But I want to make it clear here that the cities, by and large, are committing just about all of the money they can deliver for these purposes, in meeting OEO matching requirements, and undertaking all the other programs that are required to keep the city functioning reasonably well.

But OEO needs more support, innovation, and more innovative people. It needs more of the new approaches that it has already developed; more money, more work, more imagination are required to get at the root causes of our poverty problem, and to resolve them.

At the Federal level, we have developed the so-called model cities program, where currently 68 cities are now in the planning process to undertake social, economic, and physical programs which, in the words of the law, are, after a 5-year period, to result in a marked improvement in the neighborhoods and in lives of the poor in the target areas. This program is being funded by a reluctant Congress but it is being funded. It has great promise, and at the same time possess real significant and hair-raising, if I may say so, problems in terms of making the thing work. But is it a promise-it is a very significant promise on the part of those cities. They have made a significant commitment to the people of the target area in terms of what Government intends to do to improve their lives-to improve housing conditions, to improve job opportunities, undertake health programs, and to provide greater employment opportunities, and greater educational opportunities for the people.

I personally feel that it will work, that it has to work, that this country will make it work.

"It is a tree that has been planted" to use Mr. Tucker's analogy. It is an action that is underway. It gives substance, I believe, to the general feeling on the part of the American mayor, local politicians in general, that in the last analysis they must move these programs ahead.

It does give evidence of their commitment to try to solve the problem. It is not as massive a commitment as required. As the Senator indicated earlier, he felt the Congress is ahead of the people.

I believe local government officials are ahead of the Congress in this respect.

I noticed on my way here, reading the St. Louis Post-Patch on the plane, that the mayor of St. Louis had a minor confrontation with the Black United Front, a group of young people who visited him in his office, and he said he challenged them to adopt three new R's— "respect, restraint, responsibility."

In reply the group asked public officials to adopt the newer three R's-recognition, repentance, and reward.

Both sides, in this case are probably right-the mayor might give more thought, and I am sure he has, after this confrontation, to recognition, repentance, and reward, and the young men, and the militants in general who have good cause to be bitter and unhappy, to think of the desirability of respect, restraint, and responsibility in this American society.

We need commitment. I am sorry that Mr. Tucker did not read the last paragraph, or at least that part of his first draft which said;

"The problem in America is that it selfishly lacks commitment." I think that is true. I think many of us travel to and from work from our homes, and never see the ghetto, never see the slum, never

smell it, never understand it or the extent of deprivation that does exist for the poor and the black.

I think recognition of these problems and their rather staggering dimensions and their willingness to commit needed resources on their solution are the absolute sine qua non of getting this tree to grow, to grow rapidly.

and

I am reminded of Vice President Humphrey's response to the young Negro man who said that the American dream was not real to him, and he cited chapter and verse as to why. And the Vice President responded that this was why he was in politics, and that he felt it was important to make the American dream real to everyone. He ended with, "After all, that is what democracy is all about."

And I believe that to be true. I believe that the majority of our local government officials believe it to be true. I believe they are trying to improve their capabilities. I believe local government can and will be in the vanguard, the leading edge, the cutting edge, of solving these problems. I think what needs to be done and what has to be done is that the American people have to get "commitment" to fall in behind and give support to enlightened Government policy to meet the challenge of poverty and discrimination in our time.

Thank you.

Dr. POOLE. Thank you, Mr. Mields.

Mr. Tucker, would you like to respond to the assessors?
Mr. TUCKER. I would make only a couple of comments.

When Senator Harris made the comment he felt the Congress was ahead of the country, I was a little surprised, because I was going to dedicate myself this fall to trying to get a new Congress. I am convinced that is what we need.

After talking to many Members of the Congress over the past several years, particularly in the recent months, I get a feeling they do not really know where it is.

I think that the problem of many city halls and the Congress today is, they are very much like the French general who said to his troops, "Hurry up and show me which way you want to go so I can lead you.

And I think that is part of the dilemma. The modern American dilemma is that leadership seeks to reflect where they think the people are rather than try to give leadership to the people. I think that is the challenge of leadership today, whatever area of life it is. Dr. POOLE. Thank you very much.

The next section of this topic relates to the consequences of the migration for rural areas.

Our first speaker is Douglas G. Marshall, University of Wisconsin.

Biographical Sketch: Douglas G. Marshall

Chairman, Department of Rural Sociology, The University of Wisconsin; memher, Special Advisory Committee for the 1964 Census of Agriculture, and Committee on Population Change and Prospects in the North Central Region; author of numerous publications largely in the areas of rural education, demography, and migration.

STATEMENT BY DOUGLAS G. MARSHALL, OF THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN

Mr. MARSHALL. Basically, what are the implications of migration for rural areas-I do not think it matters, whether it is rural Wisconsin, or rural Alabama, the results are about the same.

What we basically have to do is raise the standard of living of rural people who remain in rural areas. One of our studies just recently completed in northern Wisconsin indicated 60 percent of the rural families who had three or more people in the family were living on $2,000 or less. We have low income too, in the mid-West. We have pockets of poverty.

We need to raise the level of living of these rural areas, because we have been exporting food, fiber, and children and money to the cities for a long time. We have been exporters of these goods to the cities of various sizes.

We also lose the educational factor. We educate them, and then we lose them.

We are unique in this respect in the North Central region, I believe particularly Iowa and Minnesota and Wisconsin, in that they do complete high school before they migrate. They have a relatively high educational attainment level in contrast to some parts of the United States. We put money into their education, and then we see them leave-not to return.

What are the effects of this migration?

It effects, of course, all the major institutions of a community when these people leave, particularly these young people, with their wealth, because they do take some wealth with them. It affects the schools, the churches, the family, and all of the various basic institutions we have.

Plans must be attuned to the wishes of the people. We recognize that. In some cases agency plans do not necessarily solve these problems.

We do have a host of agencies that are interplaying in rural communities. In many cases they are duplicating each other.

Now, to the problem of agriculture. I submit that it is hard now to find many people who are just farm alone. The farmer is the greatest "moonlighter" in the world. He has other kinds of occupations in addition to farming, or his wife works off the farm, or his son or daughter.

We just completed a study which showed in the area, a good land area, not a poor land area, one of the very best land areas of the State of Wisconsin, that 40 percent of the farm operators or their families are working off the farm 100 days or more.

So you see they, too, now have moved into what we would call the urban setting. And then they commute. Almost all of our lines of communication, particularly our roads into our cities of any size, and particularly the smaller cities, are clogged every morning with the commuters, and many of these are people who live on the land.

Now, this might be one way, of course, to solve some of the problems of urban; that is, to suburbanize them.

One of the answers of course of migration is to recognize the inadequacy of the educational process for the migrant. If you look at the person moving, he does not necessarily receive an adequate edu

96-624-68-8

cational background. Our high schools educate primarily to go to the university or colleges. They do not educate the person to return to rural areas. There is a loss process here in the educational system. It is a minimal kind of education to begin with, and it is not the right kind in the end necessarily, at least to attract them back.

I think today we have forgotten a lot of the possibilities that there might be some success stories in rural communities. I think we ought to recognize that there are some communities that have done a good job. Unfortunately, we need more research on why and how.

I scoured the literature when I was asked to give this paper, and I was quite embarrassed, because we have not really done very much on what the consequences are of migration from rural areas.

I can think of one area where we did a study-we were asked to come in a good land area, a community of about 2,000 people, a small city. Now, they are unique, they are a success story. I think there are many more such small cities throughout the United States we need to take a look at.

The point I am making is there is a large reservoir of labor in rural America, if we can convince industry, and particularly some of the smaller industries, that they can come back out there. They are doing that in some areas.

What we need to do is to analyze some of these success stories.

I want you to understand that I am not necessarily against the notion of doing something about poverty. Of course, I agree that we should do something. I am not against the idea of doing something about race. Of course we should.

But what I want to get across in the closing minutes today is that we do have some success stories in rural America. We do have communities that are in trouble, yes; because of the piling up of old people, and the moving out of young people. But there are some success stories that I think we can document.

Let me summarize quickly in this respect.

One, I suspect that we have to recognize we have certain values, or value system other than the dollar in this country. We have right now of course at one time we were farm-oriented, and this was an important value system we had, if you recall, 50 years ago, Rural America, we meant farm America.

Then we became urban-oriented, and so now our values have become oriented to this, and admittedly we have many problems we have to solve in the city. But let's not forget that we do have what we call the small town, and the small city, and the rural nonfarm, which is a large portion of the population in the United States, which we seem to completely ignore.

We either talk about the city, or we talk about the farmer. We ignore the rural non farm, and particularly the small city.

So I submit, that we ought to take a long hard look at this orientation and what has happened to this rural non farm. We are oriented more to the urban.

Secondly, that high school education, as I have indicated, is basically a technique for getting out of an area, and particularly in the north-central region. It is a device to escape. Some of the highest school attendance figures in northern Wisconsin and northern Minnesota are found in these rural poor areas. So education is a device in order to escape

from the poverty and from the lack of opportunity of many of these

areas.

Thirdly, we have to recognize the relocation of industry, that we should have to attract and bring industry back in. And it is coming back in, as I have indicated, into some of these towns.

We need to document this. Why? What are the reasons for it? We need to document this more thoroughly than we have to date, so we can do something about bringing more of industry back.

Fourth, I want to point out that the north-central region, even though it has some similarities to other areas of the country you have been talking about, that we still have some unique characteristics. We have a high level of education in our population in the rural area—a very high and very significant level of education.

Now, while I submit that having a high level of education can also mean high outmigration-just as we are indicating that some other areas having a low level of education have high out migration. Having a high level of education does not mean you are going to stay in a rural area or small town or city.

In fact, you might even move out faster. Some of our counties—one Wisconsin county has lost 70 percent of its population in the last 25 years, and it has the highest school attainment, highest school level of anv county in the State.

High level of education--the north-central region is unique.

Some of these things, yes, are unique, but poverty hits in some ways at all areas. But there are some things we have to gear to an area. We have to recognize that there are certain things we will have to do in the Upper Great Lakes that might not be the same as in southern Mississippi. We have to gear our programs to these areas, and to the kinds of poeple we have.

We still have a lot of types of rural people. They are not all just white and black in this country. As a sociologist, I remind you of this. We are a little league of nations in Wisconsin, ethnically.

So you see, you have all kinds of these ethnic islands and ethnic groups as a background that is rather significant yet.

So we are not just all black and white. There are a variety of different kinds of whites that we can talk about, and programs must be geared to the kinds of values that people have.

Fifth, what have we got in rural areas?

Well, we have a lot of old people-because the young people have left. We are unique in the north-central region. Again-Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, are very high in the number of old people in the rural areas. In fact, we have figures like 25 percent for some of our communities, being 65 years of age and older. This is true in Iowa, in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and so on, partly of course because the young people have left.

A second reason is some of the old people come back in when they retire. They come back to live in these rural communities. We get some of this particularly in the poorer areas, where living costs are less. I submit, then, that we have to recognize that we have this aging factor. A former teacher of mine once said, "Rural communities are America's old people's homes."

They are not only America's old people's homes, but they are also America's widows' homes-the small towns particularly.