the people. In the words of the President: The time has come for a new partnership between the Federal Government and the states and localities—a partnership in which we entrust the states and localities with a larger share of the nation's responsibilities and in which we share our federal revenue with them so that they can meet these responsibilities. So let us put the money where the needs are, and let us put the power to spend it where the people are. I have faith in people. I trust the judgment of the people. Let us give the people of America a chance—a bigger voice in deciding for themselves those questions that so greatly affect their lives.

Our feeling in Washington is that we have the compulsion to treat everybody exactly the same way. Broadly speaking, money flows out in massively detailed categories with all the regulations exactly the same way, all over the country. At the same time, there is great diversity in the nature of problems across the country. The problems of Chicago may be very different from the problems of Sacramento. The problems of New York City may be very different from the problems of Raleigh. If we loosen the constraints on federal money and provide more of it to the states and localities, then the people have a chance to use the money in a manner that fits their needs as they perceive them.

However, the advantages of revenue sharing go a great deal farther than that. We all feel much better and much more competent, we commit more energy and have much more zest to make things work when we work things out for ourselves. Then we are not doing something because we are told to do it, but because we decided for ourselves that it was a good idea. When an achievement is made, we can say that it is our achievement, not the achievement of some distant manager. In a nutshell, it is important that people have some control over their own destinies.

George Shultz, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, put it this way: "The thing that struck me is that, when you say to the worker on the lathe, 'We want your ideas about how the work place should be arranged, how it can be made more pro: ductive, how it can be made more suitable, and how the company can prosper more,' you turn up all kinds of people who were not thought of as having any ideas. Lo and behold, they have ideas. They have energy. They have capacities that the management never gave them credit for.”

If we could only get the people of America to take a greater interest in local government, then the tremendous energy and intelligence of our people will make revenue sharing a great success.

Well, there you have it-two major programs that the President has proposed, the modernizer in terms of government structure and functioning. You will be hearing much more about these proposals in the months ahead as they are debated.

I believe in government reorganization and revenue sharing. Times are changing, and we must do what we can to see that government continues to serve us in the years ahead. The proposals I have discussed here should help make that possible.

Take back to your people this message: We seek a balance of powers and a balance of resources which will enable the American form of government and the American economic system to fulfill their promise. There is a misapprehension abroad that the American revolution is a historical event. No way, as Snoopy says. The radical can point out that we have not accomplished more than any other people in the history of this planet and use that as an excuse to rest on somebody else's laurels. Both of these approaches are excuses to avoid the bona fide challenges. We have a revolution to complete, a responsibility to fulfill.

It is most rare that a government is established which is truly responsive to all the people. We are close to that goal. We have at hand the means to fulfill the promise of this country. The extent to which we allow outmoded structures and institutions to deter us from our duty will be the limiting factor in our fulfillment of our responsibility. This administration seeks to eliminate those limitations and free the American spirit and energy for greater involvement in the destiny of the nation. We ask your support.

INFORMATION: THE CONSUMER DILEMMA

by DR. T. M. BROOKS, President, American Council on Consumer Interests, and Dean, School of Home Economics, Southern Illinois

University

It has been said, "A man's judgment is no better than his information." If the information on which a decision is based is complete, appropriate, and unbiased, we are generally confident that the decision, and our judgment as well, will be indicative of the quality of that information. If, however, the decision is made on distorted, incomplete, deceptive, or misleading information, a man's decision, and again his judgment, will reflect the quality of that information. This can lead to trouble. But even the search for quality information can lead a man into trouble. Consider the man who, with his wife, visited showroom after showroom for weeks, carefully scrutinizing and studying new automobiles, comparing prices, performance data, comfort, and styling. "My good

ness," the wife said finally, "it did not always take you this long to make up your mind. Why, you married me three weeks after you met me." "Listen," said the husband, “buying a car is serious business."

Contrary to the view of the authors of the Pentagon papers, the healthy and effective functioning of a democratic society rests heavily upon the existence of quality information among its citizenry. Professor Booth of the University of Chicago states, "It is a commonplace to say that democracy depends for its survival on an informed citizenry. Democracy depends on free choices, and choices cannot be in any sense free if they are made blind. Free choice is, in fact, choice that is based on knowledge-not just opinions, but knowledge in the sense of reasoned opinion" [1].

I would add that the effective operation of our mixed capitalistic market economy is no less dependent on well informed consumers. If the information available to consumers is incorrect, inappropriate, or deceptive, consumers will be misled into making the wrong decisions. The extent to which misinformation distorts individual decisions will determine the degree to which the patterns of choice in our ecenomy reflect this distortion. The direction of our economy is dependent in large measure upon the multitude of consumer decisions. Any decision which the individual consumer makes will ultimately affect the overall economy, although its effect may be very minute.

The late Mildred Brady eloquently expressed the relationship between the individual and his economy. She wrote, "From the point of view of consumer economics, the individual failure of a family to spend wisely has market significance to the degree that that failure has contributed to bad practices, has rewarded the inefficient, dishonest, high-priced, or low-quality product. The overall effect of poor spending in a market so large and so varied as ours is glacial in action, hard to detect at any given moment. On the individual family, the result of a failure to spend wisely can be dramatic. The direction of the slow, massive movement of the market as a whole is determined, however, by the multiplication of the million tiny economic acts of the family functioning as a spending unit [2]." Thus, in the long run, we are all involved, whether individual consumers spend vicariously and foolishly or with wisdom and prudence.

We must ask ourselves what kind of society do we wish to live in. Is it to be a society based on the frivolous or on solid value? Is it to be a consumption-directed society or a consumer-directed society?

Although the information available to consumers has a significance far beyond the decisions made by the individual, the individual consumer is likely to feel the confusion and frustration of inadequate information. If, for instance, through erroneous information, consumers are led to believe that product A is better than product B,

when B is really better than A, the producer of A will benefit through this deception. He benefits not only at the expense of the producer B, but also at the expense of the additional satisfaction which the consumer would have received from product B. Consumer satisfaction is the basic motivator to consumer decisions. It is the reason why consumers even bother to acquire the needed information. Information may be thought of as the raw material which feeds into the decision-making process. Quality information leads to better decisions. It leads to more consumer satisfaction. Decision making is a productive process in which the amount of consumer satisfaction is as dependent upon the quality of the raw materials as it is with any other productive process, whether it be automobile production, steel making, or appliance manufacturing.

Moreover, just as there are criteria for determining the quality of goods and services, there are likewise quality standards for information. I would like to suggest three for your consideration. They are reliability, validity, and communicability.

When we say reliable, we usually mean that something or someone can be depended upon repeatedly. The opposite-unreliablemeans that we cannot have much faith in the performance of the subject. What are reliable sources of consumer information? What sources can be depended upon for information which is of consistent quality? Is it advertising, labeling, the Better Business Bureau, Consumer Reports, or government publications?

In regard to advertising, the following item appeared in today's Washington Post: "The U. S. Chamber of Commerce asked its members yesterday to do more to spotlight consumer health and safety in advertising. 'Advertising is the consumer's principal source of information about products and services. The business community and consumers alike are the losers when advertisers use tactics and appeals which impeach the good standing, repute, and credibility of the business world,' the Chamber said [3]."

Unfortunately, time will not permit an analysis of each source. I can only ask from your experience what sources of information do you find reliable?

Validity is the second attribute of quality information. By validity, we mean information which is appropriate-relevant to the decision being made. There is a wide "gap" in validity in the information available on many goods and services. Instead of receiving information on the properties, characteristics, and durability of the goods on the market, consumers are told how much the product will do for them socially and sexually-information which far too often is totally irrelevant and incredible.

The third criteria for quality information is communicability.

We may ask the question, How well is the message transmitted and received? Communication is a sharing process. The sender and the receiver must be on the same wavelength.

The following letter received by Consumers Union may illustrate the point. The letter, sent by a subscriber in regard to CU's testing and reporting on contraceptives, went as follows: "Some weeks ago, I filled out a blank establishing my eligibility to receive your pamphlet entitled A Report on Contraceptive Materials. I enclosed 25 cents. Yesterday, I received a form postcard informing me that instructions on how to attain high fidelity reproduction would be ready in about three weeks. While I appreciate the language in the open mail would necessarily have to be somewhat guarded, I wonder whether there has not been some misunderstanding. Please let me again make my needs and wishes clear. I do not, in this instance, want high fidelity reproduction; in fact, it is my wish to avoid reproduction altogether."

Obviously, what had happened was that her order for the contraceptive report had by mistake been acknowledged as an order for Consumers Union instructions on how to build a high fidelity radio-phonograph combination.

Professor Bymers of Cornell University states, "Knowledge is the product or output of a successful communication effort, and it is also a key variable in the enterprise system. Many buyers, many sellers, knowledge, and mobility are the minimum essential conditions of the free competitive market. These conditions alone do not insure the existence of the competitive market. They only make its existence possible [4]." Is it not our goal to see the establishment of a consumer-oriented free competitive market?

I believe the major thrust of the National Conference on Weights and Measures is toward providing consumers and businesses with reliable, valid information on weights and measures which can be readily understood. This information, of course, is fundamental to the marketplace. We simply could not conduct business without it. It is, however, a job that is never completed. Continued abuses and technological developments in marketing require constant surveillance and continual updating of procedures and techniques. Throughout history, reliable, valid, readily understood measures and weights have been a prerequisite for orderly consumer-oriented marketing.

In recent years, however, legislative attention has been drawn more and more to the critical information needs existing in other areas directly affecting consumers. The truth-in-lending and truthin-packaging laws were landmarks in the road toward providing consumers reliable, valid information. The prominent disclosure of quantity and other packaging data and credit terms was long over