1. Correspondence Between Congressman James R. Jones and Earl L. Hoggard Discussing Inflation and Governance Issues Identifier: CAC_CC_109_4_22_34_0001 Contributing Institution: Carl Albert Congressional Research and Studies Center, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK Collection: James R. Jones Collection Title: Correspondence Between Congressman James R. Jones and Earl L. Hoggard Discussing Inflation and Governance Issues Date: 1972-01-06 Creator: unknown Policy Area: Agriculture and Food Topic: Education--United States, Agricultural laws and legislation, Land use--Planning Congress: 92nd (1971-1973)
2. 1972 Correspondence on Low-Income Housing Cost Discrepancies Identifier: CAC_CC_109_4_22_34_0010 Contributing Institution: Carl Albert Congressional Research and Studies Center, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK Collection: James R. Jones Collection Title: 1972 Correspondence on Low-Income Housing Cost Discrepancies Date: 1972-04-09 Creator: unknown Policy Area: Agriculture and Food Topic: Agricultural laws and legislation, Land use--Planning Congress: 92nd (1971-1973)
![["The document is from Earl L. Hoggard congratulating James R. Jones on his election to Congress and expressing concerns about inflation and rising medical costs. Hoggard also discusses the need for government officials to be mindful of spending and to prioritize living within their means. He also mentions past experiences with other congressmen and their handling of government funds."]](https://jones-2.s3.amazonaws.com/James%20R.%20Jones%20Collection/James%20R.%20Jones%20Correspondence%20Series,%201968-1986%20/CAC_CC_109_4_22_1_0000-District%20Office,%20Jones%20Clippings,%201973/Thumbnails/CAC_CC_109_4_22_34_0001_thumbnail.jpg "Correspondence Between Congressman James R. Jones and Earl L. Hoggard Discussing Inflation and Governance Issues")
![["The document addresses a Washington Post article that inaccurately reported the cost of low-income housing development in the Shaw School Urban Renewal Area. The document explains that the $52,200 figure cited in the article is misleading, and the actual development cost per unit is $26,600. It also defends the urban renewal costs and the fair market value paid for properties, emphasizing the benefits of urban renewal for the neighborhood. The document provides additional information and resources for further clarification."]](https://jones-2.s3.amazonaws.com/James%20R.%20Jones%20Collection/James%20R.%20Jones%20Correspondence%20Series,%201968-1986%20/CAC_CC_109_4_22_1_0000-District%20Office,%20Jones%20Clippings,%201973/Thumbnails/CAC_CC_109_4_22_34_0010_thumbnail.jpg "1972 Correspondence on Low-Income Housing Cost Discrepancies")