government has the only machinery to produce data the credibility of which will be unchallenged. Statistics gathered by state and local governments and other interested parties are invariably based on the last comprehensive survey made by the federal goevrnment. Because of the rapid rate of change, such figures are bound to be distorted and subject to criticism. No one can make intelligent decisions without accurate, comprehensive, and up-to-date data. The American Institute of Architects strongly believes that nothing less than the establishment of a mid-decade census by the federal government will meet the need for accuracy in the decision-making process. Third, while it is clear that a mid-decade census will cost money (the five year appropriation for the 1970 census was $218,000,000), the American Institute of Architects is convinced that it will, in the long run, mean an enormous saving for the American people. The possibility or perhaps the inevitability-of error in operating under the current ten year figures results in undertermined economic loss. How, for instance, does one measure the cost of a misplaced hospital? As The American Institute of Planners correctly noted in their testimony, the people who use census data spend a year or so awaiting the data, two to three years analysing it, and the next five years waiting for fresh data. But the problems of government do not wait. The American Institute of Architects submits that, when weighed against the cost of error and the paralysis of the decision-making process that are inevitable under the current system, the cost of a mid-decade cenus would be slight indeed. The American Institute of Architects supports wholeheartedly the establishment of a mid-decade census. If intelligent decisions are to be made, it is imperative that current, comprehensive, and accurate data be available. We would like to reiterate our endorsement of the American Institute of Planners' testimony beore the Subcommittee on Census and Statistics, and to agree that action should be taken this year to allow time for careful preparation. We thank you for this opportunity to submit our thoughts for the record. Sincerely yours, ROBERT F. HASTINGS, FAIA, President. E. Communications from academic institutions, news media, private citizens, etc. Hon. CHARLES H. WILSON, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SCHOOL OF EDUCATION, Ann Arbor, Mich., July 14, 1971. DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILSON: In response to your letter of July 9, I have written to Secretary Richardson and I am enclosing a copy of my letter to him. I shall appreciate being kept informed of any developments in this matter. Sincerely, Enclosure. Hon. ELLIOT RICHARDSON, WILBUR J. COHEN, Dean. Secretary, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, DEAR ELLIOTT: I was deeply disappointed to learn that Dr. George H. Brown, Director of the Bureau of the Census, has informed the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service that the Administration does not recommend a middecade census at this time. I should like to urge you to intercede with the President and George Schultz to reopen this question. I believe it is extremely important to the development of health, education and welfare programs to have a mid-decade census in order for existing categorical programs to be revised to make them more responsive to current conditions. It is necessary to have population and income data that is more current. I shall not go into detail with respect to the substantive arguments for a middecade census. The arguments both pro and con are well known. However, I would hope that you as Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare could press for a reconsideration of the present decision and some resolution of the difficulty. Best personal wishes, WILBUR J. COHEN, Dean. The PRESIDENT, BROWN UNIVERSITY, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY, DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I learned with great disappointment today that your administration is not endorsing the taking of a mid-decade census. As a member of the Bureau of the Census Technical Advisory Committee I was most pleased to learn at our last meeting that it was virtually certain that a mid-decade census would be taken and that positive action on this decision would signify an important forward step in the development of the American statistical system. Most important, it would provide both scientists and administrators with a crucial source of data to measure the dynamic changes in American society as a whole and on the local level between the decennial censuses which are now much too far apart. In his letter to you of June 23, Mr. John Aiken, Executive Director of the Federal Statistics Users' Conference, has spelled out in detail the arguments favoring a mid-decade census. I shall not repeat them here but simply urge that this matter be given your immediate and urgent reconsideration and that Congress be urged by your administration to approve a mid-decade census. It seems inconsistent that at the very time we are urging developing countries to improve their statistical system the United States by remaining static should regress. I am sure that you will want to take the lead in avoiding this. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely yours, SIDNEY GOLDSTEIN, Director. SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY, DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY, The Hon. RICHARD M. NIXON, DEAR PRESIDENT NIXON: I was astonished and dismayed to learn recently that the Administration has totally reversed its position with respect to the advisability of a five-year Population Census program to begin in 1975. The withdrawal of support for this proposal, as indicated in congressional testimony presented by Dr. George H. Brown, Director of the Bureau of the Census, is difficult to understand in terms of either the short-term or the long-term interests of the nation. I am sure that you are familiar with all the many strong administrative, business, and scholarly reasons for reducing the ten-year interval between Census enumerations to a five-year gap. The only conceivable reason for foregoing the 1975 Census would be the immediate savings in expenditures for conducting the operation. But I feel strongly that such an economy would be totally spurious, a case of being penny-wise and pound-foolish. Well before 1980, the economic losses suffered by using obsolete or unreliable data from 1970 would far exceed any immediate savings enjoyed by bypassing the 1975 count. In addition, the probable social and administrative inequities that would develop by the late 1970's through the use of out-of-date statistics could mean losses to the country beyond monetary calculation. If it is not too late to reconsider your position and to reactivate plans for the 1975 Census, I urge you to give the matter your most serious consideration. A firm adherence to the policy of population censuses at five-year intervals would be an indication of genuine far-sighted statesmanship. Yours sincerely, WILBUR ZELINSKY, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA, Hon. President RICHARD M. NIXON, Washington, D.C. DEAR PRESIDENT NIXON: This letter seeks your support for the establishment of a mid-decade Census of Population and Housing. I write to you on this matter as a spokesman for the research community and for professionals working in state and local government on urban and regional growth and development problems. The necessity of a national census is not in question; all work based on sampling approaches in the collection of population and housing statistics must have a census as basis for checking the reliability of results. Rather, the issue concerns the frequency of the census. While the decennial census has long served as the base-line for a national system of statistics, there are compelling indications that, in times of rapid and critical change in the nation and in local governmental jurisdictions, public and private decisions relative to today's extraordinarily complex problems can no longer be safely made in the last years of a decade without updated census information on the population and housing for the nation, the states, and local subareas. The importance of establishing a mid-decade census cannot be stressed too strongly. The savings accomplished by using other data sources is open to some question. First, the user must spend time and money to locate these sources, usually a diverse set of sources rather than a single source. Second, the value of data from these sources for many purposes is not as great as the value of census data. Some of the reasons are: 1. Census data are collected at one point in time, whereas other data are not. This makes analysis of relationships between various characteristics somewhat risky. 2. Various characteristics in the census can be related to common geographic areas whereas data from diverse sources cannot. 3. Census data can be identified with small geographic areas, e.g., tracts within a metropolitan area, whereas much data from other sources cannot. If we have a quinquennial census of Manufactures, Business, and Governments, we should also have a quinquennial Census of Population and Housing. The lack of such a mid-decade census leaves a gaping hole in the information which is necessary in order to monitor the state of the nation. A mid-decade census, occurring approximately midway between the other censuses, which are taken in the second and seventh years of the decade, would permit a continuous and comprehensive monitoring of the nation's characteristics. The utility of these existing quinquennial censuses would be much higher than they are now. if there were a mid-decade Census of Population and Housing with which they could be related. I earnestly hope you will assert leadership in the support of legislation for establishing a mid-decade Census of Population and Housing. Sincerely yours, F. STUART CHAPIN, Jr.. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, Minneapolis, Minn., September 3, 1971. The PRESIDENT, The White House, Washington, D.C. MR. PRESIDENT: I would like to urge the adoption of a mid-decade census. The need for up-to-date, accurate data on the characteristics and distribution of the population of the country is greater than at any time in history. The people of this country want decisions affecting them to be based on "hard" data, not guesses or extrapolations from data that is 10 or more years old. The mid-decade census is a positive step in providing information basic to many areas of national and local concern. In the area of health, my own concern, wise expenditure of public funds is difficult enough with good data in hand, and is impossible in the absence of such. I hope a commitment to obtaining the kind of data that a mid-decade census would provide will be made and that support for its planning and implementation will be forthcoming. Respectfully yours, MARCUS O. KJELSBERG, Associate Professor and Acting Director. UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, The PRESIDENT, The White House Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I was disturbed to learn that the Administration has withdrawn its support for a mid-decade census in 1975. I have been concerned with the need for such a census for over a decade. With the rapid pace of change in the economy, and the high mobility of our people, and the growing importance of social and economic problems at the local level, the need for up-to-date statistics is greater than ever. In addition, the business community must meet ever higher standards of efficiency in determining the needs of the market and where facilities should be located to serve consumers best. Unfortunately, the absolescence rate of our data is growing rapidly at the very time when the needs for up-to-date information are becoming more critical. Twenty-five years ago, 8 or 9 year-old data were adequate to meet a great many of the needs of communities and of social, governmental and business organizations. Today, even 4 or 5 year-old data is likely to be misleading in the numerous communities in which rapid changes are occurring. I am well-acquainted with the arguments often made that statistical extrapolations and sample surveys can meet our needs at lower costs. To be sure, they can meet the needs for U.S. totals and for large areas. Unfortunately, those who must plan to cope with change need to know what is happening in smaller areas— cities, census tracts, block groups and communities. Large totals are no help. The various sampling plans leave statistical errors too large to be useful for planning work. We need a complete enumeration at least every 5 years which will show the state of affairs in smaller areas. I recognize that this is costly. The amount must be considered, however, in reference to the consequences of misdirected effort by private and community organizations as well as misallocation of resources by government and business which surely results when they must rely on obsolete figures. If we do not have a mid-decade census, these individuals and organizations will be making decisions in the summer of 1981 on the basis of where people were living and working in April of 1970. I hope that the Administration will reconsider its position and lend its support to the mid-decade census. Sincerely yours, CHARLES S. GOODMAN, Professor, Department of Marketing. UNIVERSITY OF OREGON, President RICHARD M. NIXON, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have just recently learned that the administration has now taken a position opposed to beginning a mid-decade series of national censuses in 1975. I respectfully protest this decision in the strongest possible terms. As a sociologist-demographer, I have made considerable use of census data for over twenty-five years in teaching courses, in research, and as a consultant. Currently anyone who relies on census data as I and my students do faces several years of frustration during the latter half of the decade when the available decennial census data fail to reflect current conditions. The more highly developed a society and the greater the rate of social change, the more essential it is that accurate, up-to-date information be available as a basis for intelligent decision making. I have high hopes that you will bring your personal influence to bear in favor of a 1975 census. Sincerely, WALTER T. MARTIN, Professor of Sociology and Director, Center for Ecological Studies. AUGUST 3, 1971. Hon RICHARD M. NIXON, MY DEAR PRESIDENT NIXON: I am writing you in my capacity as Technical Consultant to the Census Bureau and long-time user, for scientific purposes, of census materials. I am distressed to note that plans, which had been so carefaily developed for a 1975 Census have been scrapped; and it is my hope that you wi graciously reverse this decision. |