494 HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE ON S< IEN( I AND TECHNOLOGY 



Rudd went one step farther. He introduced H.R. 12881, a bill to 

 repeal the Metric Conversion Act of 1975- Rudd explained: 



It is wrong to impose the metric system on America. Our system of measures has 

 never been a problem in the history of this country. * * * I looked at my mail, and a 

 great many people were very much against the idea of this country going metric. And 

 after thinking about it, I decided that I was against the idea too. 



A Chicago Tribune columnist named Bob Greene praised Congressman 

 Rudd in an August 16, 1978 article, entitled "Repeal Bill Could Put 

 Metrics 6 Feet Under." Greene is the founder of a voluntary, no-dues 

 organization named WAM ("We Ain't Metric"). 



GAO REPORT RAISES DOUBTS 



Metric conversion received another setback on October 20, 1978, 

 when the General Accounting Office issued a massive and somewhat 

 unfavorable report entitled "Getting a Better Understanding of the 

 Metric System — Implications if Adopted by the United States." It 

 came as somewhat of a shock to the Science Committee to read the 

 GAO's conclusion: 



Despite opinions and statements to the contrary, it is not the current United 

 States policy to convert from the customary system to the metric system. 



The GAO cast some doubt on the underlying assumptions of the Metric 

 Conversion Act of 1975, by stating: 



Action should be taken to ensure that metrication does not occur merely because 

 it is thought to be inevitable, which is apparently what is taking place today. * * * 

 Actions by Federal agencies, multi-national firms, educators, and others aided by a 

 general feeling of inevitability and misstatements about metrication throughout the 

 country tend to forge a metric policy for the entire Nation. 



News articles based on the GAO report tossed more sands of con- 

 fusion into the eyes of the public. The United Press International led 

 off its analysis this way: 



The United States is moving toward the metric system without a clear under- 

 standing of what is involved or whether the change is worth the effort, the General 

 Accounting Office says. 



TEAGUE SPELLS OUT INTENT OF CONGRESS 



The GAO report and the publicity which accompanied it came 

 as a shocker to a majority of the Metric Board as well as a majority 

 of the Science Committee. Teague decided to set the record straight 

 by sending an authoritative letter to the Chairman of the Metric 

 Board, Dr. Louis F. Polk. It was this letter which was quoted at the 

 outset of the chapter, and dispatched on November 27, 1978, only a 



