AUGUST 12, 1971. Mr. GEORGE P. SHULTZ, Office of Management and Budget, Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. SHULTZ: I am in the investment business and find that census material is very useful for analyzing companies and industries. I would like to make a plea for a five-year census. I think that a ten-year census is not enough for the business needs of the country. One of the important uses of business taxes is census material published promptly before it is too old. Very truly yours, WILLIAM J. ROBERTS. ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON CITIES, Hon. CHARLES H. WILSON, Subcommittee on Census and Statistics, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILSON: Thank you for your favor of recent date outlining the possibilities of a mid-decade census, and suggesting that a letter be written to the President of the United States on the subject. While a mid-decade census would be of real value, it does not hold quite the same interest in the State of Washington as in other states. Some years ago the Association of Washington Cities sponsored legislation to place census data on an annual basis. Accordingly a census estimate, which has the official sanction of law, is developed for every city and town on a yearly basis. While an estimate is not as accurate as an actual count, by the use of modern demographic techniques it is believed a very close approximation is made. At least the system has worked well in this state for many years, and serves for the allocation of locally shared state-collected revenues, as well as other purposes. It is recognized that a federal census brings much additional information that can be of real value to cities and towns. Thus, bringing the matter to our attention is appreciated, and in the event our Board of Directors approve, we will be happy to write the President accordingly as suggested in your letter. Thanking you again for bringing the matter to our attention, Sincerely yours, CHESTER BIESEN, Executive Director. WASHINTON, D.C., JULY 16, 1971. Hon. CHARLES H. WILSON, U.S. House of Representatives, Cannon House Office Building, MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN: I appreciate very much the letter of July 13 which you addressed to me as Executive Secretary of the Institute of Appliance Manufacturers. My personal feelings are the same as they were in 1961; that is, that I think a mid-decade census is extremely important. However, I am not in a position to address the letter you suggest to the President of the United States because the Institute of Appliance Manufacturers has been inactive since July 1967. Cordially, PAULINE B. DUNCKEL GALVESTON, TEX., JULY 26, 1971. The PRESIDENT, Washington, D.C. MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: Representative Charles H. Wilson of California has informed me that the Administration is opposed, for economic reasons, to a middecade census. I am writing this letter in the hopes that your Administration will reconsider this decision. In my view, the need for continuing current accurate statistics on our population is so pressing that there can be no justification for a time interval established many years ago. In view of many political, social, public works, educational. health and other urgent areas that rely on these figures for planning purposes, and in view of the many billions of dollars that these areas represent, the need for a mid-decade census becomes obvious and the economy of conducting a mid decade census seems apparent. At a time in our history when we are struggling for a solution to massive social and human problems, the role of accurate census figures seems so necessary that to postpone the gathering of this data until 1980 is almost as analogous as sweeping dirt under a rug. Again let me strongly urge a reconsideration of the Administration's position on this problem. Sincerely yours, HAROLD A. GOOLISHIAN. HYATTSVILLE, MD., July 27, 1971. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: It has recently come to my attention that Mr. George H. Brown, Director of the Bureau of Census, in testifying before a Subcommittee on Post Office and Civil Service, indicated that the Administration does not recommend a mid-decade census. As a resident of one of the fastest growing Counties in the United States, I have been acutely aware for a number of years of the desire for mid-decade census in order to have more equitable distribution of Federal and State funds that are available under various programs predicated upon the population of the areas involved. In addition thereto, the mid-decade census is of immeasurable value to the business community. I am sincerely of the opinion that the cost of a mid-decade census can be substantially recovered by the Federal government by having population data available every five years. I would sincerely hope you would reconsider this position attributed to you and would urge the passage of this very desirable legislation. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have learned of the Administration's change of position concerning the establishment of a mid-decade census through the announcement which Census Director George Brown made, when questioned in the June 10th hearings, to the effect that at this time your Administration is not in favor of the mid-decade census. Almost every opinion expressed in the previous Congressional hearings, as well as those of the Decennial Census Review Committee of the Secretary of Commerce (of which I have been a member), has supported the establishment of a mid-decade census beginning in 1975. This was also the previous opinion of Director Brown and others in the Department of Commerce. I feel that it would be very unfortunate if this change is allowed to stand and the opportunity lost to prepare for the 1975 census which must soon begin, if it is to take place at all. The rate of change, the importance of census information for every conceivable public and private program, the mobility of our population, the great need for reliable statistics in forward planning-all of these are compelling reasons why the expense involved in a mid-decade census is well worth paying. The costbenefit ratio of a mid-decade census, in the view of just about everyone who has studied it, clearly shows the benefits to be predominant. It is my personal hope that the Administration will review and revise its stand against the 1975 census and initiate the necessary planning which would enable such an enumeration to take place in an orderly and efficient manner. Sincerely yours, A. B. TROWBRIDGE. FAYETTEVILLE, ARK., July 13, 1971. The PRESIDENT, The White House, Washington, D.C. MR. PRESIDENT: I would like to urge you to support the mid-decade census proposal that has recently been under consideration by the Subcommittee on Census and Statistics of the House Post Office and Civil Service Committee. As a professional economist and statistician, it is my earnest opinion that there is a pressing need for more frequent reports on the socioeconomic and demographic characteristics of the nation's population. These national, state, county and small area data are vital to both research and policy formulation but the present ten-year reporting interval is grossly inadequate when viewed in the context of the highly dynamic social, political and economic nature of our society. I sincerely hope that your Administration will find it possible to encourage Congress to provide the needed legislation for expanding the census program so that a mid-decade census will become a reality. Sincerely, Representative CHARLES H. WILSON, PHILLIP H. TAYLOR. WASHINGTON, D.C., June 25, 1971. Chairman, Subcommittee on Census and Statistics, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. WILSON: For your information I am enclosing a copy of a letter which in my shock at learning of the unwise decision to abandon the mid-decade housing census, I have written to the President of the United States. Sincerely, Enclosure. The PRESIDENT, White White House, MILES L. COLEAN. Washington, D.C., June 25, 1971. MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: With the government up to its ears in forcing housing production, with housing subsidies mounting at a rate that will soon make the agricultural subsidy program look modest, and with housing markets in danger of being distorted by government policies arrived at on the basis of inadequate information, it is a shock to learn from the testimony of Dr. George H. Brown, Director of the Bureau of the Census, that "At this time this administration does not recommend a mid-decade census." Such a census has been supported by economists generally, by the housing and mortgage finance industries, and by members of both political parties, and its need should no longer be in question. As one who has been deeply involved in the making and execution of housing policy since the early 1930s and who has had close connection with the building and housing industries and their problems over this period, I must most sincerely urge a reconsideration of this decision. Respectfully yours, MILES L. COLEAN. APPENDIX II. FURTHER COMPILATION OF COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED AND REPORTS PREPARED BY GAO AS A RESULT OF INQUIRIES A. Letter Sent to State Governor's Offices Inquiring About Use of Census Data in Its Evaluation of the Need for a Mid-Decade Census Program, and Replies Received U.S. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, DEAR GOVERNOR As you are aware, in accordance with a constitutional requirement the Federal Government conducts a census of the population once every 10 years. The principal purpose of the census is to fix representation of the States in the House of Representatives. Census information has also been a valuable source of information to Federal, State, and local levels of government for making policy decisions concerning the allocation of available resources. During the past decade and as recent as 1970, many State and local government officials in testimony before congressional committees have expressed a need for census information more frequently that once every 10 years. They point out that this need is created by the shifting population patterns and dynamic changes taking place within our States and cities. In response to this growing concern, the Subcommittee on Census and Statistics of the United States House of Representatives plans to hold hearings in mid-1971 to consider proposals for meeting these informational needs. The subcommittee has requested the United States General Accounting Office to evaluate which method a mid-decade census of population, or sample surveys-would produce the most fruitful results, taking into consideration the costs associated with the various methods. The subcommittee is hopeful that a report on this evaluation will be available for its consideration about the time of the scheduled hearings or shortly thereafter. The identification of the uses of census information by State and local governments is of course a significant factor in this evaluation. Although some general knowledge exists as to such uses, specific information is extremely limited. Therefore, in the interest of being fully responsive to the subcommittee's request within the established time constraints, we are making a request to each of the States for information concerning provisions included within State statutes requiring or implying the use of census information. In addition, we are interested in obtaining information or comments as to (1) any census taken by the State or statistical gathering activity financed by the State to provide information not provided by the Federal census or other Federal statistical programs and (2) the type of information (as to subject matter and geographic detail) that would be of most use to your State. For example, population totals serve as a basis by some States to allocate funds (regional planning grants and vocational education), for revenue-sharing (aircraft taxes and alcoholic beverage taxes); and for establishing classes of cities, salaries of city officials, and borrowing limits. In advance, we wish to thank you for your assistance in this important undertaking. Sincerely yours, A. T. SAMUELSON, Director, Civil Division. OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Mr. A. T. SAMUELSON, Director, U.S. General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. SAMUELSON: An abbreviated Census of Population and Housing at mid-decade would be most advantageous to program planning, budgeting, opera tion, review and evaluation in Kentucky. Statewide sampling by characteristic would provide less help to our State agencies than a one-hundred percent sample of a few key items. The probable cost differential would be slight; the value of carefully selected items has great intrinsic analytical potential. Such a selective count grouped by counties, urban places and SMSA's promises greater comparability both geographically and historically. This, too, is the only de jure count, a factor which is fundamental to many of our most urgent needs. A suggested format would be analogous to that used for the 1970 Advance Reports. The most cogent population data would include: numbers by race, age, population in households by head, occupation, poverty families and family income; the most cogent housing data would include: occupied housing units, units instructure, percent with all plumbing facilities, persons per room, value and contract rent. There is a need for a count by race, occupation, poverty and family income for comparing and referencing Federal-State-local programs and activities. A single source of data is needed to facilitate cross-referencing data. Kentucky does not conduct a census, but State Departments develop some data pertinent to general State use and for their internal functions. (Please see attachment.) Although the State has only a single constitutional requirement to use Bureau of the Census data, this for the classification of cities, our need and utilization of these statistics is basic to our program development efforts. Census data provide the bench mark for interstate and intrastate research about our people. To serve them better we need to know them better, and we are committed to the fact that every Kentuckian counts. Very truly yours, Attachment. ATTACHMENT I LOUIE B. NUNN, Governor. State Departments and Agencies in Kentucky generate data and statistics for their own use. Some of these have wider application and are, therefore, utilized by other Departments and diffused to the public. Nearly all of these data have restricted application because they represent a selectively defined universe. The following lists represent the sorts of material gathered by four State Departments oriented to serving the public: Vital Statistics Births: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH County totals, residence and occurrence, by color. County of residence, with rates, showing color by sex, hospital deliveries with percentages, attendant by color, and plurality. Month of occurrency, by sex Rates, by county of residence, by color, 1968-1967 Deaths: Dealths: Accidental, by place and type of accident, with rates Cause, by residence, showing age, sex and color Communicable diseases, selected, with rates, 1968-1967 County totals, residence and occurrence, by color Infant, leading causes, by residence, by age, group and color Infant, maternal, neonatal, perinatal, and under one week, with rates by county of residence Leading causes, by residence, age group; with rates and percent of total Rates, by county of residence, by color, 1968–1967 Selected causes, by county of residence, color, with rates. Selected causes, by occurrence, 1968-1959 Deaths: Selected diseases showing cases and case fatality ratios, by age group Stillbirths, county totals, residence and occurrence, by color Stillbirths, by month of occurrence, by sex Stillbirths, ratios, by county of residence, by color, 1968-1967 |