Agency was accused of hurting southern tenant farmers (Sharecroppers) in the south. Cotton planters took the federal money, removed the land from production then displaced the sharecroppers. In the case of United States vs. Butler, the court ruled the AAA was unconstitutional as well.
What act gave millions of acres of federal lands to the states to sell them and use the funds to build agricultural and engineering colleges?
The Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Act .
What was the US Supreme Court 1936 decision about the New Deal Agricultural Adjustment Act?
In 1933, Congress established the Agricultural Adjustment Administration and passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act which levied taxes against certain farm commodity processors to fund a program designed to increase farmers' profits on their products by paying the farmers not to grow crops. This was intended as a direct control of supply and demand designed to restore economic prosperity under Roosevelt's New Deal.The government initially allocated $100,000,000 from the Treasury to support the program.Butler, the respondent in this case, was the receiver for Hoosac Mills Corporation. The company was presented with an assessment for "processing and floor taxes" on cotton purchased subsequent to the Act. The receiver advised the mill not to pay the tax, on the theory it was constitutionally invalid.Butler filed for relief in District Court, but the Court found in favor of the government. Butler then petitioned the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which agreed the tax was unconstitutional and reversed the lower court decision.The United States appealed the First Circuit's reversal to the US Supreme Court, claiming the processors didn't have standing to question taxes levied against them by Congress. They also argued Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the Constitution provides Congress has the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States."The Court held that the Processors had standing to question validity of the tax, and that the Act invaded the powers reserved to the States under the 10th Amendment. Regulation and control of agricultural production properly belonged to the States and were beyond the reach of the federal government.The Act was considered an attempt to regulate farmers' activities through economic coercion. The federal government, while empowered to levy taxes, cannot appropriate and spend money when the end result is unconstitutional.The Court ruled Congress did not have a right to ratify the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933*, and affirmed the Circuit Court ruling, finding in favor of Butler.*(Although the case was decided in 1936, the basis for the decision was made on the Act as passed in 1933 and not on the 1935 amendment to the Act.)Subsequent LegislationCongress responded to the Supreme Court decision by passing the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, which paid benefits for planting soil-building crops, rather than staples.This was followed by the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, which made loans to farmers of in years of high yield to store surplus, which it could then sell in years of low yield. The 1938 Act was in effect until World War II, when it became necessary to increase food production.Case Citation:United States v. Butler, 297 US 1 (1936)
What was Thomas Jefferson's point of view on the size of the federal Government?
Jefferson wanted small Federal Government, but larger State Governments. He didn't want the Federal Government to make all of the decisions, he wanted the states to focus on the people of that state instead of the Federal Government to control everything.
What has the author Miriam S Farley written?
Miriam S. Farley has written: 'Agricultural adjustment under the new deal' -- subject(s): Agricultural administration, Agriculture, United States, United States. Agricultural Adjustment Administration
What has the author Howard Kester written?
Howard Kester has written: 'Revolt among the sharecroppers' -- subject(s): Cotton growing, History, Sharecroppers, Sharecropping, Southern Tenant Farmers' Union, Tenant farmers, United States, United States. Agricultural Adjustment Administration
Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938?
From Wikipedia:The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 (P.L. 75-430) was legislation in the United States that was enacted as an alternative and replacement for the farm subsidy policies, in previous New Deal farm legislation (Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933), that had been found unconstitutional. It also responded to the success of the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act passed in 1935.See the related Wikipedia link below for more information.
What has the author P P Wallrabenstien written?
P. P Wallrabenstien has written: 'Estimated gross cash income from the sale of agricultural products from the farm, and from Agricultural Adjustment Administration payments for Ohio farms, by counties, 1939' -- subject(s): Farm income, Farm produce, Marketing, United States, United States. Agricultural Adjustment Administration
What was the purpose of the United States federal law Agricultural Adjustment Act of the New Deal era?
Its purpose was to reduce crop surplus so as to effectively raise the value of crops. More information is available at the related link below.
What department help farmers raise crops?
The US Department of Agriculture is devoted to federal programs relating to the raising of crops. Many states and counties have agricultural support systems often in co-operation with state universities.
What Gave federal land to the states to help finance agricultural colleges?
Land act
What has the author Fred Fouse Lininger written?
Fred Fouse Lininger has written: 'The relation of the basic-surplus marketing plan to milk production in the Philadelphia milk shed' 'Dairy products under the Agricultural adjustment act' -- subject(s): Agricultural administration, Agriculture, Dairy products, Economic aspects, Economic aspects of Agriculture, Marketing, United States, United States. Agricultural Adjustment Administration
How many people are employed in agricultural jobs in the US?
As of 2020, it is estimated that approximately 2.6 million people are employed in agricultural jobs in the United States. This includes farmers, farm workers, agricultural managers, and others involved in agricultural production.
What has the author Chester C Davis written?
Chester C. Davis has written: 'What's ahead of the A. A. A.?' -- subject(s): Agriculture and state, United States, United States. Agricultural Adjustment Administration 'Report on rural credit in India' -- subject(s): Agricultural credit, Rural credit
What has the author Van L Perkins written?
Van L. Perkins has written: 'Crisis in agriculture' -- subject(s): Agriculture and state, New Deal, 1933-1939, United States, United States. Agricultural Adjustment Administration
Which two New Deal programs did the Supreme Court rule unconstitutional?
The National Recovery Administration and the Agricultural Adjustment Agency, both part of the New Deal, were accused of being unconstitutional. Small business owners felted disadvantaged by big businesses, who had a part in the drafting of the NRA's codes. Organized labor was upset because they were effectively shut out. In the Supreme Court case Schecter vs. United States, the agency was ruled as unconstitutional. The Agricultural Adjustment Agency was accused of hurting southern tenant farmers (Sharecroppers) in the south. Cotton planters took the federal money, removed the land from production then displaced the sharecroppers. In the case of United States vs. Butler, the court ruled the AAA was unconstitutional as well.
