« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
atives. I think it would probably be far more accurate than I could state it, and possibly more convincing than I could put it. Mr. KINZER. In your judgment, what personnel would be required to administer this law? Have you made any study of that? Mr. KERLIN. Yes, sir; and may I suggest that Director Austin, of the Census Bureau, has all that information. Mr. KINZER. You yourself have no knowledge of it? Mr. KERLIN. Yes, I have seen their estimates, but I would rather have Mr. Austin, who has worked in the preparation of them, present them and discuss that matter with you, if that is satisfactory to you. Mr. RANKIN. Do you have a published, complete schedule of queso o be covered by this census? Have you worked out that schedule yet'. Mr. KERLIN. We have not done that as yet. They can give you a pretty close, definite idea of what questions are to be covered in the questionnaires. Mr. KINZER. Is there a desire to have this as a substitute for, or in addition to the decennial census of 1930? Mr. KERLIN. This largely to be in addition to the regular decennial census. It is what might be classed as a mid-decennial census. Mr. ELLENBogEN. The law now provides for an agricultural census, and as far as the agricultural census is concerned, this would only advance it by a few months. Mr. RANKIN. From what time to what time? Mr. KERLIN. The existing law provides for the agricultural census to be taken as of January 1, 1935. It is proposed in this bill to advance the taking of that census to November 12, 1934. Mr. RANKIN. It would be included in this? Mr. KERLIN. The expenses of that census are not included in this. Mr. RANKIN. How much will it cost? Mr. KERLIN. We have an appropriation already granted by Congress of approximately $2,000,000. Mr. RANKIN. So it would be approximately $9,500,000 for the whole thing? Mr. KERLIN. Yes, sir. Mr. ELLENBogEN. That makes about $10,000,000, which was the amount I had in mind. Mr. KERLIN. Yes; and that is the regular 5-year data; it occurs every fifth year. Mr. ELLENBoGEN. And November 12 would be a better date than January 17 Mr. KERLIN. Yes; November 12 would be a better date. January 1 would be in midwinter, so that in the northern section of the country it would be very difficult. Mr. RANKIN. You take a manufactures census every 5 years, do you not? Mr. KERLIN. No; that is taken every 2 years. Mr. RANKIN. Is that included in this? Mr. KERLIN. No, sir. Mr. RANKIN. I have asked this question before when this same issue has been before this committee. You speak of an unemployment census. I wonder if you discriminate between the voluntarily unemployed and the involuntarily unemployed. I wonder if you will show the number of people who are out of employment, who are seeking employment, and the number of people who are out of employment who are not seeking employment. Mr. KERLIN, Yes, sir; the questions are designed for the purpose of bringing out that particular information. Mr. RANKIN. We have a great many people in this country who never have been employed and never will be employed if they can get around it. So we do not want to fail to discriminate between those people and the people who actually are out of employment and who want employment. Mr. KERLIN. That has been a very difficult question to set forth in that form in order to bring out just the information you have indicated there. But we took a census in 1930, when we did design our questions for that specific purpose, and we will have now the advantage of that experience. Mr. ELLENBogEN. I would like to ask you this question: There was an unemployment census taken 4 months after the regular census was taken in 1930. As I understand it, the records of that unemployment census were destroyed, practically, shortly after the census had been taken. What light can you give us on that? Mr. KERLIN. I personally was not aware of the fact that that data had been destroyed. Mr. ELLENBogEN. I was amazed to find that the usual rule of the bureau had been broken and that the original records relating to the unemployment census taken in 1930 were destroyed almost immediately after the report had been printed, and just before President Roosevelt took office. Mr. KERLIN. I do not know about that. I am quite sure Mr. Austin can give you information on that point. But if that was done, I presume it was on the principle that the data had been transcribed from the original questionnaires. Mr. ELLENBogEN. It is a very curious thing to me. The CHAIRMAN. As I understand it, you know nothing about that? Mr. KERLIN. No, sir; I do not. The CHAIRMAN. That can be developed later. Mr. KERLIN. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. At this time I offer for the record a letter from Hon. Harold L. Ickes, Secretary of the Interior and Federal EmerÉ. Administrator of Public Works, which communication is as OILOWS:
FEDERAL EMERGENCY ADMINISTRATOR of PUBLIC Works, - Washington, April 16, 1934. Hon. DANIEL C. RoPER, Secretary of Commerce, Commerce Department, Washington, D.C.
MY DEAR MR. RoPER: The Mississippi Valley Committee, a Public Works Administration agency, is deeply interested in the proposal for a 1935 population census. Morris L. Cooke, its chairman, informs me that at a recent meeting it was voted that—
“While normally a census taken at 10-year periods is adequate, in view of the unusual economic and social conditions which have prevailed since the 1930 census, the taking of a somewhat simplified census in 1935, with special reference to employment and other population movements, will be fully justified. No other expenditure of like amount is apt to yield such rich returns.”
I am happy to pass on this comment for your information.
HARold L. IcKEs, Administrator.
The CHAIRMAN. We will now hear Mr. W. L. Austin, the Director of the Census.
Will you give your name to the reporter and state your official position and submit such statement as you care to make?
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM L. AUSTIN, DIRECTOR BUREAU OF THE CENSUS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Mr. AUSTIN. My name is William L. Austin; I am Director of the Census. - I would like to make a brief statement, Mr. Chairman. We have representatives of other services here, who are particularly interested in this census, and from them the members of the committee can obtain detailed information. This census is to provide information concerning numbers, classes, and geographical distribution of unemployed persons and their dependents, and concerning employment and occupations necessary to aid in the formation of a program of unemployment relief. The bill which is now offered by the Department of Commerce and the Census Bureau, according to the statement of the Director of the Budget, would not be inconsistent with the financial program of the President. This is an emergency census, and it is a limited one. We do not propose, of course, to cover all the fields that we covered in 1930. That was the most complete census that has ever been taken in the United States; as a matter of fact, it is the most complete census that has ever been taken by any large government. Now, since 1930 in various sections of the country there has been a great shift in population. As a matter of fact, the tide has reversed and instead of going from the rural sections into the cities it is now going from the cities back to the rural sections. Any estimates of population we make now are worth very little for cities and counties. We have no correct basis to go on, and while we do usually make those estimates of population between the decennial census periods we cannot now make them in detail as we did formerly. Our estimates are not sufficient now for us to figure out carefully the per capita birth rates and the death rates. So far as unemployment is concerned, there have been large numbers of people thrown out of employment since the 1930 census and recently, from all indications, there are a large number of people who have gone back to work. This census is principally for the use of the Federal agencies. It is not proposed to take anything like a comprehensive census. It is to enable our emergency agencies to have accurate and up-to-date information upon which to base their action in carrying out the emergency laws and providing for relief. I have a statement here, Mr. Chairman, that I should like to submit as part of the record, because it gives briefly the reasons for this census and shows clearly why an up-to-date census is needed by the various services of the Government, not only the emergency services, but also the regular services, such as the Department of the Treasury, the Department of War, the Department of Justice, the Post Office Department, the Department of the Interior, the Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works, the Public Works Emergency Housing Corporation, the Department of Agriculture and the A.A.A., the Department of Commerce, the Department of Labor, the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Federal Rail Coordinator, the Federal Reserve Board, the Federal Trade Commission, the United States Tariff Commission, the Federal Power Commission, the Federal Radio Commission, the Federal Employment Stabilization Board, the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Bank Board and Farm Credit Administration, the Tennessee Valley Authority, and the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. The statement also shows the needs of State and local governments, and private research organizations. Without going into detail, Mr. Chairman, if it is agreeable, I should like to submit this statement as a part of the record. The CHAIRMAN. Is there any objection to the request of the Director of the Census? If not, it is so ordered. The memorandum above referred to is as follows:
PREPARED BY MR. RICE FoR THE HEARING ON APRIL 30, 1934
The national emergency and the recovery program of the Government have
brought to the Bureau of the Census insistent demands for accurate statistical information concerning unemployment, employment, and occupations. In the nature of the case, data on these subjects have value only as they are related to general population data, which provide a base. If the period from 1930 to the present had been normal, the data collected on these subjects in the Fifteenth Census of 1930 would still be adequate. So great and so unsuual have been the changes of the last four years, however, that only a new census will enable the Bureau to supply the information required. It has always been assumed that a new population census is required at intervals because of changes occurring with the lapse of time. The interval specified by the Constitution is 10 years. The changes since the census of 1930 appear to have been fully as great, and in some cases more significant, than the changes normally occurring between two decennial years; while the present needs for census data, except for the single purpose of congressional reapportionment, are more pronounced than perhaps at any other time in our national history. The evidence for these statements is extensive, but they may be illustrated briefly:
g oil. in 1930, there appears to have been for the first time a reversal of the net movement of population from farms to cities. This has disturbed still further the balance between agricultural and indistrial production, and undoubtedly has had far-reaching effects upon urban realty valuations. This in turn has affected the collection of taxes and the credit of local units of government, has been a factor in the unusually depressed state of the construction industries, and has placed unprecedented responsibilities upon the Federal Government with respect to local government finance, as, for example, in transferring relief burdens from municipalities unable to meet them to the Federal Government. The larger aspects of policy respecting the allocation of public works, the stimulation of capital goods industries, and the assumption of traditionally local responsibilities by the Federal Government, thus depend upon population movements concerning which we are in need of information. More narrowly, information regarding unemployment, and its occupational incidence, is required to indicate the prospective requirements for relief. Moreover, allocations of relief funds, as of Public Works funds, can be equitable only if they bear some relationship to the present distribution of population.
What may be termed the sociological services of the Government, referring
both to the regular and the emergency agencies, require new population data. Thus, the rapid decline of the birth rate appears to have brought about, in many communities, an actual diminution in the number of elementary school students. At the same time, if children whose ages are such as to include them alternatively in the school or the working population are unemployed, there is a potential addition to the school population. School authorities require knowledge of both population and unemployment by age levels, to ascertain the present and prospective demands for educational facilities. Public health authorities are in need of population data, which can not now be provided, for the calculation of birth and mortality rates. As a final illustration of the need for this census at the present time, we may mention the dependence of the agricultural program of the Federal Government upon the data to be procured from the quinquennial census of agriculture, and the dependence of the latter for its accuracy upon a concurrent census which will include an enumeration
of Fo hese and other uses of the Federal Government for census data were submitted in a memorandum of April 4, 1934, by the Assistant Director of the Census to the Director of the Budget. A copy of this memorandum is attached for the records of the Committee on the Census. The interests of certain of these onental agencies will be elaborated by other witnesses at the present earing. *iemand for the present census is wide-spread and has been brought to the attention of the Secretary of Commerce and the Director of the Census by a large number of organizations and individual specialists in the fields of statistics, sociology, public health, actuarial science, business, labor, city planning, engineering, and various other fields of public service. Mr. AUSTIN. The national emergency and the recovery program of the Government have brought to the Bureau of the Census insistent demands for accurate statistical information concerning unemployment, employment, and occupations. In the nature of the case, data on these subjects have value only as they are related to general population data, which provide a base. If the period from 1930 to the present had been normal, the data collected on these subjects at the Fifteenth Census in 1930 would still be adequate. So great and so unusual have been the changes of the last 4 years, however, that only a new census will enable the Bureau to supply the information required. It has always been assumed that a new population census is required at intervals because of changes occurring with the lapse of time. The interval specified by the constitution is 10 years. The changes since the census of 1930 appear to have been fully as great as, and in some cases more significant than, the changes normally occurring between two decennial years; while the present needs for census data, except for the single purpose of congressional reapportionment, are more pronounced than perhaps at any other time in our national history. The evidence for these statements is extensive, but they may be illustrated briefly. Commencing in 1930, there appears to have been for the first time a reversal of the net movement from farms to cities. This has disturbed still further the balance between agricultural and industrial production, and undoubtedly has had far-reaching effects upon urban realty valuations. This, in turn, has affected the collection of taxes and the credit of local units of government, has been a factor in the unusually depressed state of the construction industries, and has placed unprecedented responsibilities upon the Federal Government with respect to local government finance, as, for example, in transferring relief burdens from municipalities unable to meet them to the Federal Government. The larger aspects of policy respecting the allocation of public works, the stimulation of capital-goods industries, and the assumption of traditionally local responsibilities by the Federal Government thus depend upon population movements concerning which we are in need of information. More, narrowly, information regarding unemployment, and , its occupational incidence, is required to indicate the prospective requirements for relief. Moreover, allocations of relief funds, as of publicworks funds, can be equitable only if they bear some relationship to the present distribution of population.