In March, many of you responded to my questionnaire on the energy crisis, impeachment and the economy. In all, my office received over 50,000 replies. From these, we drew a scientifically selected sample, representing a cross-section of the district by age, sex, political party preference, county of residence and years lived in Arizona.

The following report sums up your responses:

An overwhelming portion of the district's citizens (78 per cent) consider environmental damage to be as bad in the long run as the energy crisis. They want any increased energy and fuel production tied to environmental safeguards and oppose relaxing present safeguards in order to solve the energy crisis. Nearly three-fourths also suspect the oil companies of somehow engineering the energy crisis and bidding for higher prices, while 83 per cent declared oil profits are already too high.

Fully three-fourths of the citizens have either concluded that impeachment by the House and trial by the Senate are justified, or at least want a full House inquiry. There is also strong (68 per cent) sentiment favoring an April 30 windup of the House inquiry. Citizens split about evenly on whether or not the President should resign now, but surprisingly, one in four Republicans favor resignation.

Asked whether the Administration's wage and price controls should be discontinued, retained or strengthened, 41 per cent said controls haven't worked and should be scrapped, a view apparently shared by the President and his Administration, based on their recent actions.

While most citizens (74 per cent) blamed the oil companies for the energy crisis, 55 per cent also said the crunch was inevitable because of our nation's rates of growth and energy consumption; 45 per cent blamed the environmentalists; 34 per cent accused government, and only 16 per cent blamed the Arabs and their refusal to sell oil to this country.

If rationing gasoline at the rate of 45 gallons per licensed driver over 18 years old were necessary, 56 per cent of the citizens said they would support such a plan and 44 per cent would oppose it. Those under 18 years of age differed from the older citizens, dividing evenly on this proposal. This reinforces responses I have received from younger drivers during my visits to high schools and in other meetings with young people in the district. They obviously are reluctant to give up their driving privileges entirely, when older persons would be restricted but not prevented from driving.

Continued private ownership of the oil industry, but with limited government power "to prevent collusion and monopoly and to allocate petroleum products" where needed, was favored by 76 per cent of the citizens. Only 8 per cent favored complete government takeover, and only 16 per cent supported complete freedom from government control.

Environmental damage is just as bad as the energy crisis, in the view of an overwhelming (78 per cent) majority of the citizens. They support measures to make sure "that we don't ruin the environment" in expanding our fuel production. Only 22 per cent said we should "delay or relax" environmental controls in order to meet energy needs.

On the impeachment question, 40 per cent said impeachment by the House and trial by the Senate are justified, and another 35 per cent said they are uncer-

tain whether the President should be impeached, but feel "sufficient questions have been raised to justify a full inquiry by the House." The remaining 25 per cent said the President has been "unfairly maligned," and we "should get off his back."

Party alignments are revealing. Favoring impeachment were 57 per cent of the Democrats sampled, only 18 per cent of the Republicans and 36 per cent of the independents. Favoring full inquiry were 33 per cent of the Democrats, 36 per cent of the Republicans and 39 per cent of the independents. Saying, "Get off his back," were 10 per cent of the Democrats, 46 per cent of the Republicans and 25 per cent of the independents.

If the House votes impeachment, 68 per cent of the citizens said the President should then be removed from office by the Senate, and 32 per cent disagreed. While 84 per cent of the Democrats and 67 per cent of the independents would favor removal, 56 per cent of the Republicans said the President should remain in office.

Asked whether President Nixon or Vice President Ford could best lead the country for the next three years, citizens were almost evenly split, 51 per cent for the Vice President and 49 per cent for the President. Age is important here, with 55 per cent of those under 18 favoring Mr. Ford and 58 per cent of those 65 or older favoring President Nixon.

Asked whether the President should resign immediately, the citizens are also split almost evenly. Younger citizens are again more likely to favor resignation and the older ones to favor his staying in office. While 69 per cent of the Democrats favor resignation, 26 per cent of the Republicans -- more than one in four -- say the President should quit.

Several comments come to mind as I examine these findings.

The nature and degree of the President's weakness, and the attitudes on impeachment and resignation, are particularly significant.

Has any former President fallen a hairsbreadth short of the Vice President in the public's confidence? It should be pointed out that Democrats and Republicans divide in exactly opposite proportions on this question, however, with 78 per cent of Democrats favoring the Vice President while the same percentage of Republicans favor Mr. Nixon over Mr. Ford. Independents are aligned precisely with the average of the sample, almost evenly divided but leaning slightly toward the Vice-President.

It is also significant that one in four supporters of Mr. Nixon's party believe he should resign, and that less than half of the Republicans, 46 per cent, say we should leave him alone.

It is also important that people who consider themselves independent lean heavily in the direction of impeachment or full inquiry. Independents, incidentally, account for one in every four voters in our sample. In effect, we found that the Democrats and Republicans tended to cancel each other out. It is the independents, then, who tip the balance.

On the energy issues, I am heartened that a large majority believes that we must preserve our environment and not back away from our commitments to protect it, while we attempt to expand our fuel and energy output in coming years.

This means Congress and Federal policymakers have a very thin line to walk. The public, in effect, wants to have its environment and to burn it, too. It remains to be seen whether such a pair of potentially contradictory wants can both be satisfied. If it is possible, it does seem that to fill such an order will be costly. Once the costs are more clearly visible, it will be interesting to see whether the public still sets the same demands. I expect public attitudes will prove to be subject to change as we learn more about the costs.

It is revealing that citizens also tend to want government to take a middle road on the question of regulating the oil companies. Strongly as so many citizens feel that the oil industry is somehow responsible for the energy crisis in the first place, a very small number of citizens wants complete government takeover.

This, in effect, adds a third condition to the equation. Besides wanting both continued high levels of energy available and high-quality environment, the public wants us to preserve the basic character of a free-enterprise economy.

Some leading thinkers on the subjects of the world's environment and its various shortages and scarcities have been telling us that the only answer will ultimately be less freedom of choice for all of us. It is clear from this survey that the citizens of the Second Congressional District of Arizona are not yet ready to accept that conclusion.