agriculture and particularly to milk marketing problems than has Governor Lehman. No other governor has been more constructive in what he is trying to do to help. 145
All the energy and good will of New Dealers produced mixed results during the 1930s. With a deep sense of frustration, Edward R. Eastman declared in 1936: "Damn milk anyway! There never has been any real solution to it, and I am beginning to doubt if there is any."146 Certainly New Deal experiments did not "solve" farm problems in the Empire State. At the insistence of farmers themselves, New York created the milk board to improve returns to dairymen, but government price-fixing in the absence of production controls stimulated increased output, which in turn depressed prices. Throughout this period, organized farmers largely dictated the shape of state agricultural programs, often to the detriment of the public at large, which had to pay the cost of higher returns to producers. The New York Times lamented in 1941: "As in many other examples of Government 'economic planning,' more attention has been paid in the milk control program to the interests of special groups. . . than to the general public welfare as represented by the interests of consumers as a whole."147
Despite significant shortcomings, the farm policies of the Little New Deal expanded the role of government in the Empire State. As a result of the Depression, New Yorkers accepted a series of measures designed to guarantee farmers a minimum standard of living. Although state and federal intervention failed to achieve the goal of parity with pre-World War I purchasing power, it helped bring some improvement in prices and showed, above all, the willingness of New Dealers to put government at the service of economically distressed groups.