The 1963 Wheat Referendum: An Interpretation

Abstract

In May 1963, U.S. wheat farmers voted down a government sponsored wheat program. The purpose of this article is to ascertain the relationship between the outcome of the referendum and a selected group of five independent variables. A multiple linear regression technique was used in analyzing the data for 28 wheat producing states. The results generally suggest that part-time farmers and Farm Bureau members voted against the program while small wheat producers, tobacco growers, and supporters of John F. Kennedy voted for its passage.I N MAY 1963, over one million U.S. wheat farmers cast ballots in the 1963 wheat referendum. The program up for approval was basically a two-price plan that incorporated both acreage allotments and land retirement. Of 13 wheat programs put to the referendum test since 1941, this was the first denied the two-thirds majority needed for approval. The 1964 program received the approval of only 48 percent of the participating voters, a decline of 20 percent from the previous referendum.The purpose of this paper is to examine the outcome of the 1963 referendum on a state-by-state basis for an explanation of the resulting voting pattern. The outcome will be measured in terms of the percentage voting "yes" in each of the 28 states where 5,000 or more votes were cast.' Of the total votes cast in the nation, over 97 percent were represented by these 28 states. Less than 20,000 votes were cast in each of nine of these states while, at the upper limit, between 60,000 and 92,000 votes were cast in each of seven states. AnalysisA multiple linear regression technique was used to evaluate the influence of a selected group of five independent variables. For each independent variable, 28 observations (one per state) were assembled. The dependent variable and all of the independent variables are measured in terms of percentages.The following variables were included in the analysis: Y percentage voting "yes" in the wheat referendum.o The author is indebted to Dale Hathaway for a number of helpful suggestions and criticisms.1 The 28 states in decreasing order of the total number of votes cast are Kansas,

How Large is Congressional Dependence in Agriculture? Bayesian Inference about ‘Scale’ and ‘Scope’ in Measuring a Spatial Externality

“…Early interest originates from a study of the 1963 Wheat Referendum (Daft, ). The referendum was a vote for a government sponsored two‐price plan incorporating acreage allotments and land retirement.…”

“…Despite its importance, Congressional voting on agricultural legislation has received little attention in the literature. Noteworthy exceptions (Daft, ; Fort and Christianson, ; Brooks et al ., ; Mehmood and Zhang, ) focus attention on ‘constituent‐internalised’ determinants of political preferences measured by the impacts of covariates on voting propensities of constituents. Yet, political lobbying activities, political action committees (PACs), and other collective, rather than private, actions also influence agricultural legislation.…”