system is the greatest! I have kitchen scales, measuring cups, thermometers in the metric system, as well as a conversion chart. I think it would be a great service to consumers if the U.S. went metric." There are many more like this, and they are to be reckoned with. Ten years have produced some sophisticated attitudes among many young women, and many others have traveled extensively in these days of easy tours by plane. It was interesting, too, to receive literal petitions signed by many people asking help in getting the metric system under way. One card says "We cast seven votes for the metric system. Postcards to our senators and representatives already sent." And from Milwaukee came an honest-togoodness petition signed by 23 men and women, who as consumers want the metric system. Now we come to some practical suggestions from people as to how they think we could begin the changeover. An Oregon consumer says he thinks volume and weight would be fairly easy-could be begun at once, but length will take more time and work. A Pennsylvania consumer says she believes with the extensive use of TV today, people could be taught through that medium very quickly-seeing how it works. This agrees with the study made recently by the University of Vermont which found that generally the many women they contacted were not antagonistic to the change, but persistently suggested it be implemented by use of actual measuring tools: cups, spoons, pans, "yard-sticks." etc. instead of using charts, books or printed matter. A San Francisco woman says her neighbors and friends have talked this over with her, and there is agreement that even hesitant or disapproving people could be convinced with careful, clear and repeated explanations using everyday situations familiar to them. Another suggestion that came in was for the change to come gradually, a 3- to 5-year interval, she thinks, with both systems printed on labels for a time, and getting the medical and scientific people to help as missionaries. A reader in Roanoke thinks 10 years is a better period to allow. He believes a thorough system of education worked out by the NBS with a consumer advisory committee would do the job without trouble. An Assistant Professor at the University of Iowa agrees. and suggests ways of getting the public used to metric terms and meanings. A doctor in Oregon suggests industry be persuaded to help with giveaways providing metric measuring tools, like "meter sticks." It would soon become common knowledge. Two letter writers felt a better system than the metric system based on tens, would be the Basic 12. They felt it was not really necessary to make use of the count of our fingers in creating a better system. Their arguments are interesting, but seem not to get consumers interested. All of the letters offering ideas on "how to do it" underline one very good thought: make use of those who support the changeover to become community aides in bringing understanding and effective use into play, once the changeover is decided upon. Neighborhood committees could help at stores or wherever people need a little information at the point of sale. These letters that have come to me show that the majority would willingly take part in this. So we would have a national network of volunteers for the metric system. They are all very much alike. Some just say, "Forget it!" others, "What was good enough for my father and mother is good enough for me and my children." Others just shudder and run, verbally. One letter cited a book. "Methods of Machine Shop Work," with a chapter entitled "Metric Fallacy" by F. A. Halsey, published by McGraw-Hill. He says this chapter will cure anyone of the desire for the metric system. There are letters saying it's fine for the U.S. to stand alone with a different system. Other letters say, "I'm too old to learn." And a real estate lawyer describes as terrible, the confusion that would result if the metric system were applied to the measurements of lands, and deeds on file. In two overseas phone calls to London I collected two different points of view. I'll give the decidedly violent opposition first. This from Rodger Diplock, Director of the Retail Trading-Standards Association of Great Britain, and an old friend of mine, which explains his informal language. He says, "As regards 'going metric,' everybody here hates the guts of every person who thought it was a good idea to change from miles to kilometers. I suppose we are prepared to accept decimalization next February, on the basis we shall be going into the Common Market (which Heaven Forbid). As to metrication, the cost to this country will be absolutely staggering and I wish to know nothing of it. In any case I shall still go on walking a mile to my local pub instead of working it out in kilometers." But Miss Sheila Kemp, an executive with the British Consumer Council, feels people are being prepared for the change, and will gradually accept it if enough clear explanations are made when metrication actually starts. Some British consumers, she says, feel that the change to the decimal money system due in February, 1971, is a chance to let industry raise prices. They also feel the new measurements of the metric system would let industry use "tricks" to raise prices and cut amounts of goods received. Miss Kemp feels strongly that this is the result of not getting the right words and the right facts into the general communication channel, to help people understand how the old and new systems compare. That the costs of change will be at least in part handed on to consumers is a fact. But that it can save money for them later on, is also a fact. It is going to take skillful art and highly competent word masters to bridge the communication gap in our own country, if the metric system is not to divide us further and create ill will at the grass roots. But I believe it is psychologically possible and has greater consumer support than is usually realized. Appendix 1 Public Law 90-472 An Act To authorize the Secretary of Commerce to make a study to determine the advan- 82 STAT 693 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the SEC. 2. In carrying out the program described in the first section of Investigation (2) appraise economic and military advantages and disad- (3) conduct extensive comparative studies of the systems of weights and measures used in educational, engineering, manufacturing, commercial, public, and scientific areas, and the relative advantages and disadvantages, and degree of standardization of each in its respective field; (4) investigate and appraise the possible practical difficulties which might be encountered in accomplishing the increased use of the metric system of weights and measures generally or in specific fields or areas in the United States; (5) permit appropriate participation by representatives of United States industry, science, engineering, and labor, and their associations, in the planning and conduct of the program authorized by the first section of this Act, and in the evaluation of the information secured under such program; and (6) consult and cooperate with other government agencies, SEC. 3. In conducting the studies and developing the recommenda- Results of (1) investigate the extent to which substantial changes in the (2) investigate the extent to which uniform and accepted engi- SEC. 4. The Secretary shall submit to the Congress such interim Report to SEC. 5. From funds previously appropriated to the Department of Funds. poses of this Act for the first year of the program. SEC. 6. This Act shall expire thirty days after the submission of the Expiration final report pursuant to section 3. date. Approved August 9, 1968. GLOSSARY 1. Customary System: the system of measurement units (yard, pound. second, degree Fahrenheit, and units derived from these) most commonly used in the United States. Often referred to as the "English system" or the "U.S. system." Our customary system is derived from, but not identical to, the "Imperial system," the latter has been used in the United Kingdom and other English-speaking countries, but is being abandoned in favor of the metric system. 2. Metric System: the measurement system that commonly uses the meter for length, the kilogram for mass, the second for time, the degree Celsius (same as "Centigrade") for temperature, and units derived from these. This system has evolved over the years and the modernized version today is identified as the "International System of Units," which is abbreviated "SI." 3. International System of Units (SI): popularly known as the modernized metric system, it is the coherent system of units based upon and including the meter (length), kilogram (mass), second (time), kelvin (temperature), ampere (electric current), and candela (luminous intensity), as established by the General Conference on Weights and Measures in 1960, under the Treaty of the Meter. A seventh base unit, the mole (for amount of substance) is being considered as another SI base unit. The radian (plane angle) and the steradian (solid angle) are supplemental units of the system. 4. Metrication: any act tending to increase the use of the metric system (SI), whether it be increased use of metric units or of engineering standards that are based on such units. 5. Planned Metrication: metrication following a coordinated national plan to bring about the increased use of the metric system in appropriate areas of the economy and at appropriate times. The inherent aim of such a plan would be to change a nation's measurement system and practices from primarily customary to primarily metric. 6. Cost of Metrication: that increment of cost, monetary or otherwise. directly attributable to metrication over and above any costs that would have been incurred without metrication. 7. Benefits of Metrication: monetary and other advantages accruing as a result of increased use of the metric system. 8. Measurement Standard: a device or physical phenomenon that is used to define or determine a characteristic of a thing in terms of a unit of measurement established by authority. Examples are gage blocks, weights, thermometers, and mean solar day. 9. Engineering Standard: a practice established by authority or mutual agreement and described in a document to assure dimensional compatibility. quality of product, uniformity of evaluation procedure, or uniformity of engineering language. Examples are documents prescribing screw thread dimensions, chemical composition and mechanical properties of steel, dress sizes, safety standards for motor vehicles, methods of test for sulphur in oil, and codes for highway signs. Engineering standards are often designated in terms of the level of coordination by which they were established (e.g., company standards, industry standards, national standards). |