visit more sites in covered jurisdictions. It was requested that we send a questionnaire to all NAACP leaders in the South who would then obtain information on these voting problems. The questionnaire was approved by you and hand carried to Mr. Mitchell's office on August 23. It was to be sent to NAACP Headquarters in New York and then mailed to NAACP leaders in the South as soon as possible. Originally we were to hold off making additional field trips to the South until we obtained responses from the questionnaires. However, because of our very tight schedule and the need for timeliness, we have planned field trips to Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Mississippi for the week of September 2. Any delay pending receipt of NAACP questionnaire forms would seriously impede the report's completion. If responses to our questionnaire reveal particular problem areas that merit further investigation we will send staff to those areas at a later date.

6. The Commissioners.-I believe that it should be a matter of record that the Commissioners will be expecting a different type of report than, it now appears, the Voting Rights staff will produce. They approved a proposal that is at great variance with our current plans for the study. Dr. Horn has been concerned that we use data from the Institute for Social Research at the University of Michigan to indicate the attitudes of those who don't register and vote. Because of our concentration on covered jurisdictions it seems less likely that we will be able to use any of this information in our study.

7. A Permanent Ban on the Literacy Test.-Currently the use of literacy tests to determine who votes has been suspended until 1975. If the Voting Rights Act expires it is possible that some States would reimpose the test. This could be disastrous particularly in some southern States where there are large numbers of illiterate voters. It has long been Commission policy to advocate a permanent ban on literacy tests. The Voting Rights Project has planned a short study of the use of literacy tests in conjunction with the main report, calling for their permanent ban. The status of this study now seems in doubt since the Voting Rights Project is being confined to covered jurisdictions in the South. Many of the States that have literacy tests are in the North and West.

8. The Schedule.-The inclusion of additional sites as well as major revisions in the study's design will necessarily affect the completion date of the project. At this time we cannot accurately estimate how much time it will take.

Conclusion.-Although our planning reflects the decisions made in our meetings of Aug. 20, Aug. 23, and particularly Aug. 26, I would like to reitrate several points: Our entire project staff continues to hold the view that the study should not be limited to covered jurisdictions in the South. If the decision is irrevocable to so limit the study. I would like to urge a modification of this policy. May I suggest that we visit the uncovered jurisdictions previously scheduled and prepare the materials from covered and uncovered jurisdictions already visited so that the material would be available for substantial inclusion in Congressional testimony. If this alternative also is untenable, a third alternative would be to utilize this material in a publication following Congressional action on the Voting Rights Act.

FRANK KNORR,

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Washington, D.C.

DEAR JOHN: You have occasionally written to me asking for issues of priority to the Mexican American community. MALDEF presently is facing an issue with which you might be able to assist.

There are many counties (46) in Texas that are seriously malapportioned resulting in violations of the "one man-one vote" principle of the minority communities. Litigation cannot be pursued because of the lack of data for commissioner's precincts (wards). The Bureau of the Census does not publish these data. The census, however, is able to do a special review of its data and acquire the information; this though, is done on a fee basis and MALDEF cannot afford it. Can the Commission be of assistance in acquiring the information?

I've looked at Section 207(a) (ii) of the Voting Rights Act; this Section provides that the Census shall do surveys in jurisdictions designated by the Commission. These surveys, however, are limited to counting citizens of voting age, etc., and do not provide for counting persons generally.

Your assistance in this matter would contribute greatly to the voting rights of minorities in Texas; I do hope you can be of assistance. If you are interested in this, please have your office contact Mr. Al Perez in our Washington, D.C. office at 659-5166.

Atentamente,

VILMA S. MARTINEZ, President and General Counsel.

Ms. VILMA S. MARTINEZ,

[EXHIBIT NO. 15]

President and General Counsel, MALDEF, San Francisco, Calif.

DEAR MS. MARTINEZ: I am writing in response to your June 22, 1977 letter concerning apparent malapportionment in 46 Texas counties and the difficulty of obtaining detailed population data to support appropriate litigation.

A member of the staff has been in touch with Al Perez of your Washington office about your need for 1970 enumeration district data for these counties. Unfortunately, we are not in a position to obtain the data on your behalf. As you surmised, the section 207 surveys will not provide the detailed information you require, so the data would have to be purchased from the Bureau of the Census. The cost to us would be about $100 for each enumeration district, the same amount, I believe, Census would charge MALDEF. In the absence of a fully budgeted project requiring acquisition of the data, we are not able to allocate the resources needed for such a purchase.

It is possible that at least some of the data you need are available from other sources. For example, a State agency such as a development commission or a State university research bureau may already have purchased enumeration district data and be able to make them available at a reduced cost. Also, given its size, there may be block data available for Nueces County.

After reviewing the information supplied by your Washington office, however, we agree that there appears to be significant under-representation of Spanish surnamed citizens on some of the county commissioner courts. It also is apparent that some counties have failed to live up to the Constitutional requirement of periodic reapportionment on one-person, one-vote principles. In the enclosed letter, therefore, we have asked the Department of Justice to investigate the situation in these counties. You may find them willing to share whatever statistical information they develop in their investigation.

My letter to Assistant Attorney General Days, you will not, also discusses the problem raised in a MALDEF complaint regarding post-election purges of nonvoters in Arizona. Although our understanding of this situation is based on a review of the original complaint and conversations between members of our staffs, it is not clear that implementation of the purge law constitutes a "change affecting voting" under the Voting Rights Act, just as many other recurrent aspects of holding elections have not previously been considered changes. Under the circumstances, however, it is not clear that implementation of the purge should not be considered changes and thus be subject to section 5 clearance. At the very least, we believe MALDEF is entitled to determination from the Department of Justice.

Thank you for bringing these matters to our attention. We will appreciate your keeping us informed of the status of both problems. Sincerely,

JOHN A. BUGGS,

Staff Director.

STATEMENT OF RAUL YZAGUIRRE, NATIONAL DIRECTOR, THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA; PRESENTED BY MICHAEL CORTÉS, DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA

Mr. CORTÉS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

On behalf of Raúl Yzaguirre, I would like to thank you for the invitation to appear today. I would like to point out at the outset that Mr. Yzaguirre's remarks are largely consonant with what Mr. Pérez has said already. We share all of the specific concerns that he has raised.

I would like to emphasize this morning that continuation of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is of great interest and concern to the National Council of La Raza. The fundamental goals of our organization complement the purposes for which the Commission was created in 1957. Our goals and the aspirations of the Hispanic people of the United States will be well served by continuation and strengthening of the work of the Commission on Civil Rights.

The National Council of La Raza was founded in 1968, and exists for the improvement of the economic, social, educational and cultural well-being of the 16 million Chicanos and other Hispanic people of the United States. Our board of directors includes elected officials, labor union leaders, academicians agency administrators, attorneys and leaders of community organizations from every region of the United States. One hundred eight local organizations are affiliated with the national council. Among those organizations are community development corporations, private social service organizations and local area federations.

The National Council also serves as Secretariat to the Forum of National Hispanic Organizations. The Forum is comprised of 63 autonomous organizations of Chicanos, Puertorriqueños, Cubanos and other Hispanics from throughout the Nation, all of whom share the National Council's fundamental aspirations of justice under law for all residents of our country.

The purposes for which the Commission was created are as essential today as they were in 1957. The Commission has many important accomplishments to its credit since its creation. But there has always been a gap between the Commission's purposes and its accomplishments. The work of the Commission is far from done.

Throughout the early history of the Commission, it ignored Hispanics, for all practical purposes. The problems of equal protection related to race, color, religion, sex, and national origin, were not given equal or equitable attention. Those problems which especially concerned Hispanics were less likely to be treated. A principal cause of this neglect was the hiring practices of the Commission itself. Hispanics have long been underrepresented among the Commission's own staff.

It has been gratifying to see that, in more recent years, there has been increasing emphasis by the Commission on needs of Hispanics. The representation of Hispanics among Commission staff appears likely to continue increasing. There appears to be a growing recognition of both the nature and the extent of civil rights problems facing Hispanics in the United States. This Nation has, after all, the fourth largest Spanish-speaking population in the Western Hemisphere. By the turn of the century, if not sooner, Hispanics will be the largest minority group in the United States.

It is certainly appropriate when, in an era of increasing interest in the human rights of residents of other Spanish-speaking nations in our hemisphere, the Commission on Civil Rights gives increasing attention to the rights of Hispanics here at home.

There are a number of specific problem areas in which Hispanics in particular look to the Commission on Civil Rights for help. Chief among those areas is that of equal educational opportunity. The average educational level of Hispanic is below not only that of the general population, but below that of blacks in the United States as well. The problem of prejudice against Hispanics within educational institutions is compounded by language and cultural difference. Equal educational opportunity, from kindergarten through higher education, is among our highest priorities.

Another problem area of particular concern to Hispanics is that of the rights of immigrants. Policy brutality and prisoners' rights are also areas in which we look to the Commission for Civil Rights for

action. The problem of disparate sentencing as a function of national origin, as opposed to race, remains relatively unexplored.

The progress being made by the Commission at addressing the needs of Hispanics would certainly be accelerated if membership on the Commission itself were limited by a fixed term. One of the very few unfavorable consequences of repeatedly extending the life of the Commission has been, in effect, appointment of Commissioners to permanent, perhaps lifetime, positions. Even if the Commission is to continue its standing as a temporary agency, subject to periodic extension, I recommend that the law be changed to provide a fixed maximum number of years for each Commissioner's term of office.

I would like to repeat that the recent progress the commission has made at addressing the needs of Hispanics has been gratifying. It is clearly in the best interests of Hispanics' struggle to gain equal protection under law to have the life of the Commission extended. On behalf of the National Council of La Raza, I urge you to vote favorably on this extension.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to present our views.

Senator BAYH. Thank you, Mr. Cortés.

I would hope that I and those of us on this committee could work with you and Mr. Pérez and your organizations to refine the interests of the Commission and its responsibility to study and report on the problem of discrimination against Hispanic Americans.

I am not familiar enough with the particular question that you raise, Mr. Pérez, to be able to make a quick judgment of whether the best way to get results is through the Commission or to have Justice hit somebody to stop. But there can be no reason, in my judgment, why the Commission should not be enthusiastically pursuing the problems that exist in the Hispanic American area. That discrimination has gone on a long, long time. Your forefathers were here before mine as Americans, in most instances.

To be less than vigorous in our pursuit of full equality for Hispanic American citizens is intolerable in my judgment. Without going into the details here, I hope we can work together personally and at the staff level to see that the Commission pursues whatever avenue seems to merit pursuing as far as how we are going to get the most results and the quickest, most expeditious attention given to this discrimination. I appreciate your bringing it to our attention.

Do you or your organizations have any opinion relative to this matter of State commission versus regional commission?

Mr. PÉREZ. Senator, we favor maintaining the existing structure where you do have State commissions. Essentially we favor that because of the reasons articulated earlier by the other speakers here. I think that having State commissions brings the Commission much closer to the actual grass roots problems.

We fear that if you create regional commissions you kind of take away that closeness and, I think, the understanding that the State commission brings to the Commission on Civil Rights.

Mr. CORTÉS. Mr. Chairman, I would clearly echo what Mr. Pérez has said. The question of access of Hispanics to the commission and its operations is of paramount concern to us. It is clear that keeping these bodies closer to us-the State level rather than the regional-is going to promote that kind of access. So, we are clearly in agreement.