94th Congress I f COMMITTEE
2d Session COXITTEE PRINT PRINT No. 94-24
RELATED T6 O/IVLAT N
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CENSUS AND POPULATION
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETY-FOURTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION
JULY 28, AUGUST 25, SEPTEMBER 8 AND 24, 1976
Printed for the use of the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 78-590 WASHINGTON : 1976
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 Price 80 cents
There is a minimum charge of $1.00 for each mail order
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE
DAVID N. HENDERSON, North Carolina, Chairman
MORRIS K. UDALL, Arizona, Vice Chairman
DOMINICK V. DANIELS, New Jersey EDWARD 3. DERWINSKI, Illinois
ROBERT N. C. NIX, Pennsylvania ALBERT W. JOHNSON, Pennsylvania
JAMES M. HANLEY, New York JOHN H. ROUSSELOT, California
CHARLES H. WILSON, California ANDREW J. HINSHAW, California
RICHARD C. WHITE, Texas JAMES M. COLLINS, Texas
WILLIAM D. FORD, Michigan GENE TAYLOR, Missouri
WILLIAM (BILL) CLAY, Missouri BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York
PATRICIA SCHROEDER, Colorado ROBIN L. BEARD, Tennessee
WILLIAM LEHMAN, Florida TRENT LOTT, Mississippi
GLADYS N. SPELLMAN, Maryland STEPHEN L. NEAL, North Carolina HERBERT E. HARRIS, Virginia WILLIAM, M. BRODHEAD, Michigan PAUL SIMON, Illinois NORMAN Y. MINETA, California JOHN W. JENRETTE, JR., South Carolina STEPHEN J. SOLARZ, New York JOHN H. MARTIN, Chief Counsel VICTOR 'C. SMIROLDO, Staff Director and Counsel
THEODORE J. KAZY, Associate Staff Director ROBERT E. LOCKHART, Counsel J. PIERCE MYERS, Assistant Counsel DAVID MINTON, Associate Counsel
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CENSUS AND POPULATION
PATRICIA SCHROEDER, Colorado, Chairwoman
WILLIAM LEHMAN, Florida JOHN H. ROUSSELOT, California
STEPHEN L. NEAL, North Carolina ANDREW J. HINSHAW, California
GLADYS N. SPELLMAN, Maryland WILLIAM M. BRODHEAD, Michigan PAUL SIMON, Illinois
Ex Officio Voting Members
DAVID N. HENDERSON, North Carolina EDWARD J. DERWINSKI, Illinois
(DONALD F. TERRY, Assistant Counsel, Room 601, BOB Annex-Ext. 56741)
Statement of- Page
Borgstrom, Dr. Georg, professor of food science and human nutrition
and geography, Michigan State University ----------------------- 1
Estrada, Dr. Leo, Population Division, Bureau of the Census -------- 50
Evans, Thomas P., director, Division of Research and Statistical
Services, South Carolina Budget and Control Board -------------- 15
Roberts, Dr. Elizabeth, executive director, Project on Human Sexual
Development, Cambridge, Mass., accompanied by Dr. Sol Gordon, director, Institute for Family Research and Education, Syracuse, N.Y., and director of Syracuse University marriage and family counseling program ------------------------------------------------- 25
Article from the March 1, 1976, Congressional Record, by Hon. Gladys Spellman, entitled "Life Support Centers ------------------------------ 45
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON CENSUS AND POPULATION OF THE
CoMMITTEE oN POST OnICE AND CIVIL SERVICE,
Washington, D.C., November 17,1976.
Hon. DAVID N. HENDERSON, Chairman, Committee on Post Offlee and Civil Service, U.S. Houe of
Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Earlier this year, the Subcommittee on Census and Population sponsored a series of discussion sessions on population-related issues. The topics included: "Food, Water, and Population: How Near the Limits," "The Sunbelt Phenomenon," "Issues of Spanish Origin Americans," and "Teenage Pregnancy."
These sessions have become the subject of widespread interest among individuals and organizations who are involved in demographic and other population-related fields of research and analysis. In order to meet the informational needs of those who could not attend the Washington, D.C., meetings, the subcommittee believes that it would be most useful, appropriate, and in the public interest to publish the full tests of these meetings as a committee print.
DISCUSSION SESSIONS ON ISSUES RELATED TO POPULATION
WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 1976
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
CO:&1MMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CENSUS AND POPULATION,
The subcommittee met at 8:45 a.m., in room 311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Patricia Schroeder (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Mrs. SCIROEDER. I want to welcome you to a series of four discussion sessions this subcommittee is sponsoring on issues related to population.
Today, we have with us Dr. Georg Borgstrom, a recognized authority on world food resources and their utilization, who is a professor of food science and human nutrition and of geography at Michigan State University. His studies in the geography field cover various aspects of the balance between population and resources with an emphasis on
evaluating population densities. He is going to speak this morning on the topic of "Food. Water, and Population: How Near the Limits?".
Before turning this discussion over to Dr. Borgstrom, I would like to thank the Population Reference Bureau, and in particular Mr. Robert Avedon, who has been instrumental in setting up this meeting and the three to come in August and September. The subcommittee appreciates your help very much.
At this point I'd like to announce the meetings that are scheduled for August and September. On August 11, we've got Dr. Leo Estrada. He's going to be discussing "Issues of the Spanish-Origin Americans."
On August 25, we'll have Tom Ford and John White, who are going to be talking about the "Sunbelt Phenomenon" for those of us who live in the sunbelt. We're interested in whether that is fact or fiction.
On September 8, we have Dr. Elizabeth Roberts and Dr. Sol Gordon, who are going to speak on "Human Sexuality."
We'll kick it off with Dr. Borgstrom. I may have to leave soon, because we have an MIA meeting simultaneously, but I will stay as long as I can.
Dr. Borgstrom ?
STATEMENT OF DR. GEORG BORGSTROM, PROFESSOR OF FOOD SCIENCE AND HUMAN NUTRITION AND GEOGRAPHY AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Dr. BORGSTROM. I'm indeed honored to be invited to discuss with you the food and population issue from a somewhat different starting point than is generally done. I can't resist the temptation.
1 hope some academic person will find the Congress set up to show slides. I found they had not reached that technical stage, so that is a hope for the next century.
Let me take you back to 1671 and to China. This is the time when China reached the. size of the United States today. Then to the 18th century, and we find the Chinese population doubled in 100 years. And Hong-Liang-Ki formulated the same laws long before Malthus did, and was condemned to death by the Chinese Emperor. But when trouble came on the year after the death sentence, he was made a professor, and was a ffreat teacher of China in that century. The reason that I bring t is in is that I think we have to take a look at the world in these other terms. Why did the Chinese double in the 18tb century?
Well, you can read all kinds of demographic analyses of this. One aspect is missing. That's the food assets. This is the time when the American Indians' crops achieved dominance. They could feed more people and push back boundaries of mortality and improve health. We always think that's a feat of medical technology. This is the time when the Chinese swarmed out through the Southeast Asian area. The next part of the world that reached 200 million-was Europe, and that did not come until 1810.
But let me Just use a few minutes to remind you about India, which did not reach 200 million until 1870, much later than Europe. The consequences of both these cases you know: In India today with three times as many people; China with four times as many, rapidly moving upwards.
They transcended their limits and China started to do that 1,500 years before that point, pulling down their forests with ecologically disastrous consequences, which I would say only a few years ago they managed to get under control. And India lost most of its forests and all of its pastureland, and still we go in there and there is little more, than the Assam Valley that has not Been used.
This gave these countries their small area of land and forest and pastureland per person which characterizes the living of these people today.
Let us go back to Europe. What happened in Europe 1 Well, Europe had since 1650 managed to drastically increase its food production and match the growing -population, but it had also transcended its biological limits by pulling down its forests.
Modern Europe, except Scandinavia, is entirely reliant on outside Q0. urces for its forest products. But the success of the agricultural revolution was verv significant and was really the initiator of the scientific revolution which gradually came with the 19th century and was introduced by the French, British, and Russian experts.
By the way, czarist Russia had a chair in agricultural chemistry in the 19tli century, long before we did. This is frequently overlooked. Rothamstead in Britain was the leader but much trade in food oriffinated back in the Roman Empire. But I'm not going back to at. I'd rather point out that Europe managed well, and in 1850 had a yield level in a number of crops which we have not yet matched in the United States, because they have much more favorable rainfall, much more favorable climate, and much more uniform climate than we have in America.
Europe could not take care of its growing numbers, could not feed its people, and it resulted in something which we generally overlook and which has been distorting most of our analyses of the food and population issue and certainly our discussions of this issue. It's the fact that 1850 to 190-0, we, the Western man, the Europeans swarmed to all corners of the globe, both East and West. This is the time the conquest of Siberia started.. By the way, the Transsiberian Railroad was built by American engineers. Today, some 50 million have gone 9
that way. But the great big pulse went to this hemisphere, both north and south, and when you put it in perspective, 1850 to 1950, Western man grew more rapidly than any other branch of the human family. It affected birth rate, -death rate, net growth.
Very few of these figures have been analyzed from this point of view. We were not the restrained part of the human population. You will have "marvelous" quotations from the history books of our universities. How clever we were in agricultural technology. How clever we were in medical technology. How Malthus was proven wrong, when in fact he was proven right.wBut what happened? What is said?
It was said that the advancement in bringing down the mortality was primarily through medical technology. And I could point to the introduction of water works, which is said in many of these works to have drastically reduced mortality as very clearly is shown in figures. I could tell you about the introduction of sewage plants. This is true both on the iDart of the white man that went to this continent as well as those that stayed'in Europe. Construction of sewage plants reduced diseases. And there is no question that pasteurization was a tremendous, step forward. The way milk was distributed was a disgrace.
Scientists entered the scene preserving and processing on a new level. All methods but canning had been tried previously. We.made them all more efficient. But canning was mainly used for wars in the 19th century. And it was only at the end of that century that the United States got the idea that we could use canning for peaceful purposes.
When you start thinking in biological terms, it is the white man's conquest of the new lands that has led to all the false metaphors about us being in relief boats and we are trying to survive, each one of us salvaging ourselves. When, in effect, we are, as I will show you, in luxury cruisers, very far from any dangerous position due to what happened here.
But let me finish this part of it and say that it is not whether you have medical technology, and this is well proven through recent research in Guatemala and India. You can introduce all medical resources and it does not help if you don't have the food base. They have no effect whatsoever.
It is whether you can feed those that survive, and Europe transcended the limits, and the white man transcended the globe, which is unique in human history. It involves one of the great niarvels how we were allowed to take all the empty favorable land in the world. The iva-rs were between groups that were fighting for power in this structure. We got the empty lands: East and lVest _Nfrica, Australia and New Zealand, but the biggest drive created Argentijia aii(l Brazil.
When you look at the figures of Argentina-there was no Argentina prior to 1890.
So, 100 million left Europe and 25 million over the 100-year period have returned, but the 75 million today represent more than 500 million people, including a major portion of the U.S. population.
I'm not going into the fact that we've got such enormous resources that this gave us the most disgraceful period in our history, when we started like the Arabs chasing and training the blacks to provide manpower in order to take care of these vast resources. But that is a minor question in terms of the total picture.
But most important is the fact that we doubled our tilled land. We tripled our pasturelands. We manifolded our forest lands in this treinendous North American continent. This does not include the pampas, the llanos, and many other parts of the hemisphere that also became ours.
You know the whole story of the Caribbean and' I'm not going to bring this in in any other way, but to remind you that if you look at the Caribbean, it shows a lesser rate of population growth. This is completely deceptive. That is the part of Latin America which is growing most rapidly. In effect, they have the most rapid liftoff to United States, to Canada, to Europe, as, for example, England, which Jamaicans in particular like.
And you know the Puerto Rican story. But I'm not going into this to merely remind you that here's an example from our days. That is a repetition on a minor scale of what we stood for: The biggest landgrab in world history, but also the biggest migration in world history which created this global abberation and affects our analysis and in particular the fundamental point of food; this really affects the interpretation of the demographic transition.
The demographers have started analyzing this. The final curve, the drop in mortality, drop in brith rate or fertility rate, is not going at the same rate and you get a discrepancy. We got a population explosion. The European explosion preceded the current worldwide explosion.
But the food was never brought in. The fact that many portions of the world were feeding from outside sources and that this was the main factor that actually created population growth, not only the way that we have more people surviving due to this, but also through more people there was an interference in the mortality. And this is not being registered.
Now, looking at this, what is the real reason we have failed to see this food/people relationship? We can put the blame on education. This is a dimension that is woefuly missing in most of our educational efforts.
Western man was the leader in creating a world trade based on the economic factors as they were seen or as they were intentionally developed. My friends, please remember that the British and French empires did intentionally develop certain world trade paths. I'm not going into that.
I would rather concentrate on this fundamental point. We say, it is said in Congress and in papers: "When is the world going to learn to feed itself?" I tell you, "'When is our affluent western world going to learn to feed itself ?"
Who are the big parasites and what is the reason we've not discovered them? We're measured trade in money, in tonnage, sometimes refined it to protein and calories. This latter some now try to play up as a prime factor. Of course, it's such anl easy way to get out of these nutritional miseries. This is not the way to measure the role of trade. Look at Europe today. I've calculated for every European country the acreage on which it is, depending.'The net trade acreages have been calculated as the acreage which its import is taking, subtracting f rom that the acreage needed in each country to produce what it is exporting. This is where the enormous transcendency of limits emerges.
Let me briefly say that Europe is depending on a continent. What's the size of it? In European terms, adding together the figures for each country, you get about 62 million hectares.
Recognizing the difference in yield, what it means is that western man, in this case represented by the European sector, would need 96 percent of the tilled land of China. This is the degree of implication. India shows a slightly lower figure. Latin America is the same as China. We would need all the tilled land of Latin America to feed Europe. This is a transcendency of enormous dimensions.
'What is it in American terms? Well, it's about 27 percent of the U.S. acreage, taking into account the differences in yield, et cetera. As you know, our total net exportation is little above 27 percent of our tilled land. We are now, together with Canada, the only major provider of the world. Not because we are producing particularly well, but because we have these enormous land resources, thanks to the historic development I have described for you. We have three times more tilled land to feed each individual in the W'estern World than the third world has. Besides that, we have far more pastureland. Every American is depending on 1.5 acreas of tilled land. He's depending onl 3.5 acreas, of pastureland, which is completely unique in the present w orld.
And you. have a. completely other picture, and when you diagram this and put the poor world against the rich world, we in the rich world have three times more land to feed each individual in the wellto-do world than the poor world has.
On top of that, we have then resorted to the trick of using, as you know, nonrenewable resources to bring the production up. I will return to that point.
So Europe is the No. 1 parasite, and the world household in any kind of international arrangement will have to take this into account.
What does it mean in some concrete nutritional terms? 'Well, I have a slide which shows when adding tip this in terms of producing, Europe is provided more than 12 million metric tons of plant proteinl. Tho whole consumption of China is 14.5 million metric tons, and the Indian consumption is 12 million metric tons, and Africa is S million metric tons. This is the key to the food and population ise
Japan we've let into this luxury enclave after World War TT. and~ Japan- is much -worse than Europe, and is the most extravaganit case in exceeding any kind of reasonable limits. The traii Qeiideiev of limits is of the dimensions that Japan is depeniingM(Y onl sRelln ouitsZide
Japans to feed its people. Half of that is in the agricultural sphere depending on importation.
And mind you, this thing is not now calculated on the basis of any vague world averages. It's figured on the actual production of the Japanese islands today with its very high yields. In addition, they've taken from the oceans, dominating them, an amount of animal protein which requires more than 3.5 Japans, and the agricultural import corresponds to 3.5 and you've got 7 Japans.
They've lost all touch with economic and geographic realities. If there is any tension in the world, they are the ones in the greatest trouble. And, of course, they are getting close to 7 million metric tons of protein, which is half of the European figure. The world cannot afford a Europe of that extravagance, nor can it afford the Japanese extravagance.
In 1948, I was invited by the FAO to Stavanger, Norway, to open a conference on the role of the oceans in world feeding. I gave a keynote address saying we had opened a new era for the oceans, a time when the oceans were going to feed the hungry vorld. How deadly wrong I was. We in the well-to-do world have since then been allowed to repeat the big landgrab in the oceans.
There has never been in the history of fisheries a more dramatic growth. For what purpose? To overfeed the well-fed world. Fourfifths, and in some years, two-thirds-it's between those two figures of the catches of the oceans go into the stomachs of the well-to-do world. We in the United States get 65 percent of the world's tuna. We eat 3 pounds per person a year. and that's 6 pounds live weight. The U.S.S.R. soon realized, when they started their drive, that in tuna there couldn't be a place for another grand power of the U.S. magnitude. What has happened in the oceans has been led by the Soviet Union and Japan and Europe, the east by East Germany and Poland and the west by France and Spain.
The most important point. I'd like to draw your attention to is in 1972 when the Peruvian crisis came on the scene, half the world catches of fish went into the manufacture of meal and oil. And the fishmeal went to the United States and Europe for broilers and hogs, et cetera. The oil did not go to the fat-hungry world, but into the overfatted world, more than 80 percent of it.
That is the situation of the, oceans. The Peruvian crisis came due to overfishing and also due to climatic changes, which ties into other climatic changes in the 1970's.
Europe was depending equally as much on the oceans. And the soybean production in the United States had to take the place held by the Peruvian fisheries in the feed market.
I have a chart which I think is very essential, because our whole diecussion of world trade has been entirely dominated by the concept of aid, and we like to think of trade as being synonymous with aid. But world trade has always been dominated-up to World IWar II it was exclusively so-by a trade from the poor world to the wealthy world. After World Wa IT. we got to our senses and led by the United States and supported by FAO provided food aid through grain deliveries to the poor world.
What happened in the 1960's is that we made our tragic triage decisions. We decided we were going to favor the groups that were stra-
tegically of interest to us. So, as the 1960's moved along, the amount of grain and other food that went into aid programs dropped and what was in the aid programs went to Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and South Korea, and that's still the pattern, as you know, but with other recipients in the same category, such as Chile, South Korea, and the Middle East. And as you in Congress know, we are still trying to get back to some reasonable level of aid programs.
What is most important is this: When you add together the grain, which is the chief item here, you see, of course, the dominance of Europe all the way through and then you see Japan coming along and becoming a second important partner. Then you find the Soviet Union coming in with a certain quantity. But they have seen the message and they want to join the capitalist club, or the protein empire, whatever term you want to use. They have entered the scene, but they are getting over too and have increased their feeding burden so enormously by expanding their livestock. I don't think most Americans realize the tremendous Soviet accomplishments in wheat and far exceeding the United States in milk.
There's never been anything like this. Khrushchev started this. He wanted to copy this country and do it also in agriculture. They weren't eating as well as we did when they visualized themselves as the 21st century United States.
The world cannot afford the U.S. diet nor that of the U.S.S.R. because of the climate which is a factor we haven't been counting on. I wrote about it the first time in 1953--even going back to a paper I wrote in 1946 where I pointed out the vagaries of the climate present in the great plains of China, the Soviet Union, and the United States.
But let me finish that graph and tell you, if you add together what China and India have been importing, there's only 1 year where they managed together to get up to a figure which was close to what only Japan was getting, and it's a fraction of what Europe is getting. But only if you put this in terms of these countries, China and India, you get a sensi le analysis of this. Put in per capita terms, they get merely
6 to 7 kilograms per capita and year.
Chou En Lai said this in 1954 in an interview from Cairo to French newsmen. They were talking about Canada's deliveries to China and what the importance was. He said: "Well, you know that these inportations are not that important. They are only a few percent of our consumption." And when you look at India and use the same kind of analysis I have done, India has been receiving a few m.m.t. all right, but both China and India have exportation of food using almost as much acreage for that as would be required to raise their imported amounts.
China is resorting to fertilizer plants. India is more unclear, but they used to export peanuts prior to World War II, but since then they have been sending peanut cakes. That's more protein than Africa has been sending Europe. You will find that there are several years where India is actually making a contribution to the world household larger than what they get. They are not transcending their own limits nor the world's limits.
I have hinted that the animal production is up, and it's not posible in the framework of this brief analysis to go into the details of this. But let me say that, as you well lnow, we have shown the extravagance
and negligence, whatever word you want to use, or lacking responsibility in the world, we have Joined the big banquet of the Western World. When the world reached its crisis in 1972, the well-to-do world accelerated its feast. So did the United States. We climbed to the unbelievable level of 72 grams of animal protein per person and day. Do you realize what a transcendency of limits this is? This is 3.5 times more than nutritionists of any country would tell you is needed. And as you well know, you don't need any animal protein at all. What this means 'in the world is that we're using 5.7 m.m.t. of animal protein, which is more than the plant protein, which is 2.6 m.m.t.
But in order to produce that, we're taking some soybeans. We're taking a lot of grain. We're taking parts of our range lands. I have left those out because I think that's a wise utilization of these resources. If you take that figure, you will find that we are using plant protein far in excess-28.5 m.m.t.-almost twice in excess of what the total Chinese population is receiving.
You know their animal production is depending on waste utilization for hog production. China has four times more hogrs than the United States, but only a tenth of that is based on primary p roduction. And we have something to learn from this. If you look at the overall picture, we can oversimplify the thing by saying that the',great problem facing the world is population, growth. It is a sine qua non for any movement ahead to get this under control and push it back instead of talking about future billions when we have a backlog of two-thirds of the human family which are desperately short of food, water, energy, forest products, and metals.
This is the degree of our transcendency of limits. But in addition, we will have another 1,000 million in the next 10 years. If'we look at the world today, which I have done, we will find that there are about 480 million people that cat as well as we do in America. Some of them are in India, some of them in Spain, some Brazil. Most of them are here. Many are in E urope. not as many as we think in the southern part of Europe, which is in a crisis.
If we took all the food that's produced today and gave everyone an American diet, how many could the world feed? Tf we could distribute and had the money an energy to do that distribution, 980 million. That's a fourth of the present human family. It's no wonder we have a gap. That means there has to be, some kind of adjustment of resources.
And the world is talking about Canada and the United States as the food sheiks of the world, and we say to the oil sheiks to be more reasonable in deciding the use of their oil, and the world is saying the same thing to us. -And there is only one thing to do. That is to move to some kind of allocation of the world's resources.
If food crop areas were used for food crops, we could provide every individual today with an adequate diet, something like the Chinese diet of today. But please do not forget the dynamics. Even after such a herculean accomplishment, we are faced with another 1,000 million in the next 10 years.
And we say we can easily double the world production. I can tell you as a geographer I have a chart showing the whole matter of the land resources, and I will end with that.,
But before so doing, let me tell you there are three more forces which are tied to the population growth, and are reflecting it in the way I am trying to present it to you here. And that is this: That we have a growing affluence. We have an affluence that is growing two to three times more rapidly than the growth of the population and within a minority which is using a disproportionate amount 'from the very beginning.
And we're widening the gap. We thought we were narrowing the gap. This is not true. We are narrowing it in tonnage. It turns out in the well-to-do world we are adding per year more and more in terms of energy, in terms of paper, in terms of food. Whether you are counting it as animal protein or vitamins or essential minerals, we are addig per year more than-the whole world is usig If we stop today and the whole development of the world would be given to the other world, it would take them 120 years to catch up to our world in energy terms. I'm not advocating that, and I don't, think the world has the resources, and it is another question I don't have time, to go into.
Let "me say the most dismal as "ect of this situation is the growing danger of destitute people, landless, waterless, foodless, jobless, and I would add, unemployable. We're getting them right in our own midst, because we have created an industry and a technology which has as its prime objective to make man superfluous. Then we turn around and say, "Poor devils, they can't get sufficient income."
What do we -do? Instead of recognizing this, we discount them. There are these ghosts-in the closets, and Mr. McNamara is running around the world like a modern Marx and saying 40 percent of the world has fallen through the floor. We, the experts, have. known that for a long time. And all the calculations of FAO are calculated on growing demand. Whether it's a ruble note, a dollar, a pound note, or whatever kind of note there is, those are the only ones they are counting. This is the explosive issue..
Millions will be vanishing and are wiped our without us knowing. This is why we need a completely new approach, because we are at that point in history. Either we go to a third world war, and we are bound to fail, may not even survive, or we move out into one world, which still in my opinion is feasible. It's not feasible by not recognizing these factors.
Then we have a fourth factor which is also an amazing transcendency of limits. That is the issue of urban migration. Ours was and is based on better education, better job opportunities, and was the basis of industrialization. It's interesting to go through this, because industrialization was the first step.
iThe scond step was urbamlzation. But what the poor world is doing playing the film backwards. We think by moving thein to cities, we're going to have the education, we're going to have the development. But it does niot change the basic fact which I'm talking about.
You have an Indian famiily which has a f arm, and there are some 15 million landless that do not have a farm. They have a farm of a little over, an acre, and they send away their childIren to the city. Do they manage to survive? They still have to be fed when you gro back and calculate.
You take the Punjab area where wheat. is grown. In use of irrigation and fertilizers they are much higher than we are. So is Mexico in the area where these varieties are grown. And in making wheat into an irrigated crop, it is one of the most questionable matters, because water is our greatest nonreplaceable factor. It's not a question of tilling; it's a question of water utilization.
It's said water is ample but available at the wrong time, in the wrong quantity, at the wrong locality. Thigh is doubletalk. The truth of the matter is that we have emptied the ground water resources in many regions, including a large portion of the United States. We are continuing that when moving out with corn production in the Dakotas and Kansas. In areas without water, we're irrigating the corn. The water table continues to fall in New Mexico and Arizona. It's now movingc- down to 1,000 or 2,000 feet. We're using in 1 year what it takes 100 years to accumulate when you put it on the running account. This is where we make the tragic mistake. I'm afraid I won't have time to go further into this.
,Please remember that our basic education is failing, and I think this is true in all levels right from first grade school. Up to the President of the United States as well as statesmen of all countries, we need a new education. We think it's a miracle we are fed. It's no miracle as to the basic amount of water required, the amount of land required et cetera. We think we have reduced the acreage. When you start lookin g, this was done by resorting to input of nonrenewable resources in terms of energy. You will see now that we must have energy plantations. So'we're going back to the soils. You start calculating the energyT acreages. which I have done, and you get many times the number of acreages we have for food and forest. And we have a fight between food and forests.
And 'recreation is almost out. You read the story of Japan where laws have been put in every Japanese city where everyone should ha1v so many square meters of recreation area. They get one-tenth of that because they don't face up to th e realities of this situation.
*What is the reason? It is this point that every American and every citizen should know how much water, how much land, how much trees hie's depending on. And only when we get that kind of understanding cani we talk about each other. And we will then discover that wo've not been as smart as we think we have. And we will'furthermore (discover another things which is the great disease of our western technical civilization, and that's the high degree of specialization whchl has led to many of the misconceptions.
I've gvnyou one exam ple-explaining the European population explosion. There was truth in every one of those statements as I pointed out to you, with the drop of mortality well confirmed. Still it was a great untruth in them when it was put into reality and the biological equation. It is not this medical factor, it is how many we can feed. It is high time we recognize their limits. And I have tried and want to show you this slide to get an understanding of it, that it is not a simple question of food. It has six neurologic points. If there is a shortage of food, you produce more food. It's not necessarily true..
There are many countries I have visited in recent years where there's been a tremendous increase in food production and agricul-
tural production. Still the numbers of malnourished have skyrocketed. Producing more food is not sufficient unless you pay attention to nutrition.
The world has been increasing tremendously its production of grain and sugar and oil needs. But when you look at the protein produced in crops, the poor countries have lagged behind., There is another transcendency of limits which I don't have time to go through. I'll just summarize it.
No one should be allowed to operate in any of these areas without taking these six together. Food is one. It took us 25 years to get a recognition that population was the second. The third one is what I call the third dimension, the processing and utilization of food. It's no use Producing food to be eaten by rats and insects. We like to think the other world is negligently dependent. Do you know in catching our shrimp, we're throwing overboard more fish than the United States is eating. We use a fourth of our protein for feed for milk. Without producing 1 single ton more of food, you can feed hundreds of millions more people. Taking care of this is not in the prime interest of the profit seekers.
The fourth dimension is nutrition. The fifth one is diseases. Everyone of you know the realization that diseased persons don't take nutrition efficiently. But the thing I pointed out to you is that public health measures will cease to help if there is not adequate nu11trition. The medical efforts, even the most sophisticated, have no effect. This is what has played on the world scene which has led to much of the demographic mistakes made in analyzing this.
I. asked Barbara Ward at a dinner party, "What was the greatest surprise in your professional career?" It was really, she answered, the diseases that followed in the wake of the Volta Dam. Irrigation is not only destroying lands through salt accumulation-GO percent of the land is under that threat today-it is spreading water diseases.
The most important point of all: The sixth dimension is the resources. They have been disregarded by many international agencies and still we have to get back to taking basic resources into consideration. And the number one resource issue today is that of energy. We in the United States are eating food which requires 12 to 15 times more energy than when it's presented on the table, 3 times more when it's leaving the farm. And we still think this is acceptable. Mfy friends., let me tell you, we cannot continue that extravagance. On a world scale this would earmark for food 80 percent of the world's present energy account.
I understand you will have a lot of questions.
VOTCE. Will you go into the -relationship between the amountswell, what amount of water does each person require?
Dr. BoROSTROM The question was: How much water does each individual require?
Well, he really does not require any more than half a gallon per day. And if you take 1 gallon, that's ample. And a great deal of water we get from our food, it is indirectly taken in. That is the physiological ,need. But it is not only the food we're eating. Water is needed for crops. This amount is the same whether provided through rain ot
ir'ri gat ion.
Our American diet today takes 4,200 gallons per person a day. And that is due to the high proportion of animal products which require a lot of water for producing feed or through the grass. And if you want to put it in concrete terms, the great issue is the hydrological cycle, nature's huge desalination machinery. Evaporation from the oceans is clearing it of the salts. We think we can compete with this. This would mean 900 pounds of salt per person in America. We take from the faucets 170 gallons per day (gpd). That's twice what Europe is taking. Nobody will tell me that sanitation is better in America than Europe. There is a great deal of waste. We have a lot of citizens who are not metering water. This water use is nonconsumptive, posble to reuse, yet creating major hazards. We have areas in Europe where water is reused 20 to 25 times. In the United States we reuse it some 15 times, which is not only a question of cost, but it is also a question of a hazard, because we do not have protection against virus when used as drinking water.
If you ask about another water factor, that's the books, their newspapers, that's 350 gallons a. day. This takes a lot of water, less in manufacturing, more in production of the trees. I think this should be put in a textbook and be available for every American. If you ask about smoking, this is 20 gallons, and beer behind the scenetae 200 gpd.
We should go all the way through and make a diagram in terms of energy, land, paper, et cetera. You can bring in any unit of -resource measUrement.
VoicE. Sir, you've talked about the billion additional population. 2 billion by the turn of the century or more. What do we do to provide some incentives for the developing worlds to get a bona fide attempt to get~ a handle on their population explosion? I think the U.N. Population Council in Bucharest has been a general failure.
Dr. BORGSTRO-M. I look a t this in the following way. The biggest group seems to have a handle on this. China-I hope to visit China in October. That's 800 or 900 million. You know they're getting a handle on this and pursuing this, now with additional efforts in the rural regi ons.
The second is India, where what's happening these days is unbelievable. I don't know if they will manage, but it's drastic. When I said on the Indian radio in 1973 something much more modest along these lines, of limiting family size. and I was told behind the scenes that they were planning for it. If it will mean compulsory sterilization after the second child, which I'm afraid the main portion of the human family would be forced to do in order to avert catastrophe. But it certainly'will need the attention of all those issues I've been talking about and include of the resources. And Indonesia is also courting to these ideas. I think every country will have it on the top of their agenda by the end of the 1970's, actually. If you take that group of people and then add the Western World, which has gradually come down, but. as you well know, needs to go further down, we can say that a major portion of the world is moving in the right direction.
The examples which are often brought o-ut about Thailand and Singapore are all examples of the same thing I have been talking about.
What is behind that? We like to talk of mortality and birth rate and all those figures. It's my firm opinion it's the same as in Europe. It's the fact that they got all this food that actually reduced the growth. If you look at Kerala in India, they have gone the furthest in welfare. They have put food foremost and with a clear effect downward on the fertility rate.
There is some truth in the statement that food is a very good contraceptive. Kerala is the most densely populated state, and they are showing the greatest drops.
I think this is what has happened in our world. It's not that we are so much more clever or so much more efficient, it's the fact that we have reduced mortality and have not been forced to have more children for a minimum to survive.
This is the argument that is moving into Latin America. I have been following Mexico and Brazil. There's no doubt that even the leaders on both sides and others are recognizing they have to join hands in getting a handle on this. And I think to gyet a handle on it is to attack the things I'm talking about.
VOICE. Would you elaborate on your statement that food is the greatest contraceptive?
Dr. BORGST11OM. If you secure old age, which is partly due to food, but the most important point is this: If you see your children dying, well, the inclination is, of course, to compensate that with more children. If you see they survive, you're reaction is the opposite.
I think this is well proven by the field studies. We have been, too, inclined to look at this in the light of the millenia more than looking in these particular details.
VOICE. You were saying, sir, I believe, that affluence has differential consumption, but a greater effect on the population growth. I happen to agree with that, but I'm trying to find some analytical or statistical basis on that.
Dr. BOROST11OM. I have a great deal of data I can send you on that. If you put it in terms of plant and animal protein and you see the increase that is taking place, one set of figures popped up in my mind-if you look at this banquet of ours you see this feast of the well to do. My next book is "The Banquet."
The ratio of livestock and man in the poor world is three. In our world, it is six. The feeding burden in the United States is not 215 million but 1.3 billion and it is closer to 1.5 billion, and in addition, 0.22 billion for our pets counted as primary protein consumers. But
keeping in mind that figure, three to six, what do you think has happened since 1972? In the wealthy world that figure has threefolded. So in the added number, it's 18 times more given to animals.
What has happened to the poor world? It has dropped from three to one. This is merely to remind you that there figure three is something badly needed in that world not the least for traction animals. That is problem one. The poor world is forced to cool down their increase by one- third, while we increase it six times.
Mr. AvEDoN. My name is Bob Avedon and I, too, thiank you all for joining us. And I want to thank Dr. Borgstrom. And I've seen more people on the edge of their seats than I have in a long time.
Thank you very much for being with us and we'll see you on August 11.
[Whereupon, at 9 :50 a .m., the hearing was adjourned.]
DISCUSSION SESSIONS ON ISSUES RELATED TO POPULATION
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25, 1976
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESE rTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CENSUS AND POPULATION,
The subcommittee met at 8:45 a.m., in room 311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Paul Simon (acting chairman) presiding.
Mr. SIMON. This is the second in the series of discussing the population problems sponsored by our subcommittee.
Today we have with us Mr. Thomas P. Evans, who has gained national attention for his studies in manpower and employment in South Carolina. While on special assignment with the Bureau of Employment Security here in Washington, he helped develop a master plan for automatic data processing and employment security. In traveling throughout the United States, he became particularly interested in the impact of migration on the economies of the Southern States.
He is going to speak this morning on the topic of "The Dynamic Growth of the Sunbelt." The "Sunbelt" is described as the lower arc of warmlands stretching from southern California to the Carolinas, where people are migrating by the millions.
This discussion should contribute to our knowledge of the factors involved in causing the "Sunbelt explosion" and how it will affect our Nation in years to come.
Following his presentation, we will have discussion. If you can, in the discussion, for purposes of the record, identify yourself before asking the question.
Mr. Evans, we are happy to have you with us here today.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS P. EVANS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF RESEARCH AND STATISTICAL SERVICES, SOUTH CAROLINA BUDGET
AND CONTROL BOARD
Mr. EVANS. Ladies and gentlemen, since we have a small group this morning, I will remain seated for a while, unless you cannot hear me.
The Sunbelt appears to have gotten even up to Washington, D.C., here today. It is very warm here in Washington.
As most of you are familiar with population statistics, I want to review briefly the changes in the U.S. population from about 195() to 1975. As you know, every region, the four major ones, Northeast, North Central, and South and West, have all grown mnericallv. The Northeast and North Central States, they have shared in the
growth since 1950. The West gained in every decade, although it started small. The South lost from 1950 to 1960, but has gained in its share since.
Percentage gains have slowed as a result of the declining birth rates. Now we see a definite movement to the South and the West and, in general, to the coastal counties.
I might say that since 1950, it appears as though the West has gained 88 percent in population. Northeast, 25 percent; North Central, 30 percent, and the South, 45 percent; and 68.6 million people in 1975 had one in every three persons in the United States, 32 percent roughly.
It has not been many years since President Roosevelt called the South the number one economic problem. That was true in those days. We had an agricultural economy, low per capita income, health problems, malaria., mosquitos, and infestations of hook nad roundworm in coastal countries, which still existed not many years ago.
I would stress the point that 40 years ago, we reall had no current information on some measures of growth. We needeYit for the small local market areas. Population, employment, unemployment, and income were primarily guesses. The Social Security Act in 1989 created an unemployment insurance system, which set the stage for employment development and wage information in local areas.
It required the States which rated unemployment 'insurance low to require that information to be sent to the Federal'Government as statistics as required. One requirement was that the State made provision for getting information on employment, wages in the local counties for the State.
Although not much use was made of the information at that time t 0 set the stage for further development, records of the employment and wages were required to be maintained by industry and county.
I would read you one statement of the gentleman of South Carolina who got a Ph. D. on the study of that population. We researched all records back to the 1600's. I think it is one of the finest paragraphs written in terms of the need for information on population with respect to the Government.
The affairs of a modern state or nation could not be administered without the adequacy of accurate data concerning the population. Nearly every question of government is a problem of population, and it turns 'upon the numerical status, the direction, the trends, the characteristics or composition of the people Involved. Furthermore, each institution in the area relies on a knowledge of population to understand and evaluate Its own scope, the problem of-reaching its constituency, its relation to other agencies, and its likely future development.
That paragraph sets the questions of meeting information at the local level for development of an area.
After these, after World War II, we began to get information developed on local areas. Much of the information on employment, with the cooperation of the Federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, an unemployment insurance system which has wages and employment by county, provided the Bureau of Check Analysis with a much better basis for development of personal income for the geographic area.
In 1967, the Bureau of the Census started to get a program together with the States to develop with the States the population estimates
each year by county. This program is now in effect in all States, I believe. This helps the local area people to have further knowledge of their own areas, which is an essential for industrial development.
Many decisions are made at local levels. The plants are going to be located at a certain point. All data originates at a certain place and a certain point in time.
I would review briefly with you what I consider to be some of the major factors in the dynamic growth of the South or the Sunbelt.
The, first thing is the industrial development and the diversification of industry. The South has had a large share of natural resources in terms of good agricultural land. In some States, you have a lot of gas and coal. We have that as a factor in industrial development.
Speaking of the Southeast and South Carolina particularly, for a long time after World War II, industrial development was made possible by the release of workers from agricultural employment. The reason for that is agriculture is one industry in which productivity gains at a much more rapid pace than some of the other industries.
This released a lot of people from agricultural employment.
When the nonfarm employment could not pick up these workers, there was migration. South Carolina lost about a quarter of a million workers between 1940 and 1950 through out migration, around 230,000 from 1950 to 1960; and 170,000 from 1960 to 1970.
The reversal came from 1965 to 1970. This helped the South to have a good number of people to feed into the new plants in the nonfarm wage sector.
Another factor some of you may not be too familiar with is this. Many years ago, there was a great rate differential between the North and the South. If he were in the South, it cost more to ship to the North than it did for the northern manufacturer to ship to the South. That.was many years ago. It assisted the location of industry in the South.
The South has had to spend a high proportion of its income on education. I think you will find that we have been very interested in approving education to elimination of illiteracy in the South. Consequently, State governments have given a great deal of support to the public school system.
In Governor Burns' administration, the sales tax was passed in South Carolina for the primary purpose of improving the educational level of the black citizens. As now plants were attracted to the South,, technical and vocational education systems were started. Technical education systems began' around 1961. They prepared the workers who wel-e coming out of agriculture and those interested in jobs in industry with the skills to meet demands of new plants located there.
Also to help overcome the illiteracy in population', the South and South Carolina, I know, in particuldi, has devoted a lot of effort to adult education to reduce the illiteracy level. Higher education has expanded in practically all States of the Sunbelt. For example, 40 years ago, the University of South Carolina had 1,800 students. Today.thei have 21,000 on the campus. The South is getting self-sufficient in higher education. A great advantage, also, in terms of the increasing indiistri.-ilization of the South is the Interstate Highway SyStem. I know that in:mufac-
turers like to. locate plants which are in close proximity to the Interstate Highway System so products can be moved easily to distribution centers and ports for export. Of course, the development of the Interstate Highway System has made suburban areas and many areas in the South.
People can live 30 miles out from the major city and get to work very readily.
I mention the natural resources, such as energy, natural gas, coal, and so forth; and they are in various areas in the Sunbelt. One major natural resource which we don't think much about, except when we read about it in England, lack of it, is water. Recently, Dr. Garren, the dean of the Scho'ol of Agriculture at Georgia, said tl-,,e Southeast is one of the largest underground water supplies to be found anywhere in the world.
Federal legislation and Federal revenue sharing and spending have also contributed substantially to the States, cities, and municipalities, particularly in the period of rapid inflation which started in 1974 and the recent recession. Other Federal legislation which has had an impact on the development in the Sunbelt, such as Appalachian Regional Commission and the Coastal Plains Commission, which have helped coarstal areas of South Carolina, North Carolina.
We have many military bases in the South. We have Army, we have Navy, Marine; and this contributes substantially to the areas of economy.
Although it may be argumentative, one factor which we believe has a bearing, on the development is the freedom of choice laws, which exist in, I believe, all Southern States. I believe Louisiana was the last State to pass the freedom of choice law. Studies have shown that such States have had a, faster growth than nonfarm Federal and State without such laws.
I mentioned the reversal of the out migrations of the South. There is a claim that the South has lost low-income blacks, poverty blacks in the North, which may have been true in the early periods, and the, in migration has been higher income people. But we are having a time right now trying to determine something of the characteristics of the in migration that we are getting between 19TO. and 1975.
For example. my State had 80,000 in migration, approximately, which is good for a 5-year period. Our best estimate is we must have had a reversal of black out migration in South Carolina, because we cannot see that this could all be an in migration of whites. In many cases where new plants are locating, they bring a basic staff, work with higher skills to oDerate the plants. This helps in terms of people.
Not too many months ago, the Fantus Co., a nationally known research outfit, surveyed for the Illinois Manufacturers Association. Thev made a study on the good business climates of States.
The ranking of the States gave the following order of 10: Texas, No. 1. Alabama, Virginia, South Dakota, South Carolina, North Carolina, Florida, Arkansas, Indiana, and Utah. So, many of these States are in the Sunbelt.
In terms of population growth, it is interesting to note that by 1975, several of the Sunbelt States, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Arizona, Texas, Utah, and Hawaii had exceeded the population projections made by the Bureau of E economic Analysis for
1980. In f act, South Carolina's 1975 population, 2,881,000, was the exact figure projected for 1980 by the Bureau of Economic Analysis.
One State, I think it was New Mexico, had exceeded the 1990 projection.
All of this is preliminary, in a sense of trying to tell you as a southerner, some things that I have found in working with lab or market information and population.
Also income data over about the past 30 years. This is since W1orld War II ended. I was back into State government. employment. It is most important, in my mind, that Congress, which sets the rules by
-which the private economy and individuals function, try to establish and maintain the sound health of the economy. We all work within the f ramework of the rules set by Congress.
The model for South Carolina indicates the State is dependent 750 percent on the national economy and 25 percent of the industry in regional mix.
I was very pleased recently to note this. This is within the last year or two. The establishment of the Congressional Budget Office, which should be a help to Congress in maintaining a strong U.S. economy. A strong economy for various regions of the country.
Most States like South Carolina have constitutions that say you cannot operate on a deficit. Legislation will set spending to tie in with the money that is available.
In a recession as we have had in the past year or two, we have had deficits, too. They have to be made up in the following year. With inflation running as it was, the revenue flow in States tend to increase fast when inflation starts. Then the spending tends to increase fast. At the time, the revenues slow down. By that time, the cost of everything the State buys has gone up.
Then the revenues growth is slowing.
We do have deficits. Despite what I read in some national magazines, I do not think in many cases the Sunbelt's States' financial costs are overflowing. 'We still need to develop more and better information and local areas. This is particularly in regard to population.
Our work with the Bureau of the Census, I believe they have two or three committees working in order to develop these on populations, so we will have information for the counters on sex, race, and age g5rouips. This is along with improved measures of unemployment and employment.
Many Federal dollars now depend on the measures of unemployment. I feel the Federal programs and statistics have been a great help to governmental and policym'-akers at every level of government in the States. I believe these programs offer the best means for accomplishing a goal to provide better information to policymnakers. i
It has been a pleasure to talk with you today and tell you what I believe is some of the causes of the increasing- migration to the South and the Sunbelt. I hope that what I have hiad to say will prov-ide you with better understanding of the growth and some of the problems that we had prior to th rapid acceleration of employment and population.
People tend to move to regions of increasing employment opportunities. The converse is not always true.
I have seen local areas in which plants were shut down. Ten years later, people still live there. They don't like to be uprooted, necessarily, because the plant has closed.
In the old days in the South, there was a great -deal of family assistance, high agricultural employment, small farms, relatives helping people through recessions and depressions. But today, with the pecuniary association we have, we have to have some replacement of income when a recession strikes such as struck in the 1974-75 period.
At the last count, South Carolina had an unemployment rate in June of 5.6 percent, compared to the Nation's 7.5 percent. We have come through, we feel. It was one of the roughest -recessions. The textile industry still dominant in South Carolina suffered severely. In. one county, almost 50 percent of the work force was unemployed.
I know in other areas of the country, the same situations developed. Hopefully, we are allon the right track. I believe I will close at this time to see if we have any quest o-'ns from the audience.
Mr. BPXWER. I amMichael Brewer from the Academy for Contemporary Problems.
Mr. Evans, I would be interested in your observations about how the areas of designation, namely, the South, has reacted to this in miuration phenomenon at the local community level, the municipality of the county, the level of the State, and the level of the multistate region.
We have a Southern growth policies' board, which was much concerned with a continuation of in migration into the South for fairly obvious reasons.
As one goes down to county and municipal levels of government, in migration is not necessarily a blessing.
I am wondering whether one finds different -reactions between the coastal counties, either on the gulf or the South Atlantic States and the States in which those counties are located? Has there been a governmental apparatus set up to analyze and respond to this demographic phenomenon now affecting the entire region?
Mr. EvANs. As you say, in general, coastal counties are enjoying in migration. Of course, in migration creates problems.
For example, let's take a well-known resort area. Myrtle Beach. It has a limited population in terms of year-round. In the summertime, they can get to 200,000 people in there in 1 week's time. This creates problems. Water and hotel facilities and sewer facilities is rough.
Under some Federal programs, it becomes difficult to convince the people that these things are needed and the magnitude of the problem. I have not heard too much adverse comment from local groups about the industrial development and the immigration of people.
I think the South has been very receptive, to the best of my knoArledge, to the in migration. I believe also that the South is responding favorably to the segregation of public schools. We have had instances, of course. There again, it all depends.
I know one high school in which, at one time, integration wasaccoinplished by freedom of choice. The high school became about 255 percent black by freedom of choice. HEW ruled that out. They drew lines. It became about 50 percent black. I think the Southern people have great respect for law. Not that this is not true everywhere. When the Supreme Court and the Congress rules, they are cooperating in the best, way possible.
Let's say this. We know that in migration will still bring problems. It may slow down, depending on how the national economy behaves.
Is that sufficient?
Mr. Br.EwFR. Not really. I was thinking of Florida, for example, which, under the pressure of development that has come in the wake of Sunbelt migration. If you will have adopted an entirely new land use policy, with quite stringent provisions fhat rule out development on particularly fragile areas of the Florida coastlines.
I wonder whether the Sunbelt phenomenon was bringing about any kind of reexamination of provisions relating to development, such as has taken place in Florida?
Georgia has established a fairly strong environmental program at the State level. I know very little about the State of North Carolina. I know little about the Gulf Coast States as to whether they have viewed in migration as a potential danger and are establishing new policies and administrative programs to contend with it.
Mr. EvANs. South Carolina passed a bill aimed in that direction. The veto was not overridden even at the session of the general assembly.
There is a concern for the coastal areas in terms of environmental. There is a lot of thinking going on, but it has not jelled.
Mr. BAKER. Dave Baker- with the Population Institute in Washington.
A lot of people in Northeast accuse the southerners. of stealing industry from them through the process of having a generally lower wage rate. I don't know that that is valid, but people perceive it is generally lower in the South.
Perhaps it is because of a more favorable business climate. Is this statistically correct? Over time, is there change toward equally strong warre rates with the industrialization of the South?
,Afr. EvANs. Let me put it this way. In the beginning, a lot of people thought about the Sunbelt and the South in terms of cheap labor. I do not believe that such a situation will continue for long.
The South Carolina per capita income is something like 80 percent of the national average. The wage rates of most of the manufacturing industries are well over $100 a week. Some are way up. Cheap labor does not obtain any more.
In this country, we have the ability for people to move freely. If they are skilled workers, they can move to areas in which they get the maximum return for their investment and education.
All the wage rates are still below the national averages. I have a table giving a few facts on it. In the Business Week, the weekly earnings of production workers, $192 in the United States; $162 in the Southeast and all industrial weekly earnings was $154 in the United States and $145 in the Southwest.
While they are still below, they are not that much below. The weekly eai-iiings are a little lower. The Federal tax bite is not as heavy
In terms of living cost, some p ople feel that, if you could get the people on the comparable basis in terms of living cost, the wages would be better than they appear. I am not sure. I am not sure the liviiicr costs are that much lower in the metropolitan areas of the South. There are areas such as Charlotte. According to something in Busi78-590-76-4
ness Wieek, they had a per capita, in 1972, which exceeded New York City. Given time, I think the wages are going to converge toward the national average.
Mr. HOUSER. Houser, with Congressman Meeds, Washington State.
If I build a new factory in Louisiana, that is exempt f rom property taxes for about 10 years. Do you know of other States that offer tax incentives and, if so, what are they?
Mir. EVANS. To exempt manufacturing plants from property taxes?
Mr. HOUSER. In Louisiana, that is my understanding,.
Mir. EVANS. South Carolina does, for 5 years, except for school taxes. The manufacturers pay school taxes.
I think we found this. Most reputable manufacturers are not going to complain about their tax payments. They would rather have stability of taxation in terms of taxable income to complain about paying the taxes. That has been the experience of studies I have seen.
Mr. WORRELL. Worrell, with the Population Reference Bure11aul. WXould you comment on trends in tax legislation in the Southern States? 'You mentioned the establishment of a sales tax. It would seem to mie the kinds of people that are coming in that you described are going to demand more, services from Government. Therefore, this must be reflected in some kind of trend in taxes.
Mir. EVANS. That is quite true.
As you mentioned just now, the effects of in migration are increased pressure on local governments for services and increase the capital needs for local governments as well as personnel for providing those services.
In South Carolina and North Carolina, for example, the tax structure of the two States in terms of who collects money, about 75 percent of State, local taxes are collected by the State in both States. The State spends -possibly 49 percent, or 50 percent.
It is pretty close to 50 between the State and local governments in terms of spending. This has long been a practice in these two States.
For example, in South Carolina, it has always been the policy to try to provide basic educational needs by the State teachers' salary aid, which is the bulk of the teachers' salaries in most all districts in South Carolina. It is supplemented at the local level in various ways. The supplements can run about one-eighth to one-sixth of the State aid sal ary.
This has been going on for a long time.
In the revenue sharing, it goes to counties and municipalities from the State level. It is completely without strings. It just goes back, and is considered a part of their regular operating budget. So this helps them to provide services.
But the sales taxes are primarily put on to provide for the capital needs of schools and to equalize and provide better facilities for public school education.
All the sales tax money is not devoted to the public school education program, plus a lot of other taxes. Does that cover it?
A VOICE FROMt THE AUDIENCE. Congressman Derrick's office. How significant, are right to work laws in the South for continued economic and population growth?
MAr. EVANS. I want to state this. This is argumentative.
I have seen studies which indicated the States with the so-called right to work laws have had faster growth than nonfarm work employmentl than the other states. This Fantus study was reported by the South Carolina Chamber of Comtmerce for the good business. Fantus makes the same use of that as one of their rating factors.
In other words, they consider the freedom of choice and right to work laws an important factor in the development of favorable business climates in the state. Their nonfarm wage salary employment growth has been tremendous in the past few years in South Carolina.
Strangely enough, although many of you may have thought about it as an agricultural State, for 15 or 20 years, manufacturing has been about as high percentage at total -nonf arm wage employment than any state in the country. Sometimes New Jersey would be on top, and sometimes South Carolina, in this particular category.
Mr. AVEDON. I want to thank Mr. Evans for joining us, and thank you for being with us this morning.
If there are no further questions, we will end the meetings at this time.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 9 :25 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
DISCUSSION SESSIONS ON ISSUES RELATED TO POPULATION
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1976
U.S. HOUSE oF, REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVMr SERVICE,
SUB3COMITTEE ON CENSUS AND POPULATION.
The subcommittee met at 9 a.m., in room 309, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Patricia Schroeder (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.
MS. SCHROEDER. Good morning.
We have two different speakers with us this morning, and first is Dr. Elizabeth Roberts. We are delighted to have you with us.
Dr. Roberts is presently executive director of the Project on Human Sexual Development in Cambridge, Mass.; and was the former director of the Children's Television Unit at the Federal Communications Comnmission. Dr. Roberts has also conducted research into the role of television programing in the lives of children.
Our second speaker is Dr. Sol Gordon, director of the Institute for Family Research and Education at Syracuse, N.Y., and director of Syracuse University marriage and family counseling program.
Our speakers will be commenting on various aspects of teenage pregnancies and venereal disease among teenagers, which is an enormous problem. There were 1 million teenage pregnancies last year and 3 millon new cases of venereal disease in this country alone. At the end of their presentation there will be a question and answer period.
Dr. Roberts and Dr. Gordon, it's all yours. Thank you for coming.
STATEMENT OF DR. ELIZABETH ROBERTS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
OF THE PROJECT ON HUMAN SEXUAL DEVELOPMENT IN CAMBRIDGE, MASS., ACCOMPANIED BY DR. SOL GORDON, DIRECTOR OF THE INSTITUTE FOR FAMILY RESEARCH AND EDUCATION AT SYRACUSE, N.Y., AND DIRECTOR OF SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY,
MARRIAGE AND FAMILY COUNSELING PROGRAM
Dr. ROBERTS. Sol Gordon and I were discussing how best to conduct our program this morning. We decided I would provide and discuss general background relating to sexual developmnt-what goes on early in peoples' lives that affcts their sexual decisionmakmig; and hie would focus his attention on the issue of adolescents and contraceptive use.
The topic I would like to talk about is of ten written about t i-; little understood and is seldom a topic for serious public discussion: thiat is (251)
the meaning of sexuality in our lives and its implications for social and educational policy.
We certainly have evidlencedl an enormous interest in sexuality. Television, movies, books, the wide distribution of pornography, and the how to improve your sex life advice attest to this interest.
However, despite our national interest in "sex", full, honest, rational dialog about the meaning of sexuality in our lives, in family relationships and in child development has not been forthcoming.
Sex education, as generally conceived, is almost an irrelevancy. It hias not resulted in increased understanding about sexuality for most Americans, and the problems it sought to address are still very much with us:
Eighty percent of all American marriages have been called sexual disaster areas with;
Fifty percent of early marriages and 40 percent of all American marriages ending in divorce.
Over 3 million cases of infectious veneral disease are treated yearly.
Pregnancy is the number one cause of school dropouts among feYnales in the United States.
Over 200,000 babies a year are born to unwed teenage mothers who are less likely to have had prenatal care, more likely to have babies with health problems, and attempt suicide at a rate 10 times that of the general public.
Reported rapes are up 11 percent as compared to a 3-percent decline in other major crimes.
The majority of emotional problems brought by patients to their doctors involve sex and marriage.
Statistics like those I just cited indicate that expression of sexuality are often the cause of problems to individuals and to society.
However, identifying sexuality exclusively with sexual behavior and relating it primarily to veneral disease, sexual dysfunction, abortion, or unwanted and unplanned pregnancies. identifies it with a narrow range of undesirable and negative, outcomes, and human sexuality becomes one more social problem, like violence, depression or alcoholism.
I believe that part of the reason for the limitations of most sex education is the compartmentalized and formal nature of most programs and the narrow context within which most of us still tend to think about sexuality.
There's clearly a need to develop comprehensive social and educational policies which take into account the centrality of sexuality to all aspects of one's life and to understand its importance and relevance for policy planning in fields such as population, family services, media and advertising, child care-the list could go on.
Sexuality is too often seen as something we can isolate from the rest of living. For many individuals, lhe word "sex" brings to mind some kind of transitory episodic experience-it begins at a certain time, in a certain place, with a certain person-it has a beginning and an end.
Sometimes it almost seems separable from ourselves. It is not seen in relation to the totality of life, its developmental process and in our human relationships.
However, sexuality clearly is more than the "sex act" -more than intercourse or reproduction. As one well-noted sociologist put it, sexuality is not mere "organ grinding.".
Therefore, I'd like to explore with you three points this morning that I think are essential to evaluate if we are to develop meaningful preventive-positive policy in this area.
First. What do we mean by sexuality;
Second. What in our development influences our sexuality, how do we transmit this information to children;
Third. What kind of family and social institutions or environments influence this developmental process in children, and what are the implications of the above for private and public policy.
What is sexuality?
Well, in contrast to the popular notion of sexuality it encompasses that which is connected with our feelings of maleness and femaleness, with our masculine or feminine identity, sexuality is not merely something we do, it is defined by who we are; and the way in which we define our sexuality is part of a learning process that begins the day of our birth.
Rather than get into a lengthy argument that is now being waged in many academic hallways about biology versus learning and socialization. I'd simply like to say that our sexuality has a biological substrate but this is not the. same as saying that it is biologically determined.
The fact that I have a clitoris and a vagina and that Dr. Gordon has a penis certainly has some impact on our sexuality.
However, these physical facts alone hardly define or predict the variety of sensual, intimate, and affectionate ways in which I relate to men or women, adults or children.
In a recent publication of the American Medical Association, they stated, and I quote:
Fluman sexuality is not confined to the bedroom, to the nighttime, or to any single area of the body. It involves what we do, but it is also who we are.
It is an identification, an activity, a drive, a biological and emotional process, an outlook and an expression of the self * it is an important factor in every personal relationship and in every human endeavor, from business to politics. .This statement, along with others from the World Health Organization and many prominent professionals in the field, have indicated the need to understand sexuality in a broadened context, as important to establishment of self image, self understanding, personal identity, and the formation of human relationships.
Clearly, then, I'm talking about sexuality as more than sex, more than reproduction, and more than social hygiene.
In the last quarter century, several prominent researchers includingr Kinisev Masters and. Johnson and countless others have focused olir attenltio-i on certain limited 99,pects of sexiiility.
Specifically, they have looked at, written about, and spread the wvordl about "ogss""coitus," and specific gential-sexual dysfuncitions.
Obviously ~ ~y IPmoesipiyn the -work of important individuals. However, I believe that this writing has set the tone and the trend for current popular discussion about sexuality.
Certainly intercourse is a sexual activity. So are many other erotic activities that may have intercourse as their reference, Point: reading pornography, petting, making out.
In addition, a variety of what can be referred to as sensual activities-touching, music, drinking, dimmed lights, even a good back rub under certain circumstances can appropriately be considered erotic expressions of our sexuality.
However, there is a wider ran e of affectionate and intimate behaviors that are also effected bygour notions about sexuality, even though they are not intended to result in orgasm or intercourse. '
These include various ways in which we express affection to people in our lives, to members of the same or other sex, to friends, lovers, spouses, and children, even to professional colleagues and strangers.
These behaviors too are directed and influenced by our notions about our sexual identity and about how should we express our sexuality.
For example, we know there are certain ways we "Should" or "should not" touch members of the same sex.
For example, it's OK for a man to pat another man's buttocks during a sports activity. The same activity on the street would be suspect.
Some subcultures allow men to hug and kiss, while other groups view this as a sign of weakness or even homosexuality.
Because of confusion and apprehension over what is' an appropriate expression of sexuality, or what is appropriate to one's sexual identity, many parents stop holding or touching their own children as the child gets older.
Parents admit the holding or roughhousing with their children sometimes turns them on, and they get fearful and worried that it will turn their children on.
Many women particularly speak of this concern with regard to breast feeding young children.
I might add that these feelings and fears are often compounded by the aura of secrecy and privacy that surrounds sexual issues or feelings.
Unfortunately, in matters of sexual communication, in spite of our presumed openness and the so-called new permissiveness, we do very poorly.
Traditional inhibitions and taboos, lack of information and uncertainty about values prevent frank communication between adults and rnake it almost impossible between parents and children.
Most surveys indicate that over 80 Percent of families' seldom or never discuss sexuality. These communication difficulties are deepseated and persistent, and often result in a perpetuationof the belief that sexuality is something only expressed in the bedroom, is somehow dirty or bad and to steal one of Dr. Gordon's lines, best saved -only for those you love the most.,,
One of the most distressing aspects of this situation is that it can be self perpetuating. Adults who deal uneasily with their own sexuality are likely to remain afraid of and opposed to education about sexuality for their children.
For example, statistics indicate that today's teenagers, are sophisticated about the fact that "sex" exists; but theirknowledge and att.*7
tudes about the relationships between sexuality, affection, love and babies is often naive and confused.
This is a topic that I know Dr. Gordon will be discussing in some detaill. I simply want to suggest that when We look at the specifics of adolescent sexual activity and contraceptive use, we consider the many messages, often conflicting ones, that we give young males and females in our society about their sexuality. It is adult and desirable to be sexy; but not too'sexy. Sexuality is a good thing; sex is bad. Bodies ar-e good; touching them can be bad. Masculine is to be always sure of yourself and to be aggressive; to be feminine is to be emotional and, romantic and to say no even if you mean yes.
If we continue to raise our young girls to be ambivalent about making sexual decisions or acknowledging sexual feelings, then we should not be surprised when despite, all the contraceptives available the 15or 16-year old girl has difficulty acknowledging to her boyfriend or even to herself that it is something she has planned and accepts--that she doesn't have to be swept off her feet or pretend that it all "just sort of happened."
She doesn't have to worry about: "What will he tink if I planned ahead and brought a diaphragm; or will he think I am a bad girl and sleep around if I am on the pill ?"
As long as we raise our young boys to identify masculinity with "scoring"~ and label as weak or feminine other basic human needs such as touching or being held, then we shouldn't be surprised when the young 15- or 16 -year-old boy who may merely want to express or receive affection decides that the only acceptable way to get it is to press for intercourse.
We must begin to say to our children that there are many ways to satisfy these needs. for human contact, intimacy and Pleasure, and there are many ways to demonstrate your masculinity and feminity.
What are some of the verbal and nonverbal messages gwen to young people while they are growing up that may influence their sexual decisions and feelings?
First. Well, first, very early in their lives, children explore their own bodies and they are interested in exploring other bodies.
The feelings that are communciated to the child about the appropriateness of this behavior, about what they can touch, who they can touch, when they can'touch, about who you can show your body to, under what conditions, when you can be nude, who you can kiss, who you should shake hands with, who you can shower with, who you can ask questions about your body, these are all important learning experiences for the child.
We also know that during early childhood, most children take notice of their genitals. They touch them, they fondle them, they may systematically stroke them, they may want to touch other children's.
I think it's important to note here that with issues like childhood genital touching or what is usually called childhood masturbation or sex play, the child probably doesn't bring the same meaning as the adult to these activities.
Nevertheless, the reaction of parents', teachers, friends, and relatives to these activities is most important. Because the child does per78-590-76---5
ceive the anxiety or the anger or the moral concern the parent demonstrates in response, and links it to this behavior.
What kinds of messages are given to our children about their bodies, about specific parts of their bodies, from television, billboards, advert isements?9.
The child may be learning little that is explicitly related to genitalerotic behavior, but he or she maybe learning the guilt or the anxiety associated with touching their body.
Second. In addition to body learning, young people are learning the various ways in which their family and our society approves of expressing emotion and affection.'
There's substantial research documenting the -different ways in which we allow and encourage, boys and girls to express their feelings.
We reward or accept aggression and assertive behavior more in boys. We encourage nurturing and caring behavior more in girls.
Girls are more likely to express affection through hugging and touching than are boys, and boys are often systematically discouraged from kissing, hugging, being gentle or asking for comfort or help. Most of this learning takes place informally, almost incidentally.
Children see who their parents touch and talk to, they see who is allowed to cry, who -can ask for support or cuddling, and they learn how to ask for it or not ask for it directly at all. This too has implications for how they grow to understand sexuality and the various ways of expressing 1t.
Third. Finally, during childhood, and related to the above" two points, the child is learning about appropriate masculine and feminine behavior, traits and roles in life.
Proper ways of relating to others of the same and other sex are being communicated. Proper roles for the male as breadwinner, providing financial security for the family; the female as the nurturer or mother providing emotional stability, are being communicated.
'The child is learning about what is attractive to oneself and to others of both sexes. This sex role or gender role learning sets the framework for the child's development of socially appropriate male and female behavior, attitudes and beliefs; how do I define myself as female or male in our society? How do I define my sexuality as male or female? How do I prove it to my friends, to my parent, to my colleagues?
Certainly many other learning influences are going on, however, I believe that the three discussed above are important reference points for understanding sexual development.
First. Sex role learning sets the framework; how to 'be male, how to be female; how to demonstrate maleness and femaleness.
Second. Learning about affective and expressive behavior tells us to whom and how to express affection and feelings.
Third., Physical or body learning during childhood sets the parameters for feeling guilty ork pleasurable about our bodies and their use.
By the time -the child in our society is preadolescent, he or she has received little con rete information about sexuality, 'but they have developed considerable postures and orientations to the sexual which will influence his or her sexual decisions in adolescence and adulthood.
Information and values about affection, love, bodies, sex roles,, and relationships comes from a variety of sources and chIdren come to behave, for the most part, according to the rules and expectations of the people around them.
Family relationships and attitudes about sexuality are probably the most important influence on a child's understanding.
In fact, parents cannot choose whether they will be responsible for their chilren's early sexual attitudes, only whether these attitudes will be positive or negative.
However, in addition to parents, children are observing and learning f rom relatives, neighbors and friends of their parents.
As the child moves out of the family circle-into his or her own world, they come into contact with toys, books, playstuff, friends and other schoolchildren, all who bring their own messages about sexuality.
Finally, the child is influenced by various institutions as he develops; the media (TV, certainly most prevalent)', school curriculum and structures, social welfare programs, doctors' offices.
All of these environments influence the child's growing sense of appropriate body behavior, expressive behavior and sex role behavior. Can I cry? Can I say ouch? What's appropriate sex role behavior? They all contribute to the child's understanding, acceptance and expression of his or her sexuality.
.For me, perhaps the most significant thing about the 'whole learning process is the way in which we segregate boys and girls and men and women in life.
What one is, the other should not be. How one behaves, the other should not; to be masculine is to be opposite of feminine; we even refer to the opposite sex.
The amazing thing to me at times, is not the amount of adolescent sexual activity, but the fact that they manage to "get it on" at all.
Boys are raised to understand that growing up means to grow away from others, to be independent, to make decisions.
Girls are raised to see, as an important part of their identity, the role of meeting the needs of others, of caretaking, of doing what people ask of them. Girls are raised to see and understand the sexual within the context of romance and love, of being swept off their feet.
Boys, on the other hand, have little training about being sensual or affectionate. They are encouraged to be sexually "goal oriented." to score. Because they must constantly initiate activities, many boys report feeling insecure about their sexuality, they feel they are on the line all the time.
Girls report feelings used; some admit using sexuality to gain status in the community or school, or within their family.,
Unfortuately, in our culture, the development of concepts about sexuality and about sexual identity has become a basic force for polarizing men and women, and somehow, miraculously on the marriage night, "sex"~ is supposed to bring us all together again.
What are the implications for these 'w-ays of looking at sexuality and some of the developmental issuesI
Well, clearly -children don't become sexual at puberty, and sex education must be seen as an ongoing learning process. We must begin to realize and stress the importance of early learning and provideparents, teachers, pediatricians and counselors with information and opportunities for discussions of childhood sexual development and its meaning and implications for sexual behavior.
We must assess the impact of. the male and female roles we encourage through our media and other instructions. What is the impact of these roles on sexuality? A topic, about which I could go on at great length about.
We must identify sex education within a broadened context, rather than exclusively, with planned institutional 'or in-school programs.' We must look at the nonschool learning environments about sexuality.
Finally, or perhaps as a first step, discussions about sexuality need to be brought to the attention of the public in a way that will dispel the fear, anxiety, and misinformation that permeates most attitudes.
WeC need to find forms and forums for -discussions on all aspects sensibility. The full, range of topics must be'explored in a way which will facilitate thoughtful consideration and action, not always problem -oriented approaches.
Until the decisionmakers in a position to help focus the discussion become convinced of the issues' importance, confusion, and Iapprehension will continue; and 10-, 15-, and 16-year-olds will be left to their own confused emotions and misinformation.
Dr. GORDON. That was just an introduction to what I want to say.
The birth rate continues to increase among teenagers. Last year there were 1 million pregnancies among teenagers; million cases of venereal disease, two-thirds among young people under 24 years of age Yet people in this country are saying it's the pill; it's the pill that's making girls'promiscuous.
Less than 20 percent of sexually active young girls are using any form of contraception. If only they would use the -pill, we wouldn't be in so much trouble. I
All opposition tJo sex education in this country is based on the assumption that knowledge is harmful. We had better take that very seriously, because if you tell kids about sex,, they'll do it.
Less than 20 percent of the parents are offering sex education to their children, simply because they have been told that they can overstimulate their children by giving them information. And it's time we passed around some rumors of our own.
We need to pass around the rumor that no American child can be overstimulated. Have you ever tried to tell an American child more than he wanted to know? It's impossible.
They will either get bored, turned off, won't listen, or ask you another question. We have to pass around the rumor that knowledge is not harmful.
.We are in a very serious dilemma in this country, because of the openness and freedom in education in the media;- and I want to declare there is no real openness and freedom on media with reference to sexuality.
We get exploitation, we get pornography, but we rarely get sex education.
When was- the last time you saw a sex education program in any form of media, especially television?
We're beginning to get a little open, a little free in such publications like "'Seventeen,1" and "Teen Magazine," and adult magazines like "Good Housekeeping," and Norman Lear on T.V. Now, teenage pregnancy is probably one of our most serious health problems in this country. It's epidemic; and there are still people going around glorifying~ it:
The young people want to have babies. They want to have something to cuddle; they don't have anything else to do. In the slums, especially, of our country, they are so deprived they need a little baby.
But do you know that all the research in the field has been done on teenagers already pregnant. They ask an already pregnant girl, did you want to get pregnant?
Well, she's pregnant so she says yes. And she and the psychologist sort of concoct a cock and bull story about some oedipal fantasy that can't be understood.
SBut we did a survey in one urban high school with 300 pregnant girls; 300 pregnant girls in one high school-and increasing at the rate of 10 percent each year.
You figure in 5 years' time, every girl except one will become pregnant. In statistics, it's always n-iAnd we asked already pregnant girls how come you didn't use contraception: "Oh, we did. We -used one of our mother's pills. We didn't think we could get pregnant standing p.0 'You can, by the way, for some of you who may not know. "We didn't think you could get pregnant the first time."
This is recent data, not something 30 years ago. This is in the age of enlightenment. Some were using foam. Now foam is not bad, not bad; but they couldn't read the instructions on the label. Have you ever tried to read one? You need a mechanical aptitude to try to figure out what to do. See, they used it as a douche afterward. 'Sounds reasonable; and some were even using Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola is -an excellent spermicidal; put a little on the sperm, the sperm is dead; it's true. Unfortunately, the sperm is faster than the Coca-Cola.
Women's liberation movement has had very little impact on high school students. Young people are starting sex earlier. They're having it whether we want them to have sex or not.
Happen to be very conservative; I don't think young people should have sex, but it's now 20 years since anybody has ever asked me for permission and they're not going to ask you or their parents.
Young people, 50 percent of them before they finish high school will1have had sex. Less than 20 percent of them now will use birth control.
Somehow, we have to get across the message that it's all ri ght for parents and people to say don't have sex; but if you're not going to listen to me, use birth control; because half of the kids are not going to listen to what we have to say, even though what we have to say is good, is better, and look at me, I'm even saying it.
But I don't turn off high school students by being authentic and savingr I don't think you should have sex. I think you should wait.
Parents and teachers, everybody is saying if we say OK, tell them about birth control they will be promiscuous; but somehow we must gret across the message that the less a person knows about his or her sexuality, the more likely they will be to be irresponsible.
The risk of knowledge is far less than the risk of ignorance. We have to drill that into the consciousness of the American public. As a matter of fact, the earlier a young person has sexual experiences, the less they know about sex.
Wts a dilemma, because once a young person has had sex, you can't tell them anything. A 14-year-old approached me and said: 1"hat can you tell me about sex? I started when I was 11."
He looked at me and he knew I didn't start when I was 11. But he didn't know anything about contraception; he didn't know anything
-about conception; he didn't know anything, but he had sex.
The earlier a person has sexual experience, the less they're likely to know about their sexuality. People who tend to be knowledgeable about their sexuality have a tendency to delay their first sexual experiences. These are simple facts.
We're somehow going to have to spread the rumor around in this great country of ours that knowledge is not harmful. People say to me, but it's controversial. And we have to answer. If you're not controversial, you don't have anything to say.
W e have to somehow provide the answers to very similar questions that people ask. We're goin to have to spread the rumor that boys use lines against girls. "If you don't have sex with me, I won't go out with you any more." "If you don't have sex with me, I'll go crazy."1 "Oh, 1 can't use a condom; boys get no feeling out of condoms.".
The girl immediately responds: "Well, the other boys I know get plenty feelings out of it; what's the matter with you?"
Somehow we have to introduce into the consciousness of young girls to say, hey, that's a line. We must reduce unwanted pregnancy among teenagers of this country. The birthrate is declining in every other group. It has declined among welfare, among poverty populations, in every group. This whole thing is going to be turned around if we don't deal with teenage pregnancy.
And -we're going to have to deal with it in a creative way. We cannot deal with it by turning sexuality into a disease. This is morally bankrupt.
We cannot deal with teenage pregnancy by suggesting that you are destroyed. finished for the rest of your life. It's morally bankrupt. It's not morally bankrupt to be able to say what your position is.
Ias a psychologist have a lot of experience with young people who are immature and introduced to sex prematurely and traumatic things happen.
I can say that as a psychologist, but I cannot say as a psychologist if you, already had sex, your sexual life is-doomed. I'can't say if you have prema, irital sex, your marital life will be finished. I can't say if you've live(d together with somebody and you have premarital sex, there's nothing to look forward to in marriage.
You know that's one of the chief arguments used agrainst premarital Sex, that if you have premarital sex, there's nothing to look forward to in marriage.
I -never thought, that's the only thing you could look forward to in miarriagre and we have to pass that around as a runior that sex isn't
all there is in marriage.
That's why we need to concentrate our energies in raising the consciousness level among young people. AVe need to say somehow or other that "no" is also a pretty good oral contraceptive.
We need to somehow convey that people need to have control over the lives and need to have some understanding of it.
AVe have to stop concentrating on introducing sex education into the schools, because what happens in most schools, is that people are so vulnerable, so frightened that when you finally have a sex education program, it often becomes a course in plumbing; a relentless pursuit of the fallopian tubes.
WeT need to introduce values, we need to introduce the idea that one is the master of one's own fate. We need to introduce a course in parenting. WNe need to be able to raise questions about why people want to be parents.
Tfhe first stage in parenting is marriage. Whom. should you not marry. We need to somehow say if your f riend is constantly saying to Von:
Do you love me, do you love me, do you really love me, do you love me, (10 you really love me; you must say no, because such a person is a pain in the neck.
That's much more important education than anything else you learn about sex. The relationship of people is what counts. We need to introduce into the consciousness that people need to respect each other, love each other; that's what counts in our own sexual development.
We need to introduce the concept that parents must be the sex eduicators of their own children.
T hey can be the exclusive educators but the parent needs to be the main sex educator of their own children.
We have to introduce this to young people and we need to say to young people, you can't overstimulate a child with too much knowledge. We need to say to young people, you can't tell a child too much.
We need to tell the future parents of this country, look, don't tell your child when you talk to them about sex that it's confidential.
Some parents want to educate their children by saying: "Look, Johnny, I'm going to tell you all about sex, but keep it a secret." Whereas Mrs. Jones who's giving their child all this garbage about the cabbage patch and Santa Claus, she never says to keep it confidential, does she?
The result is that the misinformed become the sex educators in the neighborhood. It's about time our children become the educators. If your neighbor doesn't like it, get another neighbor. Why do we always have to move?
People are saying to us now, "'Sex education belongs only in a
Well, you can't be the exclusive educator of your own child. If you want to be the exclusive educator, you can't allow the child to have
any friends, to read any books, to watch any television programs, and you certainly can't allow this child to go to any public school bathroom in the United States.
If you want to be your child's exclusive sex educator, wrap that child up in cotton and wool and keep him there for the rest of his life and we'll have to accuse you of child abuse.
We have to make a distinction for people who are attacking us for introducing sex in the media. There's little sex education in media. There's much violence in media, there's pornography in media, there's sado-masochism, in media, but very little sex education in television and radio.
We have to make that distinction. We have to use the weapons, the effective weapons of our enemies; the effective weapons of our enemies is that they spread rumors.
They have their graffiti, we have to have our own graffiti.
We have to have our own rumors and the basic rumor of this bicentennial year must be, knowledge is not harmful.
We're open to comments.
A VoicF,. The birth rate of the 15- to 19-year-olds is declining, but it is going up in the 10- to 14-year-olds. The portion of all unwedlock births is increasingly concentrated among teenagers where that birth rate is rising.
Dr. GORDON. In St. Louis, half of all births are illegitimate; half of all births, and it's also true in Washington.
One of the comments I want to make is that our Institute for Family Research and Education is developing what we call a National V mily Sex Education Week-October 10-16, 1976.
You see, they have National Pickle Week, National Secretary Week, why not a relevant week.
So we've created National Family Sex Education Week. Those of you -who are interested in information about this, leave me your name and address and I'll send it to you.
Why not say, look, parents need to be sex educators of their own children. Why not dispel the misinformation that some professionals have introduced, for example, that you can overstimulate a child.
We have to make ridiculous this idea that you can overstimulate a child just by information. American children can't be overstimulated by any subject whatsoever. Try it.
Then we have to somehow introduce the idea that if you're having, sex and the child walks in, the child is not finished for the rest of his life; he'll not have to spend the next 7 years with a psychoanalyst. If the child does that, tell the child to get the hell out and in the morning you can explain why you didn't say please.
You know, you don't traumatize children with information, incidents, with events. At a teachable moment, you explain what you were doing and if he asks can I watch the next time, you say no.
Tell him we like privacy. The child will learn something and appreciate your privacy as well as his own need for privacy. We need to introduce a little common sense in this whole field of sexuality. Sex doesn't have to be a trauma. Pass that around as a rumor. Dr. HARDY. May I raise a practical point? I'm Dr. Janet Hardy with the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine.
We recently completed a study on sex knowledge anid attitudes of a group of between 400 and 500 mothers. These were innercity black an~d white mothers; and we were asking them factual, simple questions about fertility, re-productivity, contraceptive use, and so forth.
Seventy percent of these women really did not have enough information to protect their own fertility, practically plan their family, and did not have enough information to be adequate teachers of their children.
Ninety-odd percent-I think it was 94 percent of the women knew where such information was available; they knew where familyplanning clinics were, but they felt that they knew the answers and the didn't seek it out.
so0me, 96 percent of Catholics and Protestants alike were very anxious to have better programs in the schools which would teach their children reproduction, physiology, contraception, and family living and sexual matters; if you like, in the broader context that our first speaker this morning was talking about.
I think one has to agree with Dr. Gordon that parents should be the teachers of their children with respect to sexuality, but where parents are inadequate teachers, then this gap has to be bridged somehow.
Dr. GoRDON. Let me comment, because I don't want to give the wrong impression. I believe we must have sex education in schools. I wanted to put it in the larger context though, in the context of parenting.
There are obviously parents who are inadequate and will not be able to be sex educators and don't want to be. I want to reach their children, you see.
But I'd much prefer to put it in the context of teaching values rather than simply putting it in terms of biological or plumbing aspects of sexuality; because information is not sufficient; it's .,the con-text.
If a person has a lot of information, and a lot of parents are perfectly capable of giving a lot of information, but fear this information is harmful or the child's not ready for it.
Well, we need to be able to communicate about readiness; we need to say that sex education is a lifelong process.
It belongs in all aspects of our life, in schools, but let's give it wider context and I certainly share your opinion in that.
IDr. ROBERTS. I think we have to keep in mind that parents are the sex educators or their children whether they feel equipped or not. Th at is very important to remember.
'Whether you feel that you have factual information, a specific kind of factual information about intercourse, about reproduction, venereal disease, about contraception, that's one matter, one issue and one in which there are many-if not many, some excellent programs in schools anid various kinds of community agencies, and would certainly need to be continued to be spread. t
I don't think this is in opposition to what Sol said. I think you can have all the comprehensive sex education programs in every. public school in the country and still have confused adolescents, and still hav-e adolescents having intercourse when they may niot want to: still
have men not knowing how to ask for affection or how to express it; young girls confused on how far to go before you've gone too far; what will he think of me.
So, yes, we have got to get factual information out, but I think in addition we have got to begin very early to socialize boys and girls this -way.
MS. SCHROEDER. Can I ask a question?
On eleisinespcialysome advertising, even the name, such as Brut, that kind of thing conveys such a heavy message.
I don't know whether that comes from our society norms. Is that how the advertising gets going to that, or do they create them?
Dr. ROBERTS. It depends on who you ask. There's been -a little bit more work of looking at the kind of sex role and messages on adver'tising programs; very, very little on sexual messages. We're trying to get some started; do some work in that area.
If you talk to the advertisers, all they're concerned with is what sells products; and there isn't any doubt -at all that sex in its most narrow sense sells products. Everything from cars, feminine hygiene, because everyone knows women smell bad.
I mean we use it a lot. I think the role message on these programs has direct relevance to sexuality and try to express it as well, not just in career development planning, which is what many have been looking at for a lot of years. Subtle cues as to who can touch who; who give directions; who follows orders. That fairly well gives a lot of messages.
One of the findings in recent research of all relationships on television, 85 percent are male/male. So little girls watching television may learn how men relate to men and how men relate to women, but see something like 6 or 7 percent of how women relate to one another.
So these are all mi-essagyes that influence what he or she is going to do when they try to reach out to the ever-broadening circle of people in their lives.
MS. SCHROEDER. It almost tends to reinforce the insecurity a lot of people have about sexuality.
Dr. ROBERTS. Prove that they are masculine by wearing Brut, or prove yourself by the kind of clothes you wear, or having your floors cleaned is sexy, which gets even harder for me..
When you talk to producers and writers they say, "Look, we're caught in a trap. It's a common denominator; they want it."
Another way is such as Sol Gordon expressed in spreading rumors that a fair number of surveys indicate that that isn't so. People watch whats available, and whats available is an extraordinary sameness.
MS. SPELLMAN. I was interested in the doctors comments in not teaching just facts, but attitudes.
Who' determines what those attitudes will be? I often work closely with teachers and their own attitudes are mixed about today's morals.
How do we get a determination and how do you satisfy the parents about the kinds of attitudes that are going to be taught?
Dr. GORDON. It's a crucial question, of course, a lot of work has been done in this field in terms of values and valuingI think we just have to make a distinction between being moral and moralizing. It's perfectly all right for me to say in the classroom
where I'm the teacher that, look, I'll give you my personal opinion.
My opinion is you should not have sexual relations. Here are some of my reasons. Young people are interested in the personal opinions of some teachers. What happens is that young people make up their own minds anyway.
In any case, it's better for a young person to know what the person thinks rather than to infer it.
You have an image of me, you think I'm radical. I'm going to tell you what I am so you can make up your own mind about the bias in this course, because every course is biased. The worst teacher is one who says he's impartial and fair. You know you can't trust that teacher.
Here are the various points of view. Explore them; you can't just go to the classroom and say that you're opposed to abortion; I think it is illegal and improper. You have to say some believe this and this.
Now, you see some people don't present their point of view. If somebody asks me a personal question about my sexual question, I wouldn't answer it; but sometimes I do. That's a matter of judgment; a matter of sensitivity.
I have a university class and the students ask questions. Once one of them asked when was the first time you had a sexual experience. At first my response was that's none of your business. But that was a genuine question and I answered it and I was 17 and it was grim.
Well, you can't imagine what a learning experience it was for the whole class, because everybody has to say that their first sexual experience was great, marvelous, but first sexual experiences are often grim, g-r-i-m. And I was devastated by the whole thing. It was such a relief to the students; terribly therapeutic; that's sensitivity.
There are parents who are a small minority who I call the "lnnatic fringe." They claim they have a right to decide what teachers should teach; what books should be in the library.
This is a very dangerous situation. They represent 1 or 2 percent of the category, but our superintendents of schools tend to be overly responsive to the "lunatic fringe" in this country.
Those of us who believe in democracy need to speak up and we need to reinforce the notion that free speech is a real thing; that voting is a very important responsibility.
In some school districts, less than 10 or 11 percent of the people vote for their representatives on the school board.
Well, we are talking about good citizenship. This is what I'm interested in now, because it doesn't occur to people like ourselves to protest a book that's in the curriculum that we don't agree with because we believe in freedom; but it does occur to people who are in opposition to say we oppose this book. They're very active.
A VOICE. On the subject of teenage sexuality, I would like to know if Dr. Roberts agrees with Dr. Gordon, and why.
Dr. ROBERTS. I would not take the same position that Dr. Gordon does. I don't think adolescent sexual activity is wrong or bad.
I think the use and expression of sexuality out of ignorance or because of one's goals is bad whether you're 13. 30, or 50, and I've met some 15- and 16-year-olds who are quite capable of nmakig decsions compared to many of my neighbors in their thirties and forties.
See, I think sexual misuse is bad, and of course, simply by experience, there are many more people in the younger age ranges not equipped with making those decisions, but not per se, because of chronology.
Dr. GORDON. I have a tendency to agree, but I don't.
It's simply that I feel if you're an educator and politician, like I am, you don't worry about the few exceptions..
I mean, this is my strategy of communication. I feel that we do have ages; there's an age when you can drive, when obviously some 13- or 14-year-olds can drive, and drive well, even better than me.
But yout vote, and obviously there are people 15 and 16 who can decide on issues better than even the average person. But I prefer to say wait, generally, until you're 18, because that's the magic, age in this country; until marriage if you prefer, but on the wedding night, don't expect to have simultaneous orgasm.
A VOICE. At some point, young people are going to have sex whether we want it or not, obviously.
Dr. ROBERTS. Right.
A VOICE. But also, whether they want it or not.
Dr. ROBERTS. Yes.
A VOICE@. What do you say to the teenager who feels he isn't ready, but peers are saying try it, you'll like it? You're not going to be popular very long if you don't. You'd better prove yourself or even what you're saying, the first experience is so grim, get the first one over and get to something better.
Dr. GORDON. I'm going to give this to Dr. Roberts.
Dr. ROBERTS. I think this is a very real question; one 'of the most pressing issues for a number of young people.
I think that the rumor that Dr. Gordon suggested, that no is a good oral contraceptive.
Second, I can relate a personal experience. Very often parents can be helpful. There was a very close personal experience and I, in fact, know this to be common. A girl was being pressed by a boy, 12 years old, on issues of popularity and a great de'-al of pressure was being made. She made it quite clear to her parents what the situation was, and she didn't want to do it.
Her mother and father said, "Would you like us to help"
She said, "not particularly. I want to try to deal with it."
A month later she said, "I simply can't take the pressure; it's too acute."
The boy called the home and asked to talk to her mother. He asked, "Are you really keeping your daughter from having sex with me, because she says it's you.1i
The mother said, "Yes, it's me." So, I think there are roles that parents ca-nTplay in taking pressure off her child.
im not sure" that many have the opportunity, because most don't even come to the parent in the first place, because the parents have already made it quite clear that's a topic you don't discuss. They don't care about the horrified time the children are going through.
Then the best hope for them is a sympathetic adult, a counselor, teacher, or perhaps other support systems. Maybe you have some better ideas.
Dr. Gomu~oN. No; additional ideas.
I think it's a very good point you're making in terms of parental support. We often don't appreciate that parents can assume that responsibility, and it's okay.
The other point I want to make in terms of teenagers is I think it's critical to say that a lot of teenagers lie about sexual exploits.
I'd like to pass around the rumor that if somebody's boasting about sexuality, you can be sure that almost always it's a lie. Even if it's true, it's OK for it to be a lie. In other words, as a psychologist, I say people who boast about their sex, lie, and I pass that around as a rumor.
Now you see, most research is made up, anyway. They make up theirs and I make up mine, you know; some people don't like that, but that's true.
I'm astonished about research in the area of sexuality, for example. I consider most of it based on false assumptions carefully documented by research.
If you think about it, they say the male has his peak at age 19 and the female at age 29. Where do they get that? They made it up. Did they ask a random sample of 85-year-old men and women when did you reach your peak? I mean, where do they get data like that? It's ridiculous.
Or the average couple has 2.3 outlets a week. There are points for perversion,lbut the point is they ask a couple how many outlets do you have. The first thing that comes to their mind is how many electrical outlets; then when it's clarified, they lie.
Do you know of any couple that tells the truth about their outlets? And then they come up wi th an average of all of the lies that people tell, 2.3 and everybody in America feels inferior.
We need to have some commonsense in this field.
The tremendous male pastime is to find out something about women's orgasms. They average it all up and the conclusion is that the woman who has had the best orgasm has had an authoritarian family. I don't know what the rest of the women do.
If they'd ask one articulate woman about her orgasm, maybe they'd find something out. See, we've got to spread the message. We have to make up our own research.
And don't misunderstand me, I'm a researcher, and I'm not against research, but I'm against some of this absolute nonsense that people are promoting, and it's appropriate for people like ourselves to have commonsense; and I would like to pass that around as a rumor.
I don't need any research to know that knowledge isn't harmful. I don't need any research to tell me that its better not to have sex if you don't care about the person. Sex is something really nice; why give it to somebody you don't like? Pass that around as a rumor.
In other words, I don't want to be challenged for' all of my values and opinions. I think I'm entitled to values and opinions. I don't. need any research. 'We have civics and good citizenship in schools. Whios askin g for resea rch about that?
We teach democracy and communism and fascism equally? 'We don't do that. W~e say democracy is better, and you know wihat, I say it too.
So certain values we're allowed to have; moral values that sex educators and researchers are allowed to have, and you -know, even parents are allowed to have. We can't be constantly intimidated by researchers in this -field.
Dr. HARDY. I would like to ask both of you what suggestions you haNv7e in the area of teenage pregnancy for research that would be sponsored by Government agencies or other sponsoring groups for progcramsand possibly even for policymaking?
Dr. ROIBERTS. I would like to comment on one point about the whole issue of research. or lack of it.
There is much we would like to continue to learn. I think a great deal we already know. I think the major problem we have with sexuality is not with books to read or research, it's that nobody can talk about it.
You can't ask does Johnny masturbate; so you can't find out to valida,,te your own values. You can't talk about this among your neighbors. Some can't even talk to their own spouse about feelings of their chbi Id's sex play or the child's sexual activity. We confuse privacy, secrecy, and ignorance in an abundant array in this whole field.
Sexuality is a legitimate topic among children and adults, and in public forums. It is something I would like to see articulated. I think probably Sol has more experience in that area than I have.
D r. GORDON. In terms of Government policy and research, I think we have a lot of information and a lot of knowledge.
For example. there are cities in this country that are really disaster areas, not only in terms of blight, but also unwanted pregnancy rates, venereal disease rates.
Why not attempt in a conscious, coordinated way to say here's Phifladelphia. here's Washington, D.C., here's St. Louis, and Atlanta; we're going to mobilize all the resources we know with the conscious effort to reduce adolescent pregnancy and venereal disease, and we're going to measure it.
I would like, for example, for the Government to help us mobilize pilot projects in five or six important areas and in 5 years' time, not in 1 year's time or 2 years' time, but in 5 years' time we should be able to see a reduction in the comparison to other cities. This is not difficult, because most of the cities are disasters. We could compare one disaster citv with another and see.
Tb at's one of the proposals that we would have.
.An other that would be worthwhile is to find out what information people have in terms of a national survey of health. For example, I have in some studies discovered that the average high school student does not know that the initial symptoms of VD disappear even without treatment.
I would like young people to know at least five facts about VD. If they kew five facts, it would be much more pertinent than a whole course in venereal disease.
If you think about how many courses you've had that you've &Iready forgotten; think about all the courses you don't even remember one fact about.
So I think we need to concentrate on communication. There are only 5 facts you need to know about VD; only 10 facts you need to
know about sex; only 11 facts you need to know about values. Everything, else is extracurricular; a part of being intellectual. I1 think there aire 12 facts you need to know about people you should marry.
Dr. ROBERTS. You almost forgot one.
Dr. GoluoN. Yes. See, in my book on parenting, I start out by stating0 whom not to marry.
That's a terrific way of starting out. One of the things Isay, for example, I hope you'll spend 24 hours with the person you intend to marry without television and without sex. If -vou can stand a person afterwards, then you know you have a potential candidate for marriage.
Most when they have been without television and sex, they know immediately it's impossible and reconsider marriage. I'm playing with ideas.
The basic idea is that I think we need some model projects to demonstrate that education can be effective.
Dr. ROBERTS. I think Dr. Gordon and I both really are into the communication business. We are concerned with how to deliver the service and information, but I think that beyond that, one of the questions inm most interested in, and I've seen some limited research, btn one has really designed one yet, and even after having attempted one myself, that's the relationship between sexual development and sexual behavior and sexual decisionmaking.
The issue of how they socialize, little boys and girls. There has been a fair amount of attention on what to do about little girls, and I have
* daughter and I am somewhat concerned that they have the opportunity to make their own life choice.
What are we doing to little boys on a human level and systematically deny them the ability to ask for help, to ask for comfort, to ask for aid. a
There are so few outlets, and not in the narrow sense that we make available to ask for comfort, or to express intimacy in this.
I'm very concerned with the impact of that; how we begin that very early with boys and girls. It's systematic ignorance; we like to keep one sex above the other sex.
Little girls shouldn't play with boys; shouldn't know about them. 'When we get to adolescence, they are put into separate classes for the annual lecture.
We don't want our children, it seems, to know about one another in any meaningful fashion. I think work in that area needs to be done and with implications on early learning. A lot is done before they reach the age of puberty.
Dr. HARDY. May I make an addition to your answer. I think that you two have largely addressed a very important issue of prevention; programs for preventing adolescent pregnancy.
Obviously, I think we can consider that highly important, but I think the Government should be concerned and can be helpfuilabout it.
In our experience, about 70 percent of the women want to keep their baby when she is pregnant; do not want to be aborted. but yet they, keep their babies and 90 percent of them drop out of school.
In Baltimore, we have for the past year or two been ca,-pitalizingr on some good things communitywise thiatare going on to knit together a
program for pregnant adolescents, and this is a knitting together of a program in medical care for the mother while she's pregnant, and for the mother and baby for 2 years after delivery.
This is a program, of rather extensive education during that period which a heavy ilose of parenting and child development is given.
It includes an attempt to change the attitudes to help girls, grow socially. The program also includes an educational evaluation, early prenatal period, and it's really very distressing to find these girls are severely retarded in many instances, educationally.
One of the reasons for them dropping out of school is that school has been an unsatisfacto y experience. We have managed to make links with the social agencies, with the Florence Crittenden Homes; so we have residential care for a few of the children.
It's not easy to find financial support for such programs. We have been lucky in that the Kennedy Foundation has helped us to an important limited extent.
I think that there is need for experimentation with programs of this type, not only in Baltimore, but in other communities, and while these programs are costly, one must realize that the long-term outlook for the children of pregnant adolescents is really poor.
We found in our long-term child development studies that 26 percent of the children of adolescence were functioning at an IQ level below 80 when they were 8 years old.
Now, this is in contrast with a controlled population where mothers were older where about 15 percent were functioning below a level of 80.
MS. SPELLMAN. May I interject something.
I happen to have introduced a life support bill which would do exactly what you're talking about. Senator Bayh introduced it in the Senate and I introduced -S'imilar legislation in the House.
I would love to have you go around and sell this whole concept to the Congress and to the country. I think that is very, very important, and I'd like very much to have your comments on the bill. I also would like very much to have the comments of our two speakers today.
The statistics show us that one out of seven young women between the ages of 12 and 17 will give birth to a child next year.
Approximately 40 percent of the girls will give birth out of wedlock, and find themselves in a position where they really don't know much aboilt what to do and how to go abont taking care of that "problem." So, I'm delighted that you made this observation.
Dr. HARDY. I'd be very interested to help you anyway I can. I regard this as a serious problem nationally while I've been working with the population of intercity kids.
The problem is not limited to innercity kids. In fact, in terms of numbers, there are more middle-class children or youngsters involved.
While their financial problem may not be quite as critical, there are emotional, education, and other problems.
Dr. GORDON.We endorse completely your concern. Another fact that is terribly important is when if they finish high school, their chances of having another baby are minimal; most marry. If they drop out, they have, one child after another and will remain -permanently on welfare.' So it's enormously important to keep socially involved and keep them in school; help them graduate.
I'm delighted with your interest and support, and I'm sure we both endorse that position, and the bill. We would be glad to help you with that.
Ms. SrELMAN. Thank you.
Mr. AvEDON. We have run about 10 minutes over. It was a very interesting meeting. I'd like to personally thank Dr. Roberts and Dr. Gordon and thank you all for joining us.
The meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:-40 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[The article submitted by Ms. Spellman follows:]
Li's SUPPORT CENTERS
Statement of Hon. Gladys Noon Spellman, of Maryland, in the House of Representatives, Monday, March 1, 1976
Mrs. SPELLmAN. Mr. Speaker, in the debate surrounding the issue of abortion there is one fact upon which nearly all agree: That there 'are thousands of women with unintended pregnancies who are confused and unsure of the alternatives available to them. The needs of these women exist, and will continue to exist, regardless of how the legal status of abortion is resolved.
And, there is one category of women with such pregnancies who need our help most of all: The pregnant adolescent There are so many conflicts facing these young prospective mothers, so many risks and even panic, that they turn to abortion without -realizing that there are other ways to handle the situation. Although the pregnant teen may be aware of other alternatives, she sometimes encounters difficulty in obtaining the necessary assistance. We owe these young women a real alternative to abortion-one which will allow every prospective mother to consider all the possible avenues for help.
During the Senate hearings on the various proposals for a constitutional amendment to protect the right to life, some startling statistics became evident. Consider, for instance, the fact that one out of every seven girls between the ages of 12 and 17 will give birth to a child next year, and approximately 40 percent of these girls will give birth out of wedlock. This percentage, although a dramatic increase over that of the past decade, is expected to further increase in the next decade due to changing social attitudes toward marriage. Those girls who marry before they give birth may find themselves becoming a part of the alarming statistics that show that two out of three of such teenage marriages will be dissolved within the first 5 years.
According to the Census statistics, the number of teenagers is increasing both numerically and in proportion to the total population. Because changing social moves seems to be resulting in growing numbers of sexually active adolescents and out-of-wedlock births, specialists predict an epidemic of teenage pregnancies and single parent households in the future. One of the problems that will confront these new mothers will be the care of their children.
Of the 85 percent of teenage mothers who currently choose to keep their child at birth, large numbers will find it necessary to relinquish their children, because of economic and social attacks they must face. It is known that such separation often leads to the children suffering from irreversible emotional, and sometimes physical harmn. Likewise, the mother, with feelings of guilt and neglect, may join the growing number of teenage suicides.
Most alarming of the newly acquired statistics is the increase in pregnancies in the under-iS-years-of-age group. This group is the only one in the childbearing" years which is actually showing an increase in its rate of pregnancy as well as ill absolute number of pregnancies.
These teenage mothers, still children themselves, and their children wNill colitinue to suffer if we ignore their needs. Despite the efforts of concerned volunteers and agencies and programs such as the Center for Teenagre Mlothers anld Their Infants at Johns Hopkins Hospitil in Baltimore, the costs associated with teenage childbearing are as unacceptable as they are unnecessary.
A major area of concern for thee unprepared expectant mothers is the health factor. Health risks for the mother as well as the child are great. Medical evi-
dence has shown that the teenage mother has a. higher probability of health problems during'pregnancy and delivery than any other group except for women 40 and over.'
Nutrition should be art area of great concern to the pregnant mother. Normal teenage growth, and good health require increased nutrition, and it is known that the mother's-health -at the moment of concep~tion plays a decisive role in formulating the expected baby's health. Yet often the- teenage mother is unaware and unprepared nutritionally, and her lack of good health may result in pregnancy complications. It has been found that there are increasing incidences of toxemia, prolonged labor and iron deficiency anemia' among teenage mothers. Similarly, a ch 'ild born to a teenage mother, because of its poor health, is much much more likely to die in the first year of its life than a child born to an older women. Children born to mothers under the'age of 15 have a mortality rate which is twice that of children born to mothers in their early twenties. Infants born to mothers aged 15 to 19 have a 52-percent higher mortality rate than children born to mothers between the ages of 20 and 24.
Present Federal policies are ufocutsed and ill-suited to meet problems faced by pregnant adolescents. Current Federal medical assistance programs have eligibility requirements which suffocate attempts of the mother to self-suffickient, thus forcing the teen mother to go on welfare in order to obtain medical benefits. Since teenage mothers are often punished and expelled from the school systems, their incomplete education and lack of skills make them high risk unemployment candidates, dependent on the welfare public assistance system. Additionally, these mothers, because of the stigma of pregnancy, are forced out of normal social environments.
It is imperative that we help these mothers to adjust to their new life roles and that we help their children. Quite often the parents of the teenage mother cannot afford to help as much as they would like, or they may refuse to help entirely. Because of the confusion and proliferation of services, and because of the myriad eligibility requirements, they may not be able to obtain benefits they could use to stay together as a family; to help their child with her child. If we do nothing other than provide a coordinated series of services, we will have accomplished a great deal.
To begin this effort, I am introducing the Life Support Centers Act. Similar to legislation introduced by Senator Bayhl last year, this bill provides health care services for pregnant adolescents before and after childbirth. It establishes national "life support centers" through State health agencies and nonprofit orgranizations, to provide a coordinated array of medical, social, and counseling services, including nutrition and adoption assistance if desired. Among the services offered through these centers would be: First, health care to the prospective adolesceent mother, both pre- and post-natal, and including -nutrition programs; second, health care to infants of adolescent mothers during preschool yea rs; third, referral services to other agencies that may service needs, if such referral is deemed necessary; fourth, coordinated social services, including educational, vocational, legal, and social counseling for the mother; and fifth, funds to provide adoption services for adolescent mothers who are considering ,the voluntary placement of their child in adoptive homes.
This legislation limits the Federal share of assistance to such "life support center" programs to 75 percent of the cost, and authorizes $30 million in appropriations for the next 2 years.
In all the debate on the abortion question, there has been entirely too little emphasis on providing services to sustain life. The legislation which I am introducing today provides those services, to give pregnant adolescents the best possible care so that their children will have the opportunity to survive Successfully.
Mr. Speaker, the bill follows:
"IT. R. 12197
"A BILL To amend the Public Health Service Act to provide health care services for pregnant adolescents before and after childbirth "Be it enacted by the ,Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the 'Life Support Centers Act of 191-6.'
"SEc. 2. Title III of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201) is amended by adding- after section 319 the following new section:
"'SPECIAL SERVICES FOR ADOLESCENTS
"'SEC. 320. (a) The Secretary is authorized and directed to make grants to health agencies of any State (or political subdivision thereof) or any other qualified nonprofit agency, institution, or organization (with the approval of the State agency) for originating, continuing, extending, or improving progranits involved in the provision of*'(1) Necessary health care to prospective adolescent mothers, including, but not limited to"'(A) tests for pregnancy,
"'(B) screening, diagnosis, and treatment of all prenatal and posatatal conditions, including nutritional deficiencies for a period of one year after birth; and
"'(C) referral when appropriate to other agencies for treatments not covered under this section;
"'(2) necessary health care to infants of adolescent mothers during their preschool years, including but not limited to"'(A) medical examinations,
"'(B) diagnosis and screening of"'(i) nutritional deficiencies,
"'(ii) visual and hearing defects,
"'(iii) genetic birth disorders,
"'(iv) mental retardation and learning disorders,
"'(v) crippling and handicapping conditions, and
"'(vi) catastrophic illness,
"'(C) referrals when appropriate to other agencies for services not covered under this section;
"'(3) family planning services;
"'(4) a coordinated program of social services including educational, vocational, legal, social, counseling, and referral services (including adoption, counseling) designed for adolescent mothers for the period extending to the point in time that the agency finds that parent and child are capable of caring for themselves; and
"'(5) funds to purchase adoption services (approved by the Secretary) for adolescent mothers participating in a program established under this section who are considering the placement of their children in adoptive homes.
"'(b) The Federal share of assistance to programs under this section shall not exceed 75 percentum of the cost of such program.
"'(c) (1) Applications for grants under this section shall be made in such form and contain such information as may be required by the Secretary.
"'(2) The Secretary shall approve only those applications which"'(A) provide that the project for which assistance is sought will be administered by or under the supervision of the applicant.
"'(B) set forth such fiscal controls and fund accounting procedures as may be necessary to assure proper disbursement of and accounting of Federal funiis,
"'(C) provide assurance that it will employ professionals skilled in maternal and child health, public health services, nutrition, and social services,
'(D) provide for cooperation with the State agency administering or supervising the administration of the State plan approved under title XIX of the Social Security Act in the provision of care and services, available under a project, for recipients eligible for such a plan approved under such title XIX and
(E) provide for the coordination of health and social services provided by the project with, and utilization (to the extent feasible) of Federal, Stare, or local health, welfare, and education programs.
"'(d) Payments under this section may be made in advance or by waly of reimbursement, and in such installments, as the Secretary may determined.
"'(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require any project rect iving financial support to compel any person to undergo any medical redning, examination, diagnosis, or treatment or to accept any other health care ,r ser. ies provided under this section for any purpose, if such person or his guardian objects.
"'(f) No individual shall be required as a condition precedent for the receipt of assistance under this Act or any other law to particiIpate in pr(Iz:F i established or assisted by Federal funds unless such individual has given their informed consent to such participation.
(g) There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out the purposes of this section $30.000,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1977, and for eal of the next two succeeding fiscal years.'."
DISCUSSION SESSIONS ON ISSUES RELATED TO POPULATION
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22,.1976
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE)
SUBCOMMITTEE O-N CENSUS AND POPULATION,
The discussion commenced at 9 a.m. in room 311, Cannon House Office Building, Dr. Conrad Taeuber presiding.
Dr. TAEUBER. I am Conrad Taeuber, Georgetown University, substituting for Robert Avedon, president of the Population Reference Bureau, which has been cosponsoring these sessions with the
subcommittee.CThis is the final session of this particular hearing on populationrelated issues.
Our speaker is Dr. Leo Estrada, who is presently working in the Population Division of the Bureau of the Census. His duties include providing technical guidance and advice for the planning, development, and analysis of census data relating to ethnicity and specializing on the Spanish-origin population which seems a bit natural, since that is w hat he has been specializing on, I guess ever since the day of his birth, and certainly throughout his career.
He will be speaking on "Issues of the Spanish Origin Population of America Today."
The President recently signed into law, a bill which would improve the evaluation of the ecoomic and social status of Americans of Spanish origin or descent. These statistics will assist State and Federal Governments and private organizations in the accurate determination of the urgent and special needs of these Americans who suffer from racial, social, economic, and political discrimination and are frequently denied the basic opportunities they deserve as American citizens, which would enable them to begin to lift themselves out of the poverty which many of them now endure.
Mrs. Schroeder, who is chairman of this subcommittee, who organizsed these meetings, unfortunately suffers from a frequent malady on the Hill, that you can't be in t-wo, places at the same time, and ,-he has had to go to another meeting. So. we will have to proceed -without her presence this morning.
Dr. Estrada, you are on.
STATEMENT OF DlR. LEO ESTRADA, POPULATION DIVISION, BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Dr. ESTRADA. I would like to thank Dr. Taeuber for the introduction, and Bob Avedon in his absence, for the invitation to speak before the congressional forum.
I am going to take time today to discuss the question of Spanishorigin statistics with the background, by discussing it in1 the background of racial statistics in the Census Bureau.
I think it is important to understand that despite the fact that the interest in the topic is rather recent, the acual usage of the statistics and materials is rather old. In fact, one can look back all the way to the Three-Fifths Compromise, which is found in article I, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, to find the very first time the racial statistics are required.
At the first census ever taken in 1790, race was a category that was used at the time to differentiate blacks from whites.
The same differentiation of categories by blacks and whites remained apparently quite satisfactory until 1860, at which time the Chinese category was added to the census.
This was due to a great extent to the pressures that were being felt by the Chinese immigration and anti-Chinese agitation which began in the 1850's and eventually led to the Exclusion Act of 1882.
The Indian category, or a category just simply called "Indian," appeared for the first time in 1860. At this time enumeration of the American Indian was being confined only to those Indians, who according to the rule, existed as part of the economy, that is, were being
This group would be nonreservation Indians, generally speaking. And this was the only category for Indians until 1890, when with Indians on reservations,~ or at that time as it was called, "having tribal relations," were included.q
In 1870 the Japanese category wvas added to the Census Bureau's classifications.
This was sort of interesting, because apparently it had nothing to do with immigration pressures, -unlike any of the other categories, because there were only 47 Japanese counted in the census of 1870.
ThJere were no further changes in racial classifications in the census until 1910 when the categories of "Filipino" and "Other Oriental Races" were added.
In case you are interested, the "other Oriental Races" included, in 1910. 2J500 Hindu. 400 Koreans, and 8 Maoris.
In'1930 the Mexican category appeared as a racial classification.
I would like to go back and mention that in 1930 the Mexican categrory appeared as a racial response, first of all, as in other cases, to the -heavy immgrtion from Mexico. Interestingly enough, what occtirred in 1930 was a combination of events.
For one, the Mexican Government took exception to the use of Mexican as a racial category; Mexican immigration declined, therefore decreasing some of the pressures that were being felt.
And during the Depression, you had an immigration decline which was increasingly decreasing the need to know or have the information.
And the result was that after 1930 the Mexican category was omitted or dropped from further use.
I think it is important to stop here for a second and consider the
fact that prior to 1930, census racial classifications were generally developed as a result of pressures from immigration policy, or in response to issues of immigration policy.
The selection of the racial categories are interesting in themselves, because they reflect upon the times, the particular times when they were used. For example, Chinese or category for Chinese was used very early and was maintained to the extent that we count the Chinese person always as a Chinese person.
On the other hand, a German, another type of immigrant into the United States during the same period, was not at that time classified with the expectation, perhaps, that probably they would blend into the general society and therefore not require a racial classification.
Racial classification during this time was also by observation. That is, the enumerators were instructed to observe and to try to designate the. racial classification by looking.
They were to ask the question about race, only if uncertain. And so to a great extent, the racial statistics we have prior to this time are, to a great extent, due to the ability of the enumerators to observe the racial-ethnic classifications.
Since 1930, public interest has shifted from the question of immigration to one of race relations, equality, and opportunity.
The Supreme Court decisions and other types of legislative bills have now required that the information be collected, and actually created a need to know the number of ethnic-racial groups in America.
Since 1960-there were no changes from 1930 to 1960 in terms of racial-ethnic statistics or categories we have used. The categories that were used at this time were pretty much established.
I think it is important, first of all, to note that race and ethnicity as it is in the U.S. census has never really received mass resistance, and it is considered in the Census Bureau, among one of the few items that receives very few comments; in this case letters of complaints from people who refuse to answer the question.
We get a much greater number of letters every year or every time the census is taken, with regard to issues-questions with regard to how many toilets you have at home, or your income. For these kinds of questions we receive many more complaints than ever received on questions of race or ethnicity..
The questions, or the question that is presently being asked is one which asks, a question where the word race is given, and then a list is g 1 ven.
The list includes white, black or Nezro, Japanese. Chinese, Indian with the word "American," Filipino, Hawaiian, Korean, Vietnamese, and then "Other race," with a place to specify the other race.
Now the census racial categories are not very sharply defined as you can tell by the list that I read. If a physical anthropologist were going to give us the listing of races, the list would be quite different than the list we use. This is mainly due to the fact that the race question as used by the U.S. Census Bureau is really a mixture of race, color, and national origin.
It creates some problems in terms of looking at it as a pure item, or a pure measure in that race and color are not the same, the racial mixtures become problematic. For example, the Census Bureau classifies non-Negroid, non-Mongroloid races as white.
On the. other hand, some racial subgroups, as in my case, do. not really fit the white color category. White, as you might guess under this criteria, would include, for example, Asian Indians of the Indian subcontinent, Arabic peoples, Spanish origin peoples, all of whom may not be white in terms of color.
Black, on the other hand, includes mulattos, quadroons, octoroons. Persons of mixed Caucasoid and Negroid race are always black.
On the other hand, perhaps of Spanish origin, who are mixtures of Caucasoid and partial Mongoloid to the extent that they are partially Indian, and in the case of a Caribbean Spanish origin persons, partly Negroid as well, are always white. So what we have is a combination; that is, the color obviously does not match very well with the situation.
On the other hand, Census Bureau divides some racial groups, by national origin and not others. The white race category, for example, is not subdivided in any way.
Mongoloid race is, and so are mixtures of the Mongoloid and Caucasoid, so that the categories of Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Hawaiian, Korean, Vietnamese, and American Indian all, represent some part of the Mongaoloid race.
Well, when you consider this, it is, I think, necessary to understand that racial'identification, first of all, in the United States is not solely a matter of. biology. And it isn't a matter-at least in'the way we define it of physiognomy or genetics.
In American society to a great extent, racial identification is a socially defined issue.
If racial identification is measured, as it presently is, in terms of self-identification, then perhaps the most important 'issue in race is whether or not we are providing terms that people can identify..
So the racial question-the question on race in the U.S. census is not intended to separate, racial subgroups out. If so, Spanish origin would be considered a subrace or subgroup to the white race, because they are a mixture of both Caucasoid and Mongoloid races.
Spanish origin, and this is the group that I would like to concentrate the rest of the discussion on, is in a-sense a racial subgroup. But in America they are considered to be white. And so, despite the fact that they may come in different shades of white and brow n, they are considered to be white as a race.
Now this does create some problems because when you are talking about how people define themselves, you also have to take this within the context.
In the Southwest, for example, it isn't at all unusual for people to conceive three races: There are Anglos, there are Mexicans, and there are blacks. And Anglo is a term that is usually used by the Spanish origin person from the Southwest to designate Whites that are nonSpanish.
,So we still get, to some extent, some confusion, some noise in the sstem, and often on the race category. People will'write themselvesty will not identify themselves as white. They will identify themselves as Mexican, or Mexican-American.
At the moment in the census, we use the ethnicity question, and we consider Mexican-Americans to be an ethnic group, separate from the race question in which we consider them to be white.
The problem, of course, is that there are some Mexican-Americans who think of Mexican-Americans as a race, and note white as the race. The categories that have been used to try to measure this group are several, and I would like to show you, first of all one chart, a chart which indicates what the measures were that were used in 1970 to measure persons of Spanish origin.
This is just a picture taken from an article which has concentrated on Mexican Americans, but the same identifiers were used throughout. The first category that you see is a category of "Foreign birth or parentage."
As you can see, the category has been collected since 1950, but certainly in different form, to the extent that in 1950 and 1960 the information is available for whites only. And in 1970 for all races. This makes the comparability of the numbers between the three censuses a little bit difficult. But it does give us some information about the group we call the foreign born.
We can specifically look at Mexican foreign born to look at those immigrants and new immigrants, the first- and second-generation Mexicans in America.
The problem is that we do not get the information on third-, fourth-, and fifth-generation ethnic Americans, or third- and fourth-generation Puerto Ricans, or third- and fourth-generation Cubans.
Under this measure, we are restricted to looking at those who were born in foreign countries or of foreign parentage.
The second measure is mother tongue. This comes from a question in which we ask whether Spanish was spoken in the home when you were a child. If the answer is yes to this question, a person becomes a Spanish mother tongue person. In 1960, this information was collected only for the foreign born. It was not available in 1950. In 1970, it was collected for all persons. So what we have once again is difficult for comparability, but it is a measure which relies upon language maintenance. That is, to the extent that Spanish is spoken in the home, then we can identify the population that speaks, that was brought up in a Spanish-language environment.
This is a fairly good measure in some parts of the United States with the Mexican origin population, for example, deep into the south part of Texas, or in some parts of New Mexico. But when you begin to talk about Mexican-Americans who live in the Midwest, or Cubans who live in the Northwest, or Cubans who live in the Northeast, then you can tell that obviously, there are Cubans, let's say, who are growing up in homes where Spanish is not being spoken in the home. Those individuals would not be caught up in the measure of Spanish mother tone.
Spanish language was not available in 1950 or 1960. but Was available in 1970, and is really an extension of the Spanish mother tongue question. Anyone who reported Spanish mother tongue in their household is considered as a Spanish language person. So if the wife or the husband in the home reported a Spanish mother tongue, their spouse and their children are Spanish language persons.
Spanish surname has been available since 1950, but has only been collected for the five Southwestern States; Texas, New Mlexico, Color'ado, Arizona, and California. This measure was restricted to whites in 1950 and 1960, and to all races in 1970.
It works on the basis of a list of names which has increased in numnber over the last few years, but presently holds about 8,00.0 Spanish surnames. To be included as a Spanish surname person, you mustyour name must appear on this list.
Names are included, that you would consider most obvious, names like Garcia, Gomez, and so forth, and many other names with less frequency. But, to be included, you must have your name on this list.
The problem here has to do with intermarriage. There is intermlarriage, and a great deal of it, between Mexican-between Spanish origin persons and Anglo persons. When a Spanish origin woman marries an AnXiglo man, we-in a sense, that person is lost as well as her children to the Spanish surname population.
On the other hand, when an Anglo woman marries a Spanish origin man, then she becomes a Spanish surname person by that marriage. To the extent that intermarriage has slippage one way or the other, I think it is obvious to see that unless they. were perfectly balanced, then you have either an increase or a decrease in the number of Spanish surname persons as a result of intermarriage.
SPanish heritage is a combination of the item "Spanish language." of the, item "Puerto Rican birth and parentage," and also "Spanish language" and "Spanish surname"~ in the five Southwestern, States. I have a chart that I will show to you in just a second. Let me go into the last one. The "Self-identification," item 6, refers to the Spanish origin question. It was not asked in 1950 or 1960, became available and -was used for the first time in the 1970 census, and is available on other surveys.
This is a self-identification question in which people are asked, "What is your origin and decent?" and a list of origins and docents are given. The Spanish origin identification includes Mexican, Puerto Rican. Cuban, persons from Central or South America, and other Spanish.
An individual who identifies with any one of these categories becomes a Spanish origin person. The item itself is interesting because it has the advantage, for example, of going beyond the first and second generation; that is, the third- and fourth-generation person who identifies with an ethnic group can be counted as an ethnic given this definition.
It is not restrictive, it does not have any of the flaws that some of the others do with regard to the intermarriages or changes in the measure which can occur.
On the other hand, it also has the problem in that, unless people identify with the labels given that they will not be counted.
I would like to show you the second chart. This is simply a diagram indicating exactly what Spanish heritage is.
First of all, up on the upper left-hand corner, three States-New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania-persons of Spanish origin there are counted in the Spanish heritage population if they are of Puerto Rican birth or parentage. That is, if they are Puerto ican.
In the 47 States and District of Columbia, we use Spanish language, which means that if a person says that Spanish was spoken in their home when they were a child-that is, they are Spanish mother tongue
-they become part of the Spanish heritage population.
In the five Southwestern States, if they answer yes to that question, they are also Spanish language persons. But if they should answer no, then we check their name against the Spanish surname list. And if they are included under the Spanish surname list, then they become a Spanish language and/or Spanish surname person.
The combination of these three is what we call Spanish heritage and and was the global figure that you would find in publications in 1970. Most of the State data appears according to the Spanish language designation, or Spanish language and/or Spanish surname in the five Southwestern States. In 1970, although all of the measures I have mentioned are available, there are some figures available in special reports under each one of them for the Spanish origin population.
Although the plans are still in progress, or still being developed, the plans for 1980 will be probably to emphasize the item of Spanish origin. That is the self-identification question. So that, in 1980, Spanish origin will most likely become a 100-percent item ; that is, it will be asked of all persons in the United States in order to allow each individual to self-identify as Spanish origin if they wish to.
The labels which are presently being tested-and I will say that there are different combinations being tested, but the ones that have been tested in the latest census pretest include the terms "Mexican" and "Mexicano," the Spanish translation for Mexican; "MexicanAmerican"; "Chicano," 'Puerto Rican"; "Cuban"; "Central or South American"; and "other Spanish." I might add that there are others which are not being used at the present, but which have been suggested, such as "Latino," "Hispano," "Latin American," and "Spanish American."
Most of these have been omitted at this point because they are more ambiguous. For example, Spanish-American may be a Spaniard in America, as well as a person from New Mexico where they very often refer to themselves as Spanish-Americans.
A Latin American would not differentiate for us the North American hispanic from the Latin American or South American, Central American hispanic.
The Spanish origin item, since we believe that this will be the primary measure used in 1980, has created some problems in that we also have become interested in the question of fairness. That is, to the extent that we are collecting information on ethnicity we want to collect information on all ethnics. One of the questions we are studying at the moment, for example, is the use of the Spanish origin question on its own as I mentioned it just a few minutes ago. And also, the Spanish origin question within a larger ethnicity question.
It is a question that asks, "What is your origin or descent. Irisi, English, Dutch, Welsh or Danish, Swedish ?" And then ainong those items it has the categories of Spanish origin like Cuban, MexicanAmerican, Central or South American, and so forth.
The third chart that I have gives an indication of, I think, what the situation is at present. The reason for the space between, is thIt tle
lpictur'e this was taken from happens to be on two different pages. in an article.
I think if you can strain your eyes enough to see, that you will see that because of the different measures that were used in 1970, there is some confusion as to the result.
For example, in the State of California, it is possible, if. someone were to ask you, how many persons in California are of -Spanish origin, to come up with different answers.
In California you can take the largest respon se, which is that to Spanish language and Spanish surname where the figure is 3.1 m illion, or you can take the smallest, which is Spanish surname, where the figure is 2.2 million, and both would be essentially correct in terms of response. But each one measures a different population.
The other totals such as Spanish language or Spanish mother tongue, are in between those two figures.
In Illinois, for example, a midwestern city, Spanish origin population is indicated here as 393,000. The Spanish language population is 364,000, a difference of 29,000 people in Illinois. For example, the Spanish origin item would be this side of the chart as the result of the self-identification question. And in the State of California, 2,369,000 persons identified as Spanish.
On the other hand, using the Spanish language. and/or Spanish surname item, the result is in this column. You would get approximately 3 million, or 3,101,000.
The difference is substantial, depending on which measure is used. And the only pattern that really arises from these results -is that in the Southwest, there are more persons that are included by the Spanish language and/or~ Spanish surname category, than self-identify.
In the Midwest and areas outside the Southwest, the opposite occurs. More people are identified as Spanish origin persons than are counted by using a measure of Spanish language.
We can take a State like Illinois, which I was pointing to, and there are 393,000 persons who self-identified as Spanish origin. And under the Spanish language item, we have a total of 364,000.
So that there is a difference according to the measure that is used within each State.
The Mexican-American population, or the Spanish origin population has become increasingly more important, I think, in terms of: the U.S. picture for various reasons.
The fourth chart that I have is simply one which indicates for -you by shades, at least, where the people of Spanish origin are located. these are individuals-by Spanish origin, meaning these are the individuals who identified as Spanish origin the, United States.
For 'example, there is, to some extent, some misconception, in many cases, that all the Spanish origin population is located in a very small region. Actually if you look at them very closely, if you have less than 2 1 500, then the count would be completely white. And while there are areas of the. United States that do not have Spanish origin persons, or have very fewx Spanish origin persons, I think it is important at the same, tine to realize that there is a large number of Spanish origin persons who are distributed quite widely throughotteUie tts
well beyond the borders of the five Southwestern States.
Increasingly, large populations of Spanish origin persons have been growing; for example, in the Midwest; the Midwestern States of Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio; in the Pacific Northwest, especially in the agricultural areas of Washington and Oregon.
The population has also been moving into other parts of the United States in which they were not found until very recently, such as the Sout, Florida, and up the eastern seaboard.
The numbers, I think, indicate and show that the Spanish origin population has grown considerably and is growing considerably in the last few decades. The reasons are several.
Mexican-Americans are still one of the ethnic groups with the highest-higher fertility rates of all groups. This is due to many factors, partly being that they are largely Catholic; also to the extent that they are poor, of the lower socioeconomic status levels; but there are also many other factors involved with regard to family and cultural factors relating to family. Also, we have a very high rate of immigration.
For example, in 1974, the last time figures were available of the number of persons who came to the United States legally, as legal residents, 70,000 of them were from Mexico-70,000. And that figure is approximately 5,000 or 6,000 higher than the annual immigration, legal immigration into the United States from Mexico that has existed since about 1950.
So the population is growing not only through natural increase, the increased fertility rate above the death rate, but also as a result of the increase through immigration.
I suppose this also brings up the issue of illegal immigration, or that of undocumented workers. Undocumented workers in the United States exist; many of them are Mexican. According to the apprehension figures which we have, a great majority of the apprehensions are Mexican.
While we don't know how that relates to the actual proportion in the United States, we do recognize the fact that Mexican illegal immigration is high; while the actual number can't be determined for many reasons; one is that the only real way to determine it is to ask the question, "Are you illegal ?" To ask that question pretty much negates its purpose.
And I think we have to realize that at this point, we assume at the Census Bureau, that we are counting some illegal aliens, those who respond to our questionnaire. On the other hand, they cannot be identified as illegal aliens, because the citizenship question is only asked of those persons who are foreign born on a sample basis.
And then, even at that point, we don't know whether they came in with legal papers or not. All we really have is an indciation that they are in the United States, a large number of persons, some of whom are in the census and other of whom are not counted, who enter the country illegally.
Our hope in 1980 is that if we can convince people with regard to the confidentiality of the census, that the information given to the Census Bureau is confidential. that a greater number-I don't know whether that would be all-a greater number of illegals will feel that they can fill out their census form without fear. This-is quite a barrier
to try and overcome when you have to consider the fact that most illegals are doing whatever they can to avoid whatever contact they can to avoid dealing with the system.
Another issue which I think is important to discuss and relates to all the things we have been talking about, is that with regard to categorizing people.
One of the items which occurs, which I always find interesting, are the write-in questions that we get on the racial question. I think that there is a resistance to some extent of people to be categorized. And the write-in questions that we get, or the write-in answers that we get, in which people specify their race as "human,"~ or as part of the universe, indicate that there are individuals-and I tink all of 'us would be included-who dislike being categorized, who resist to some extent being clumped together in categories, especially where they appear to be constructed for the convenience of someone else.
So I think it is important to ask the question of why we must categorize the population according to race and ethnicity.
Some people point out to me, whenever I tell them about my activities at the Census Bureau, why we stress those things which separate. men, rather than those -things which unite them.
I think that the response to this question is one which can be placed in the context first of all, of what we know about human nature. That is, that categorization or the use of categories is really a response on the part of men to cues we learn to associate with probable situations. And I think that all of us who run into strangers and meet strangers ini our daily activities, know that we ask -a few questions to try and categorize them in some way.
When strangers meet, whether you are on a plane and meet someone for a first time, -we often ask the question, where are you from, hoping to gather some idea, of their geographical origins and learn about their background.
We ask people what they do, usually referring to occupation, because if we know something about their occupation, we know something about their education-or at least we can make ,a guess at it. We also know something about their income, the level of their vocabulary, perhaps, other items which are related to occupation.
Then we often act -upon our idea of sex, race, and ethnicity even in the way that we approach people. So that everything that we do to somne extent is colored by the assumptoins that we make, the categories which we, ourselves, use in order to categorize individuals, in order to cue our behavior to them.
I thiink it is naive to believe that if the Government stopped printing all statistics on race and ethnicity, that people would then'be treated alike. It is also naive, I suppose, to believe that because we point out that there are distinctive differences, that people will want to 1)llt it all together or mnake them alike.
In America, we seem to be more than willing to recognize diversity accodin tsoilcasBuvey seldom do people indicate a willingness to indicate diversity according to race and ethnicity.
In our case and in the case of the advocates for minorities in the United States, I think we realize that while it may not be essential to categorize individuals, it certainly, to some extent, is inevitable,
by race, by sex, and ethnicity. And that these items will continue to set a basis for human interaction to a great extent in the future.
So the goal then becomes not to hide these facts, but rather the goal becomes to provide the most useful and accurate statistics possible, which can be used to the greatest extent by the widest number of people to understand ethnic diversity in the United States.
And diversity, according to ethnicity, is really one of the great cultural aspects of the United States. At this time, in 1970, if we consider to the larger ethnicity question in which people were asked to identify- with items such as Irish, German, Russian, French, Mexican, Cuban, over 120 million people would identify with an ethnicity. The others put themselves down as red, white, blue Americans. They have lost their sense of identity.
But 120 million people in the United States in 1970 still identified with ethnicity, some of whom were going back several generations. T think that the passage of House Resolution No. 92 and Senate Resolution 112 into public law very recently, which requires that more data be- made available on Spanish origin population, is timely.
First of all, it calls for the Census, Labor, Agriculture, HEW, to provide more statistics on Spanish origin persons.
it. is necessary and essential at this point that that be done. First of all, because there are many governmental programs where a great deal of planning is done on the basis of the numbers derived. And at the moment. it is very difficult to do so given the situation. For example, there is a question of undercounts. Do we undercount Spanish origin persons in the United States? The answer is probably yes.
But. we don't know all the reasons, and we don't know to what degree. The reason we cannot tell how many is because vital statistics which are, used to determine undercount by the Census Bureau are not available for Spanish origin persons. 'that is, your 'birth certificates are not available according to ethnicity.
Also, we have other questions with regard to numbers which are niot available at present, such as the CPS, which take current population surveys.
In the current population surveys, because of the sample size, we have, very few Spanish persons that fall into each month's sample. So, in order to obtain, for example, unemployment rates on MexicanAmericans in the Southiwest, it requires that we accumulate the data over a 3-month period and present quarterly figures.
To some extent, there is a need to present monthly figures as we do with blacks, as we do with whites, in order to be able to keep up with man-power needs and the manpower training needs in parts of tile Souithwest, parts of the Midwest, or the Northeast, and so forth. U intil the s-ample sizes are increased in order to improve the sample size, this will not be possible.
Ouir time is short. I understand that there is another group. OK?
Dr. TAYEuBER. There are a few minutes for questions.
VOICE. Some years ago in the military, in dealing with Puerto Rico, there was a category which infuriated many people called "Puerto Rican w hite."1 Do these categories still obtain in the military service? Are you familiar with it?9
Dr. ESTRADA. No;- I have seen the; questionnaire, and it was one of those thi at I -looked at: when I -first arrived at the Census Bureau, in a survey.,of different methods in 'which we had surveyed race and ethnicity.
It is always interesting to me how the cultural context of a country affects the kind of informal' tion that is collected. In the United States., for example, we resist ever collecting information on religion.
In Canada and in countries like Puerto Rico, racial statistics are not collected. There was one attempt that was made to collect that information. And you are right, there was quite a lot of protest, because in a 'country like Puerto Rico, while they recognize differences in ethnicity, they do not 'recognize differences in race.
VOICE. I wondered how you were going to deal with the other part of the Iberian problem, with'the Portuguese question, because of 'the complications again, in relation to Portuguese origin, whether from Brazi or th aay Islands, or wherever. Is this going to be handled or not?
Dr. ESTRADA. Yes. There were.-some questions in 19,70 after the data were collected, when they asked for Central or South American countries.
This -includes the vast population of Brazil, which culturally,' linguistic ally, and otherwise, is very much unlike the other Latin American countries of South America. But, because we had said Central or South American countries, we included information. And, in a sense they are counted as part of the Spanish origin population.
In 1980, this item will say Central or South American Hispanic countries, and we are hoping. that that keys the individuals who respond to it to omit Brazilians, and people from Portugal. And then we have as part of our instructions, not to include people from Brazil or of Portugal as part of the count.
VOICE. Well, the Canary Islands, for. example, are still very different, because there really is a Negro population, and Brazil, to some extent, is mixed.
Dr. ESTRADA. But the Canary Islands are considered to be 'Hispanic in terms of language and culture.
VOICE. Which term do you think, based on your experience in dealing with people of this background, do they prefer to be referred to as Hispanic origin, Spanish origin, Latin origin?
What do you think is the preferred term, or is there one?
Dr. ESTRADA. If we go by the preferences, we end up with a very long list,. We have really been trying to seek a mutual term, one thatthat doesn't create a great deal 'of reaction. At this point, Spanish heritage and Spanish origin seem to be the least harmful and thus most useful. That is, almost every person who is Spanish can relate to those two terms.
As soon as you go beyond these two items, then it becomes more difficult. When you start calling people Hispanic, there are some who fail to relate to that term.
When you refer to individuals as. Latinos, you once aai begin to get' individualIs who like it and dislike it, react very negatively to it.
So, what we seek, at this point, is to use Spanish origin as one of those neutral terms. For Mexicans, we iise the term Mexican-Amer-
ican. There are less problems with Cubans, Puerto Ricans. We try to use the most appropriate term.
Dr. TAEUBER. Of course these terms are tricky, as your experience in 1970 indicates.
A number of people in Alabama and Mississippi turned up as of South American origin. After all, they were born in the South.
.VOiCE. Why do you think there is a discrepancy between people in the Northwest, who identified themselves as Spanish origin, and people in the Southwest who identify themselves as Spanish origin.
Dr. ESTRADA. The question has to do with the problem I have pointed out earlier that persons more strongly identified outside the Southwest than within the Southwest as of Spanish origin.
I think this has something to do with the attempts on the part of Mexican-Americans in an area, highly concentrated with MexicanAmerican population, to assimilate.
They are trying not to be Mexican-American. They are trying to become part of a larger society. Interestingly enough, as soon as you move away from those larger concentrations, you get people who identify more strongly as Spanish. For example, in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio, to a greater extent because, I think in that particular case they are actually starved for their culture. I believe that is the situation. Their culture is accentuated by the distance from it.
VOICE. I was wondering if another possible explanation is, that there might be greater proportion of illegal Spanish-speaking people in the Southwest, who would not be as open about their background as they would be in other parts of the country.
Dr. ESTPADA. That certainly has to be a factor. Actually, what we would expect is not that illegal aliens would fail to identify as Mexican. However, they might fail to identify as foreign born.
So, I am not really sure to what extent that is a problem, but if they were to hedge on what their origin was, it would probably be foreign born, rather than identifying as Mexican.
Dr. TAEuBER. Other questions?
VoicE. Do you have a working estimate of the number of Spanishorigin people who are underenumerated?
.nd also, a working estimate, or do you have any idea what percentage of the illegals-what do you within the Bureau think about that? Do you have some kind of a number that comes to mind? Or just none at all?
Dr. ESTRADA. As I said, this is one of the problems. In order to determine undercount, you must have an independent measure of the population. So, if you have, for example, the number of Spanish-origin persons who were born last year, or who died, then you can work out an estimate for that particular age group population.
There are no independent measures of Spanish origin. No one else collects information, you know to the extent--systematically on the number of persons who identify as Mexicans or persons who have Spanish surname.
We have some vital statistics for some cities on Spanish surname persons, and in these cities we can tell to what extent we seem to be undercounting. But it only tells us in San Antonio there may be an undercount of a certain proportion. But it is very difficult to know what that tells us about any other place.
The estimates run-from talking to people-from as low as 10 to 50 percent, and the truth is probably nowhere between.
We can't tell, we really cannot tell. And really until an independent measure is collected, we will never be able to make a valid estimate.
VoicE. Well, on this general principle of building ethnicity more fully into the census, you suggest that self-identification of national origin may be asked on 100-percent basis in 1980.
The question comes to mind; some people may be able to state a national origin, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they think of themselves in any ethnic sense.
I mean you are obviously blending together people who are 10 generations old, in a category with others who are very new, who are themselves of migrant stock.
Well, what purpose is this kind of thing-this kind of information going to serve? And isn't there some risk of a blending of people with a strong sense of ethnic identity along with those who don't really have some, but will give you an answer if you ask it?
You are freezing that kind of an issue, that notion into the census thing.
Dr. ESTMIDA. Let me mention that there are two ways in which the item works at the moment.
In the pretest of the census, which we are presently doing in different places in the United States, we have been testing different versions of the question. In one version we simply ask for background. We don't really ask it in the sense of, you know, do you identify with this group.
The question is stated as: "Most people have ancestors who came to the United States from a foreign country. Can you identify the origin of your ancestors?"
This gives us some information about background, and really doesn't stress the question of ethnicity.
They have other questions which we are looking at; the possibility of multiple ethnic backgrounds. That is, to allow for multiple responses on the question of ethnicity, so that we can get French-Mexicans, or Irish-Arabics, different combinations.
We really don't know what we are aoing to get at this point, but it will be very interesting to find out if it can be used and for what pur-Doses. We are also looking at the question of how it relates to actual backgTound.
In one particular test we are using, we ask people, first of all, for their ethnic identity as we normally do.
And then on a reinterview, we go back to that respondent and we ask them about the ancestry on the mother's side: the grandfather, great grandmother, other ancestors to find out to what extent there is an actual lineage that can be used to determine how ethnicity relates to ancestry.
For example, if you have a father who is of Spanish origin and a mother who is not, will their children be identified as Spanish origin?
And what are the characteristics of those who are and those who are not?
If you consider yourself to be French, but the only French ancestor is a great grandmother, is that sufficient to motivate you to selfidentity as French?
Then finally, and this is probably the most important for us, is after going through a sort of lineage of their origins and descent, we then ask them to self-identify themselves without providing any labels. We simply ask them, what is your origin and descent, and allow then to give us any answer that they wish.
We are very interested in looking at the results of this, because we think it will give some idea of categories that we are overlooking, or combinations of categories that perhaps need to be improved.
Dr. TAEuBER. The fact that roughly half the population of the United States doesn't answer that self-identification question in terms of the categories that are set up, I think is also significant. We are getting into a very complex situation. Thank you very much, Dr. Estrada.
Let me just add, those of you who have attended these meetings, perhaps have noted that every word spoken is being recorded, and there will eventually be a committee print, which will carry the presentation you heard here, along with the discussion.
Thank you very much.
['W7hereupon, at 10 a.m., the meeting was adjourned.]
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 3 1262 09115 0366