In a period of rapid social change concomitant with urbanization and the redistribution of diverse elements in the population, a census at ten-year intervals fails to give us the material that we need for an adequate analysis of these changes. Moreover, it is not practical to consider such substitutes as special periodic surveys, because of the difficulties that develop in connection with sampling and tabulation for small areas, and matters of validity and reliability. Very sincerely yours, DOROTHY SWAINE THOMAS, Research Professor of Sociology (Ret.). U.C.L.A. GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: We are informed that in the deliberations pertaining to a mid-decade census, Dr. Brown, of the Bureau of the Census, has expressed the view that the administration doesn't recommend such a census at this time. I believe that this position is unfortunate and seriously neglects the importance of current information for public as well as private decisionmaking. The decennial censuses are extremely valuable in providing insights into the demographic, social, and economic characteristics of the American people. However, their value deteriorates the further one is removed from the census-taking period. As a result, important decisions which substantially affect the welfare of the population in this nation are made on often out-of-date or on the sketchiest evidence available. A mid-decade census, in my estimation and the estimation of many of my colleagues, would go far in improving the quality of statistical information that serves as an important input in a variety of public and private actions. I would strongly urge that the policy established by your administration be reconsidered. The costs of a mid-decade census, as I am well aware of, is not trivial. Nevertheless, the important benefits that are provided which will facilitate the improvement of public and private decisionmaking, seem to far outweigh these costs. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I write to urge that the administration reverse its position with respect to the mid-decade census of population and housing. Dr. George H. Brown, Director of the Census, testified in June before the Subcommittee on Census and Statistics of the House Post Office and Civil Service Committee that the administration did not support such a census. The Census of Population and Housing is the only one of our censuses which is not taken on a five-year basis. Others are taken on a five-year basis for the simple reason that their need has been adequately demonstrated and no substitute can be found for them. The same is true for the Census of Population and Housing. The need for more frequent censuses is manifest in the numerous federal, state, and local government programs that depend upon census data for the efficient allocation of resources. Also, numerous organizations in the private sector and individuals make extensive use of census information. While to some extent the utilization of administrative records may provide for census updates, manipulation of administrative records is expensive. And without benchmark census data, decisions based upon administrative records rapidly become fraught with danger. I hope that the administration will reconsider its decision against a mid-decade Census of Population and Housing. I do not believe that reconsideration should await the Census Bureau study of the utilization of administrative records. Time is short for preparation for the mid-decade census and a study of the utilization of administrative records is certain to conclude that their use is limited. Sincerely yours, WILLIAM L. GARRISON, Professor of Environmental Engineering. DUKE UNIVERSITY, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY, President RICHARD M. NIXON, Washington, D.C. DEAR PRESIDENT NIXON: I am writing to express my distress upon learning of the recent Administration decision not to recommend the institution of a middecade census in 1975. In my mind there is no doubt as to the great value of and need for such an innovation. The practice of many other countries in conducting such censuses is indicative, I think, of their great value relative to cost. I am writing in particular because my experience in the course of years of research on changes in the population characteristics of American places has indicated how rapidly they change in size and qualities. While the Current Population Survey is an invaluable adjunct to the decennial census in keeping us apprised of various trends, it rarely provides data on places smaller than the largest Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas. Toward the second half of an inter-census decade it is almost impossible to estimate or project these trends. The importance of changes in size for individual places is obvious. Aside from what it means for municipalities themselves in terms of receipts of distributed public funds, research has shown repeatedly that place size is a major correlate of the socioeconomic attributes of community populations. I am enclosing a recent publication of mine demonstrating this point, of course, it only represents a variety of related studies conducted by many other scholars as well. In view of the known importance of the kind of basic information that a middecade census would provide it is hard to imagine how effective planning can be undertaken and informed policy decisions made without such a census. Therefore, I strongly urge that the Administration decision on this matter be reconsidered and altered before it is too late to begin activities for a census in 1975. Very truly yours, JOEL SMITH, Professor. LEONIA, N.J., August 2, 1971. THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: At hearings on a mid-decade Census of Population and Housing held by the subcommittee on Census and Statistics of the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service on June 10, Mr. George H. Brown, Director of the Bureau of the Census, made the surprising announcement that "At this time the Administration does not recommend a mid-decade Census." At what Executive level this decision was made, and for what reasons, were not announced, but I assume that it was at a level below your office and that you can reverse it. I therefore take the liberty of addression to you an expression of my strong conviction that, in the interest of better understanding of the nature and magnitude of many of the fundamental and rapidly emerging changes that now trouble our Nation, this decision should be reversed. Since the mid-thirties, it has been my privilege to maintain close contact with the Censuses of Housing. I know how much more rapidly conditions in housing and in housing markets now occur in our burgeoning urban and metropolitan communities than they did during the two decades preceding World War II. During these decades I have been following closely these changes. They are far greater now in five years than they were in ten years when the Congress authorized and the Executive conducted the first Housing Census in 1940. Yet, at that time, the financial commitments of the Federal Government, made for the purpose of ameliorating housing conditions for those of its citizens most in need of its help, were measured in hundreds of thousands of dollars; now they exceed a BILLION DOLLARS annually. One error in judgment now by the relevant Committee of the Congress or by high officials in the Executive, in connection with only one of several dozens of the programs to which they are committed can cost American taxpayers more than the cost of a Census of Population and Housing. I have always been taught that it is good economy to spend one dollar if that will save two. But I plead for reversal of this decision not alone on grounds of economy: many of the current action programs of the Federal government now reach directly into the daily life of millions of its citizens-of which I am one. These programs cannot be administered with the sympathetic understanding that should inform them, nor modified as promptly as the swift and far-reaching changes in our society dictate, without comprehensive statistical materials that count and classify these individuals into measured groups-data that can be compiled with the requisite precision only by a universal Census. For the results of such a census must be accurate for small geographic areas and, they are to be used with confidence in the formulation of Governmental Policy and in executing the mandates of the Congress, they must be much less obsolete than they now inevitably become in less than ten years. For example, from 1960 to 1970, our population increased by nearly three times as many persons as from 1930 to 1940. And during the year 1966, over 12 million persons, nearly 7 percent of our entire population, left the counties and the houses in which they had been living and moved to others. This means that the number of persons who would have moved from one house and one county in which they lived into another in ten years would be equal to about 70 percent of our entire population. Both of these phenomena have an important bearing upon housing problems, on the allocation of several types of Federal funds, and on the very make-up of the House of Representatives. It is an injustice that reaches into every ocmmunity in the United States to carry on these and many other Federal Government activities on the basis of statistical materials that are over five years old. May I presume further to mention that prompt reversal of this decision appears to be necessary if the Bureau of the Census is to be given time to prepare for a mid-deca de Census in 1975? Very Respectfully yours, ERNEST M. FISCHER, Emeritus Professor of Urban Land Economics, Columbia University. UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, President RICHARD M. NIXON, The White House, Washington, D.C. CENTER FOR HEALTH ADMINISTRATION STUDIES, DEAR PRESIDENT NIXON: This is to inform you of my unqualified support for a periodic mid-decade census for reasons amply set forth in the Congressional Record of June 14, 1971, Vol. 117, No. 90, by the Honorable Charles H. Wilson, House of Representatives, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Census and Statistics. There can obviously be no rational and equitable administration of federal funds and intelligent social and economic planning without more frequent census data than the traditional ten-year intervals. Yours sincerely, ODIN W. ANDERSON, Professor and Associate Director. Hon. CHARLES H. WILSON, Subcommittee on Census and Statistics, VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY, Nashville, Tenn., July 26, 1971. Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILSON: Your letter of July 15 about the need for a middecade census has come while Chancellor Heard is on vacation. He will see your interesting proposal as soon as he returns to the office late next month. With best wishes, Sincerely yours, DAN M. MARTIN, Assistant to the Chancellor. THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, Congressman CHARLES H. WILSON, Chairman, Subcommittee on Census and Statistics, DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILSON: Thank you for your letter of July 16th. (Mrs.) ADELE J. Kaye, Secretary to Dr. Hauser. STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT ALBANY, President RICHARD M. NIXON, Washington, D.C. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY, DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I am writing you in regard to the desirability of the establishment of a mid-decade census for the United States. Those of us who work with census data are acutely aware of the rapidity with which population changes in the current era. This is most acutely true in urban areas. As a teacher I can be concerned with either historical trends or contemporary information. Planners and government officials, however, cannot. There is a great need for current information in these sectors which is not now provided from any source. I have a great respect for the Census Bureau since I have had some dealing with them on a minor project basis. While there are other sources of information on population characteristics which could be activated during the period between the decennial census, the Census Bureau is the obvious resource to be used for this purpose. Let me, therefore, urge positive consideration of current attempts in the Congress to establish a mid-decade census under the auspices of the United States Bureau of the Census. Sincerely yours, Hon. CHARLES H. WILSON, ROMOLO TOIGO, Associate Professor of Sociology. TENNESSEE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY, House Subcommittee on Census and Statistics, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILSON: I sincerely appreciate your support for the inauguration of a mid-decade census and feel as you that the administration's failure to support this position is untenable. You might get more support for the new census if you recommended statistical sampling instead of a complete enumeration. Many authorities believe sampling to be faster, less expensive, and more accurate. In any event I plan to write the President and express my disappointment in his position. Sincerely yours, JOEL R. LANCASTER, KENT STATE UNIVERSITY, The PRESIDENT, The White House, DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: This letter is written in support of a mid-decade census. The data which this census would provide would be of inestimable aid to those of us interested in doing research in urban problems and on our nation's minority citizens. Many problems of a social and economic nature which exist in our nation cannot be adequately studied nor intelligently solved without data of the kind which it is proposed to collect in the mid-decade census. I most respectfully urge your support for this census. Sincerely yours, Hon. CHARLES H. WILSON, JORDAN A. HODGKINS, Chairman. THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, D.C., July 23, 1971. Chairman, Subcommittee on Census and Statistics, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This letter refers to yours of July 15, 1971. I have been able to secure a copy of my previous letter to The Honorable David N. Henderson, dated April 27, 1962, at which time he was Acting Chairman, Subcommittee on Census and Government Statistics. My position was accurately stated in the last paragraph of that letter, which I quote: "In so far as this agency (Selective Service System) is concerned, therefore, the use which it can make of census data would not justify the increased cost of a five year census." Recent developments have not changed this view. While assistance is always considered and welcomed from the Bureau of the Census, the vital records for administering the Selective Service System are those gathered by the System at the time the registrant becomes 18 years of age, and cumulated until he reaches age 26 or 35, when he is no longer liable for induction. Thank you for again giving me an opportunity to state my position on the mid-decade census. Sincerely, LEWIS B. HERSHEY, General, USA, Advisor to the President. JULY 21, 1971. The PRESIDENT, The White House, Washington, D.C. DEAR PRESIDENT NIXON: As the Census Tract Key Person for the Tacoma SMSA, I was disappointed to learn that the Administration does not recommend a mid-decade census at this time. Without restating in detail the many valid reasons for establishing the middecade census, it is respectfully requested that the Administration reconsider its current position on this matter so that current and reliable population and housing data and all the related socio-economic data can be available to the task of planning programming and budgeting for the future. Respectfully yours, RUSSELL C. BUEHLER, |