on public aid who desired the services, regardless of their marital status. Effective September 1, 1963, we limited the program to mothers living with their lawful spouses, for reasons I shall discuss later in this statement.

I am happy to report that since Governor Kerner wrote your chairman we bave now been able to return to the comprehensive program. This was made possible through the adoption by our legislature in June of this year of Senate Joint Resolution 33 authorizing the use of public aid funds for providing this service to all mothers above age 15, married or unmarried, who request the service.

I believe it would be well here to bring to the subcommittee's attention the major issue that proved to be the stumbling block in our continuing our original program on a scale where it could be effective. It is this issue that I believe is at the base of the hesitancy of other welfare departments to launch similar programs. It may also have been a factor in the hesitancy on the part of Federal agencies noted in Senator Gruening's address to the Senate on April 1 when he introduced his bill.

This issue was the allegation that using public tax money provided for the support of the poor for family planning services would have the effect of condoning and encouraging adultery and fornication, contrary to the criminal laws of Illinois and most other States. In Illinois and other States with large urban populations, illegitimate parenthood is considerable in our ADC families. Of the 56,000 such families on our rolls in April 1965, unmarried mother families totaled 14,500.

Lost sight of in the controversy was the well-known fact that family planning aids are freely available to the general population, with no questions asked as to whether adultery or fornication might be involved. The real difference is between poor mothers and other mothers who are not poor who can obtain knowledge of family planning and have the ability to purchase the necessary supplies.

So strong were the feelings on this issue that originally it availed nothing to point out that the issue was more one of finances than of morality; that failure of public welfare officials to act to prevent continued birth of unwanted children defeated the very ends declared as public policy in the aid to dependent children program in State and Federal laws.

Nor did it avail to point to the staggering costs to the taxpayer-for the benefit of those who might be moved by this result and not by the plight of the families affected. For example, at the time of preparing our Illinois public aid budget for the 2-year period beginning in July of this year, we were faced with an increase in our average size aid to dependent children family from 4.78 persons per family to 5.075 persons per family by the end of the 2-year period. This increase, if allowed to continue, would increase our costs by $17.3 million for the 2-year period.

The result of this controversy was that we cut back our Illinois family planning program following the legislative session of 1963 to cover only married women living with their lawful spouses. The legislatures, however, created a commission on birth control "*** to study the legal, social, moral, health, and financial implications of any program which would contemplate the use of tax moneys for the purchase and distribution of materials and prescriptions and devices intended for the prevention or regulation of conception."

That commission reported to the 74th General Assembly of Illinois on March 1, 1965. (A copy of this report was sent your chairman by Governor Kerner in the letter previously mentioned.) Included in that commission's findings was the following statement:

**** the department of public aid should be free to suggest means of birth prevention, it being recognized that promiscuity and fornication are against public welfare, and programs designed to ameliorate the problem of illegitimacy are not to be construed as encouraging immorality but rather to preventing the compounding of immorality by inflicting added burdens on the State and the persons involved."

This then was followed by the following declarations which were included in Senate Joint Resolution 33, adopted by the senate on May 26 and concurred in by the house on June 17:

"It is to the interest of this State that human want and childhood deprivation be reduced to the maximum extent possible, to the end that all families may have reasonable opportunity to provide for themselves and par

ticipate as contributing members of the society and that costs of preventable dependency upon public aid may be eliminated;

***The request for and use of such information and supplies do not imply, per se, nor do they afford a legal defense or justification for, the commission of an act defined as a criminal offense under the laws of this State." With the concurrence of the house in this resolution (the full text was sent your chairman by Governor Kerner), the general assembly had settled publie policy for the State of Illinois on family planning aid for families of the poor. The criminal laws pertaining to adultery and fornication continue to applyas they always have-to any violator, irrespective of economic status. Giving the poor equal access to family planning information and aids is no longer to be confused with enforcement of those laws. On the contrary, failure to do so compounds any immorality that may have been involved in the individual situation by "inflicting added burdens on the State and the persons involved." I have gone to some lengths to set out this issue and indicate how Illinois went about to solve it, because I believe it may be a very vital factor in implementing national programs that might be undertaken by the Federal Department of Health, Education, and Welfare should S. 1676 become law. I believe Illinois, in struggling through this problem, may have contributed constructively to to national debate on family planning and the desirability-in fact, the necessity-of using public tax moneys to make family planning services available to the disadvantaged in our own population.

Let me conclude by commending Senator Gruening for not limiting his bill to an Office of Population Problems in the Department of State, but going on and providing for a similar office in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, and for a White House Conference on Population to be held in January 1967. Surely if the United States is to maintain its position of world leadership, if its people are to have the good life made possible by all the developments of modern science and technology, we need to concern ourselves with population problems at home as well as abroad.

There is, to be sure, the long-range problem of management of our total population to keep it in balance with our resources and with the standards of well-being we want for all our people. But of immediate and overwhelming urgency is the need to begin now in providing all possible aid to those who stand most in need of controlling the size of their families. And, I repeat, the only way this job can be done on the scale needed is to use public funds to help the poor and the disadvantaged to obtain the necessary information and supplies.

I would hope that the enactment of S. 1676 would give further stimulation to the few steps the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has taken to encourage action in this field, particularly in the programs which affect the poor receiving public aid, and also mothers and children who are not necessarily on public assistance but who are served by the maternal and child health programs and the child welfare services administered by that Department.

The costs of our Illinois family planning services have been recognized for Federal matching under the aid to dependent children program. I am also most happy to say that the Federal Department also plans for specific inclusion of family planning services in its implementation of the new Social Security Act, title XIX, providing for a consolidated medical assistance program under Public Law 89–97 (H.R. 6775), approved by the President on July 30 of this year. A document dated August 9, issued by the Welfare Administration of the Department has given specific mention to family planning expenditures as recognizable for Federal matching under title XIX.

The day may well come when the Federal Department will go beyond these first steps of recognizing family planning expenditures for Federal matching purposes and require the States to provide such services as a necessary part of the State effort to reduce and prevent poverty rather than merely alleviate poverty once it has occurred. A similar development might also occur in Federal aid for the maternal and child health and child welfare services. This indeed would be in striking contrast to the more or less passive attitude noted by Senator Gruening in his April 1 address to the Senate.

Frankly, all that I have said boils down to this: A tax-supported program for family planning aid to the poor and disadvantaged-launched and coordinated at National, State, and local levels-is imperative. It is here, in this immediate area, that we should and must begin to act on the problem of population within our own country.

As for Illinois, we now have a clear public policy and I mean to move ahead to utilize that policy as another help in carrying forward the numerous programs we have for developing to their full potential the mothers, the fathers, and the children we are now helping through our aid to dependent children program. We can proceed more effectively with increasing the employment potential of the 45,000 mothers we have who head their families because they were never married or the father is absent. Freed of frequent and unwanted pregnancies, they can pursue to completion the classes we have established for overcoming functional illiteracy and other educational deficiencies and move on to training for job openings that are available.

We can work with greater assurance with the unemployed fathers. With family size under control there will be greater chance of their ability to support the family once they have completed the adult education and training programs. We should have less trouble with the problem of school dropouts by teenagers in these families because family living conditions may be more easily improved and there will be less pressure on the teenager to escape from his surroundings or to seek unskilled employment because of the pressure of poverty in the home.

And finally, and perhaps most important of all, we will be in a better position to work with the mothers and help them improve the care of the children that are already here.

Senator GRUENING. Thank you very much, Mr. Swank. I would like to ask you one or two questions.

ILLINOIS: A CASE STUDY OF ATTITUDE CHANGE

When this program was first started and you had your commission of 10, there was a good deal of opposition to the program; was there not? Mr. SWANK. Yes, sir.

Senator GRUENING. Has that diminished substantially?

Mr. SWANK. This has diminished substantially. There is very little opposition being voiced to the program in Illinois at this time.

Senator GRUENING. It is generally accepted, then, by all groups, religious groups as well as others?

Mr. SWANK. In this 15-man commission-as I have mentioned, I think there is a recent paper of diagnosis of religious affiliations listed 8 Catholics and 7 from other faiths. The vote of this group as I have outlined was 14 for, with 1 dissenting vote. I think this is significant, because the Chairman of the Birth Control Study Commission was the same Senator who had introduced legislation 2 years previously to prohibit the use of State money for family planning.

Senator GRUENING. Well, he must have undergone a conversion similar to that of President Eisenhower.

Mr. SWANK. I think he underwent a considerable conversion, sir. Senator GRUENING. Thank you very much, Mr. Swank. You have been most helpful in your testimony. It will be very useful.

Thank you very much.

I would like to direct that a statement by Donald J. Bogue, of the University of Chicago, be made a part of the record at this time. This statement was presented by Mr. Bogue before the Illinois State Birth Control Commission, June 24, 1964, and gives statistical data in answer to three questions:

1. Do the poor citizens of Chicago really want to have fewer children, or are they imbued with an attitude of indifference and irresponsibility about childbearing?

2. Would the poor citizens of Chicago really make use of birth control services if they were made available to them, and would they practice birth control in a sustained way if this service were provided?

54-459-66--pt. 3B- 8

3. Can any program of birth control service have any measurable impact upon the birth rate of the populations at which it is aimed? In other words, does giving birth control service have enough effect to pay for the cost?

Mr. Bogue's statement is based on a study conducted by the Planned Parenthood Association of Chicago and the Community and Family Study Center of the University of Chicago of which he is director. The data and the conclusions make a useful contribution to the dialog in which we are engaged on the population crisis. (The statement referred to follows:)

EXHIBIT 206

"BIRTH CONTROL WORKS FOR THE POOR AS WELL AS THE RICH"

(By Donald J. Bogue, professor of sociology and director of the Community and Family Study Center, University of Chicago)

(Testimony before the Illinois State Birth Control Commission, June 24, 1964, State of Illinois Building)

The testimony I would like to submit before this commission is intended to present factual statistical data to answer three questions, which, I believe, lie at the very center of the problem which the commission is trying to solve. These questions are:

1. Do the poor citizens of Chicago really want to have fewer children, or are they imbued with an attitude of indifference and irresponsibility about childbearing?

2. Would the poor citizens of Chicago really make use of birth control services if they were made available to them, and would they practice birth control in a sustained way if this service were provided?

3. Can any program of birth control service have any measurable impact upon the birth rate of the populations at which it is aimed? In other words, does giving birth control service have enough effect to pay for the cost? In 1960 the Planned Parenthood Association of Chicago began to make aggressive moves to bring family planning services to the poorer segments of the population, as well as to the more middle-class families.

Since January 1962, the organization which I represent has been quietly cooperating with the Planned Parenthood Association of Chicago to carry out a program of mass communication and motivation for birth control among the lowincome population of Chicago. We outlined on a map a broad territory in the inner city which might be termed "slum" or "blighted" area, and we undertook to bring specific factual information to this entire population which numbered more than 1 million persons, or one-third of the entire city of Chicago. Planned Parenthood of Chicago provided high-quality family planning service to the added "birth control business" which our advertising campaign helped to generate.

We have now in preparation a comprehensive report on this activity; it will be released very shortly. Our data proved an unambiguous answer "Yes" to each of the above questions. In other words, instead of three questions, it is possible to make three blunt assertions of fact, as follows:

Assertion 1. The poor citizens of Chicago really want to have fewer children The great majority of them are not imbued with an attitude of indifference and irresponsibility about childbearing, and to the extent this indifference may have existed in the past it is on the decline

This is revealed by the following data:

In 1959-60 we took a survey of a representative sample of 1,560 households in Chicago, roughly one-half Negro and one-half white. This was a stratified random sample drawn in such a way as to provide reliable data for low-income strata, which most surveys cannot discuss because they have too few cases. We asked these couples to answer the question: How many children do you regard adequate for a couple like yourself and your husband? The Negro and white respondents responded as follows:

It is clear from the right-hand set of percentage point differences that in comparison with the white population, Negro respondents favored having fewer children than white respondents. Because the white population of Chicago is roughly 50 percent Catholic, we interpret this to mean that in comparison with the white population of the Nation, at large, Negroes aspire to a family no larger than that of their white neighbors.

We also asked these respondents the question: Was your last pregnancy planned or was it accidental in that you really did not want to get pregnant right then. The answers we got were as follows:

The frequency of accidental (unwanted) pregnancy among the Negro population was twice as great as among the white population. Almost none of the Negroes gave an answer that suggested unconcern. In fact, if small differences can be trusted, the white population showed slightly greater unconcern about whether or not they were pregnant than the Negro.

We asked them: How do you feel about family planning: Do you approve or disapprove? We then asked how strongly they approved or disapproved, with the following results:

Although Negroes were less wholehearted in their approval of family planning than whites, more than 75 percent were favorable in their reaction. The "climate of opinion" about birth control in the low-income neighborhoods of Chicago is unmistakably positive. Incidentally, the even more favorable attitude of the white population, with nearly one-half declaring themselves strongly supporting birth control and with less than one person in nine expressing an attitude of disapproval demonstrated how small is the remnant of the public that rejects birth control in some form. (In asking our question we made it clear to our respondents that the rhythm method was included as a birth control method.)

As a statistician, I can certify that the sample on which these data was based was sufficiently representative and sufficiently large that these results are reasonably close to what must exist as the "true" situation among the Chicago population, and that the differences between these results and statistics that would reveal the "Negro to be unconcerned about family size would not be likely to occur by chance even once in 1,000 times in a sample of this size."