Mr. ROONEY. According to my figures, these increases in programs come to $595,400.

Mr. HAUSER. It is $600,000 on page 114.

Mr. ROONEY. Where do you get $600,000?

Mr. HAUSER. I wonder if you have the $4,600 for an agricultural

program.

Mr. ROONEY. No, I do not. I am looking at your general state

ment.

Mr. HAUSER. That is the one item that is not mentioned in the general statement. It is shown at page 114 of the justifications, Mr. Chairman, and represents minor elements in agricultural statistical programs. The total for all is $600,000.

QUESTIONS TO BE ASKED FOR THE SEVENTEENTH DECENNIAL CENSUS

Mr. ROONEY. While we are talking generally about the Census Bureau and in particular the Seventeenth Decennial Census, some while back there was quite a hullabaloo created about certain questions included in the questionnaire. What were those questions?

Mr. HAUSER. Those questions related to income, Mr. Chairman, as they appear on the population schedule.

QUESTIONS ANNOUNCED A YEAR AGO

Mr. ROONEY. Those questions were included in the proposal brought to this committee a year ago and published in the record of the hearings of this committee at that time, were they not?

Mr. HAUSER. That is correct.

Mr. ROONEY. There was nothing inserted at the last minute in regard thereto, was there?

Mr. HAUSER. That is correct.

Mr. ROONEY. Tell us something about the history of the census insofar as those particular questions are concerned.

Mr. HAUSER. As far as the income questions are concerned, they were put on the schedule in response to a widespread demand from many sources, including business organizations, organizations of businessmen, newspapers, radio broadcasting companies, magazines, the major labor organizations, the CIO and the AFL, and educational and research institutions. All told, there are thousands of requests of this nature in our files, calling for the Bureau to collect income statistics for a multitude of purposes.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITIES

We placed the questions on the schedule in accordance with law because under the law, the Fifteenth Decennial Census Act under which we operate, the Bureau is required to ask questions relating to a number of subjects, including population and unemployment. The Director of the Census is given the authority to fix the number and form and subdivision of those questions with the approval of the Secretary of Commerce. It was our judgment, that is my judgment and the judgment of the Bureau staff in consultation with leaders in business, in labor and in other Government agencies-and in accordance, incidentally, with the intent of Congress as indicated in the

legislative history of the Fifteenth Decennial Census Act which directed that the Director confer with leaders in and outside of government in order to determine questions on the schedule that the income questions should definitely be included with any questions relating to unemployment and population. The Congress itself in making provision for an unemployment census in 1937, specifically requested that information be obtained not only on total unemployment, but partial employment and income, because obviously the most important. effect of unemployment, whether it be for a few days or over a long period, is how it interrupts the flow of family income, or the income of the individual workers.

Similarly with respect to general population, a measure of income is the most important single measure affecting or explaining differences in the birth rate differences in size of the family—which in turn help to explain the deceleration in the rate of increase in the population of the United States and throughout western civilization. Finally, in addition to striving for these important objectives relating to population and to unemployment, Mr. Chairman, we included the income questions because of the fact that the business community has been particularly persistent in asking for such information. The income questions afford the best single measurement. that there is in conjunction with population figures of potential markets, because markets are people with money. The population census measures the number of people and in measuring family income, also measures their purchasing power.

BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS REQUESTING INCOME DATA

Mr. ROONEY. Which business organizations requested such information?

Mr. HAUSER. I have a long list of such business organizations of which I will be glad to just name a sample. A list of over a thousand was inserted in the hearings several years ago and I have some more recent lists here for examination. For example, A. J. Wood & Co. Do you want the business ones first?

Mr. ROONEY. Yes.

Mr. HAUSER. Columbia Broadcasting System, National Broadcasting Co., Paducah Broadcasting Co., Pan American Broadcasting Co.; National Newspaper Service; Bayonne Times, Los Angeles Times, New York Herald Tribune, New York Journal-American, New York Post, New York Times.

Mr. ROONEY. And that in the face of editorials in some of these newspapers?

Mr. HAUSER. Yes; in spite of the editorials in some of these newspapers, the business offices have been asking for some of this information.

I have a whole list of publishers.

Mr. ROONEY. Let us have the names of those newspapers.

Mr. HAUSER. The Washington Times-Herald, Vineland TimesJournal, New Jersey; the Washington Post, and the Washington Star. They have used income data since the 1940 census.

Mr. ROONEY. How did they indicate to you that they were interested in these income questions?

Mr. HAUSER. Through correspondence taking a number of forms, expressly asking for such information on the schedule as well as asking us for such information for specific business uses or other uses. In many cases these papers have republished the information in accordance with the kinds of tables that have significance for their own. advertising and commercial purposes.

HISTORICAL

BACKGROUND OF QUESTIONS ABOUT PERSONAL FINANCES

Mr. ROONEY. I want to find out if there is anything revolutionary about these income questions. What is the historical background of previous censuses with regard to such questions?

Mr. HAUSER. Mr. Chairman, economic questions have been asked in the census of population for the last 100 years. Back in 1850, under President Taylor of the Whig Party, all persons in the United States were asked to report the value of all real property owned. In every census since then, quite irrespective of administration, questions relating to the economic status of families and persons have been included. The first census conducted under the act under which we operate at present, for example-a bill passed by the Seventy-first Congress and signed by President Hoover-that was the first census with which I was connected--had questions relating to the value of homes owned and the monthly rental paid for tenant-occupied units. So, from the standpoint of innovation, I would say that any student of the census can clearly see that questions relating to economic status have been asked for a full 100 years now in census history, and most of these questions have been placed on the census schedule by action of the Congress itself. In placing the income query on the schedule I feel that we have been following the intent of Congress as evidenced by the actions of Congress itself. In 1940, a question on wage and salary income was included. The present question includes all sources of income.

I could elaborate further, Mr. Chairman, if you desire.

Mr. ROONEY. Suppose you insert in the record a typical request for income data. If any of the other members wish to develop this further, they may do so when the questioning comes to them. (The material requested is as follows:)

Hon. JOHN J. ROONEY,

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS,
Washington, February 8, 1950.

MY DEAR MR. ROONEY: Since you inquired about the interest of business in the income query on the 1950 population schedule, I thought you would be interested in seeing the resolution which I received only today from the American Marketing Association. I am enclosing a copy of this resolution, together with the other materials relating to interest in the income question.

I wish to thank you again for the opportunity you gave us fully to explain our appropriation request for fiscal year 1951.

Sincerely yours,

Enclosure.

PHILIP M. HAUSER, Acting Director, Bureau of the Census.

Dr. PHILIP HAUSER,

AMERICAN MARKETING ASSOCIATION,
Chicago, Ill., February 6, 1950.

Acting Director Bureau of the Census,

Washington, D. C.

DEAR DR. HAUSER: I am enclosing a copy of the resolution which was adopted at the American Marketing Association's recent conference in New York City. The board of directors has instructed me to submit this resolution to you in official protest against the exclusion of income data from the 1950 census schedule. Sincerely yours,

GEO. H. BROWN, Secretary.

RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE AMERICAN MARKETING ASSOCIATION, DECEMBER 28,

1949

Whereas the inclusion of income reports in the 1950 census schedule has been subject to criticism and attack; and

Whereas the inference has been drawn that such data have no commercial and marketing significance or value; and

Whereas the membership of the American Marketing Association is keenly aware of the practical utility of comprehensive income data; and

Whereas these data are the more important for marketing purposes since rental values have become less significant of buying power; and

Whereas intelligent and informed marketing management is of great importance in sustaining the flow of production and thereby sustaining a high level of employment; and

Whereas these data are not only in the public interest but can most economically be obtained as an incident to the Seventeenth Decennial Census; and

Whereas the operations of the Bureau of the Census are fully protected by law to insure inviolate secrecy: Now, therefore, the American Marketing Association, in official meeting at New York City this 28th day of December 1949, has

Resolved, That the "family income" information provided for in the 1950 census enumeration should be retained and that the Bureau of the Census should be so informed, for the record.

DETERMINATION OF SIZE OF CENSUS DISTRICTS

Now, to get to something utterly practical, why is it that my congressional district is made one-half of a census district instead of a full census district?

Mr. HAUSER. Mr. Chairman, throughout the United States where we have large urban concentrations of population, and where, as a matter of administrative concenience, for efficiency and the saving of funds, it is possible to consolidate congressional districts into one large census district, we have done that.

Mr. ROONEY. You have done that in New York City?
Mr. HAUSER. We have done it in most of the large cities.

Mr. ROONEY. You have done it in New York?

Mr. HAUSER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. Have you done so with every single congressional district in New York City?

Mr. HAUSER. I am not prepared to answer the question without consulting maps, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROONEY. How about your assistants?

Mr. PHILLIPS. I think there are no districts in New York City with less than two congressional districts. Some are three and some

are two.

Mr. ROONEY. Will you pleasse ascertain if that statement is absolutely correct and, if necessary, amend the record accordingly? Mr. HAUSER. I will supply the information.

Mr. PHILLIPS. Staten Island is separate.

Mr. ROONEY. I was not thinking of Staten Island.

Has the same thing been done in Chicago?

Mr. HAUSER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. Has the same thing been done in Philadelphia?
Mr. HAUSER. Yes, sir.

Mr. ROONEY. The census districts in these cities are made up of two or more congressional districts?

Mr. HAUSER. That is right, sir. It depends on the size of the population and the size of the congressional district. We have some districts that are very large. There is one that may have 800,000 people in it.

In rural places, we have taken much smaller districts from the standpoint of population and had to cut some of them in two, because of the great distances involved in farm country and so forth.

Mr. ROONEY. Am I correct when I say that in all the large cities throughout the country-New York, Chicago, Boston, Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and so on-a congressional district comprises merely a part of the census district?

Mr. HAUSER. That is right.

NUMBER OF ENUMERATORS DETERMINED BY CONDITIONS IN DISTRICT

Mr. ROONEY. How many enumerators are to be used in a census district?

Mr. HAUSER. Since the average district is 350,000 people, the average might be 350 enumerators.

Mr. ROONEY. It would be at a ratio of 1 to 1,000?

Mr. HAUSER. Yes.

Mr. ROONEY. Is that ratio to be followed throughout the city of New York and in my congressional district?

Mr. HAUSER. Yes, sir. There may be deviations sometimes that we cannot control because we do not know what the 1950 population of the district is until we have taken the census; but, in general, we put in about 1 enumerator for each 1,000 persons and, if there are more people than that, then the enumerators get a second district to do.

Mr. ROONEY. It has been said that, since I am chairman of this committee, it would be all right if there was 1 enumerator for 1,200 people in my district and in the other congressional districts in Brooklyn.

Mr. HAUSER. It probably would not be too bad. It is an arbitrary line that we draw, there.

Mr. ROONEY. We do not want any less than anybody else. We want to be treated uniformly, the same as everywhere else. Do not pick me out because I am chairman of this committee to give my district 1 enumerator for 1,200 people when somebody else has 1 for 1,000.

RURAL AND URBAN RATIOS

Mr. PHILLIPS. In most of the large cities we do run 1 to 1,200. In the rural areas, it is less than 1 to 1,000. The average Nation-wide is 1 to 1,000. In the large areas, it is 1 to 1,200, and the rural areas, 1 to 800.

Mr. ROONEY. Before we consider the appropriation details, I shall ask if there are any questions, generally, on the problems of the Bureau of the Census.