Hancock, the Vietnam War, the Naval Reserves, Operation Desert Shield, and Operation Desert Storm.]]> 0:00:33 Background
0:01:45 Enlistment
0:02:50 Boot camp and USS Hancock
0:05:55 Vietnam War
0:09:22 Naval Reserves and going back to school
0:10:23 Liberty and awards
0:12:48 Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm
0:14:43 Off-duty activities
0:16:07 Keeping in contact with other sailors, injuries, and September 11th
0:17:31 Civilian life
0:18:55 Lessons learned from the Navy
0:19:20 Closing remarks]]>
Holtz, Alan R.. Interviewed by Jared Grossi, November 13, 2014. Audio/video record available. Item DP0016189, UCF Community Veterans History Project, Special Collections and University Archives, University of Central Florida Libraries, Orlando, Florida.]]> RICHES of Central Florida]]> Veterans History Projects, Library of Congress.]]> Holtz, Alan R.. Interviewed by Jared Grossi, November 13, 2014. Audio/video record available. Item DP0016189, UCF Community Veterans History Project, Special Collections and University Archives, University of Central Florida Libraries, Orlando, Florida.]]> UCF Community Veterans History Project, Orlando, Florida.]]> UCF Community Veterans History Project Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.]]> Adobe Flash Player]]> Java]]> Adobe Acrobat Reader]]> RICHES of Central Florida]]>
0:00:32 Entering the Military
0:03:32 Training and assignment
0:04:59 Feelings on the Vietnam War
0:07:17 First experience in Germany
0:08:41 1972 Summer Olympics
0:10:28 The Yom Kippur War
0:12:42 Personal benefits of being in the military
0:14:06 Post-military experiences
0:17:13 Preparation and thought process in the Army
0:18:52 Personal time in Germany
0:20:58 Destruction of the Berlin Wall
0:22:17 Evolution of the military and public opinion of veterans
0:26:09 Issues with government
0:27:43 Homecoming
0:28:22 Family feelings on enlistment and war
0:29:07 Feelings on assignment
0:29:47 Relationships in the Army
0:31:39 Fun in the Army
0:33:00 Travel experiences and relationship with host family
0:34:43 Working with international students
0:35:12 Summary of international experience
0:35:32 Stand-out memories
0:37:13 Opinion of entering military today
0:41:16 Opinion of recent wars
0:43:37 Admiration for evolution of military and public opinion]]>
Blank, Bill. Interviewed by Gabrielle Hank. Audio/video record available. UCF Community Veterans History Project, RICHES of Central Florida, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.]]> RICHES of Central Florida]]> Veterans History Projects, Library of Congress.]]> Blank, Bill. Interviewed by Gabrielle Hanke. Audio/video record available. UCF Community Veterans History Project, RICHES of Central Florida, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.]]> UCF Community Veterans History Project, RICHES of Central Florida, University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida.]]> Vietnam War Collection, UCF Community Veterans History Project Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.]]> QuickTime.]]> Adobe Acrobat Reader]]> RICHES of Central Florida.]]> RICHES of Central Florida]]>

For the Census of 2000, the short form consisted of only seven questions, while the long form consisted of 52 questions and was used for a 17-percent sample of the population. For the first time, race questions were not limited to a single category; rather, respondents were able to check multiple boxes. A new question related to grandparents as caregivers was also mandated by legislation passed in 1996. Disability questions were expanded to including hearing and vision impairments, as well as learning, memory, and concentration disabilities. The 2000 Census also eliminated questions related to children born, water sources, sewage disposal, and condominium status. In addition, the 2000 Census was the first in which the Internet was used as the principal medium for the dissemination of census information. Summary Files were available for download immediately upon release and individual tables could be viewed via American FactFinder, the Census Bureau's online database. Files were also available for purchase on CD-Rom and DVD.

Due to declining questionnaire mail-back rates, the U.S. Census Bureau marketed a $167 million national and local print, television, and public advertising campaign in 17 different languages. The campaign successfully brought the mail-back rate up to 67 percent. Additionally, respondents receiving the short form were given the option of responding via the Internet. Telephone questionnaire assistance centers available in six languages also took responses via the phone. Statistical sampling techniques were utilized in two ways: first, to alter the traditional 100-percent personal visit of non-responding households during the non-response follow-up (NRFU) process instead by following up on a smaller sample basis; second, the sampling of 750,000 housing units matched to housing unit questionnaires obtained from mail and telephone responses, as well as from personal visits. The goal of the latter was to develop adjustment factors for individuals estimated to have been missed or duplicated and to correct the census counts to produce one set of numbers. This "one-number census" would correct for net coverage errors called Integrated Coverage Measurement (ICM). Both of these measures were taken in an attempt to avoid repetition of the litigation costs generated by the 1980 Census and the 1990 Census.

Despite these efforts, two lawsuits—one filed by the U.S. House of Representatives—were filed in February 1998 challenging the constitutionality and legality of the planned uses of sampling to produce apportionment counts. Both cases were decided in favor of the plaintiffs in federal district courts, but the U.S. Department of Commerce made appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court. Known as the  U.S. Department of Commerce v. the U.S. House of Representatives, the Court ruled that the Census Bureau's plans to use statistical sampling for purposes of congressional apportionments violated the Census Act. The bureau revised its plan, stating that it would produce statistically adjusted data for non-apportionment uses of census data information, such as redistricting. However, in March of 2001, the Census Bureau recommended against the use of adjusted census data for redistricting due to accuracy concerns; the Secretary of Commerce determined that the unadjusted data would be released as the bureau's official redistricting data. The Director of the Census Bureau also rejected to the use of adjusted data for non-redistricting purposes in October of that same year.]]>
U.S. Census Bureau]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 2000.]]> U.S. Department of Commerce]]> U.S. Census Bureau, 2000.]]> U.S. Census Collection, RICHES of Central Florida.]]> U.S. Census Bureau and published by the U.S. Department of Commerce.]]>
  • reproduce the work in print or digital form
  • create derivative works
  • perform the work publicly
  • display the work
  • distribute copies or digitally transfer the work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.
  • This resources is provided here by RICHES of Central Florida for educational purposes only. For more information on copyright, please refer to Section 5 of Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code.]]>