Evening star., 1912-07-16
LOCAL TAX BURDEN
Louis P. Shoemaker's Views
of District Assessment,
ATTITUDE OF CONGRESS
Cost of Maintaining Nations Capt.
tai Not Equally Proportioned.
Organic Act Ignored.
To the Editor OF The Star:

To the Editor of The Star:
In your editorial OF recent date en-
titled The Washington Tax Burden
| you say there Is no question that
some lack Of uniformity exists in the
assessment, but 1t is not to be accepted
| as evidence that the assessors have
| failed to assess the taxable property
| in the District high enough. If there
| is lack of uniformity it is to be cor
rected rather by decreasing the over
valuations than by increasing the COM
parative undervaluations."
| Perfect uniformity of assessment
| does not prevail in any municipality.
| This is simply a weakness of human
nature, and will always exist Uni
formity. nevertheless, should be main
| tanned as nearly as possible
| Some of those in Congress feel
| charged with the duty Of representing
only the people of the United States
beyond Washington, and fail to recog-
nize the fact that the taxpayers OF
the District of Columbia have no other
rely or to whom they can appeal. Such
should readily see that the per capita
tax of maintaining the Capital city
falls necessarily very heavy upon local
taxpayers, Wh1le the REMAINING popu-
lation of the country contributes an
exceedingly low portion The burden
upon about $4,000 local takpayers
based upon population OF 343,OoO Is
$26.66 per capita. while that Wnicn
falls upon others composing the nation
is but 51s or 6 cents per capita.
Washington an Exception.
| 1t ought to be easy to understand,
though it is apparently difficult for those
who are seeking to relieve the United
States of proper proportion of the cost
| Of maintaining our federal capital, that
Washington is and must always be an
exceptional municipality, with improve
ments of a federal character. and, con-
sequently upon a scale of Importance not
thought Of elsewhere The national street
extension plan, covering thousands OF
acres beyond the old city limits approved
and enforced by Congress, is one Whlcn
no municipality of this country has ever
undertaken to duplicate, and yet Con-
gress, without the consent of our people.
| and to great extent over their protest,
| established this national plan for the new
and greater Washington, and particularly
stipulated that no portion Of the cost
thereof should fall upon the federah
Treasury. So it is with many other prc>o-
| sitions, national in character, which
Congress does not hesitate to dictate and
impose upon the local taxpayer, yet per-
sistently refuses to share the cost thereof
Those who are interested in placing OBJ
| legations upon local taxpayers. and thus
relieving the general government of re-
sponSibility in connection with the cost
of maintaining it's home, should well un-
derstand that wherever the federal city
might be located federal necessities
would beyond question exist. and that 1T
| is more important and necessary to the
United States than it is to the local land
| owner that Washington should be a
| model city, as we are trying to make It.
| Some contend that the local landowner
could not get along SO we'll without the
| general government, but it can also be
contended that the general government
could not get along very well in Wash
ington without the local landowner un-
less Congress proposes to establish a ma
tional reservation and provide for the
entire cost of a well kept city, with all
the necessary requisites, consisting of
public improvements of every character.
Purpose Of Taxation.
Those who are interested might also re-
member that taxation everywhere is
levied for the purpose of meeting legiti-
mate expenses of the government; that
there is no authority to levy tax of any
kind for any other purpose. and that
every property owner in the District is
willing to bear his proper proportion of
the cost of such expenses as may be
necessary for the local municipality, but
not for those which belong to the ma
ton.
The question is, shall Washington be a
national city, gratifying the demands of
the nation from not only an esthetic
standpoint but from standpoint of
practical utility, or shall it be a local
city, having a local municipality, crafty
ing only the needs and necessities of those
people who own land and pay taxes here?
or course, there can be but one answer
to this question. !. e., it is national
icif 6pro oJ md c6n he
maintained as such to a great extent by
the people of the United States.
1 The compact of 1878 is not founded
upon generosity on the part of Congress.
but upon condition which existed then,
and still exists to greater extent, be-
cause more than 90 per cent of the cost
of maintaining Washington is due by the
federal government, based upon it's inter-
est here. The people of the District do
not specify the cost of public improve
ments; Congress designates all improve
ments that are to be made and stipulates
their cost, whether the people would pre-
fer others or not, from funds accumulated
by reason Of taxation levied, not by the
people of the District, but arbitrarily pre-
scribed by Congress
How Taxation Might Be Lowered.
| If Congress would withdraw it's effort
to maintain Washington as a federal city
(which, of course it will not do) the
demand for funds would unauestionably
be much less. If current ordinary and
general improvements, such as are neces-
sary here from year to year, were paid
for from current revenues, and extra
ordinary improvements, such as school,
houses, trunk sewers, great bridges, pub
lie parks, all of which are largely for
the benefit of future generations were
paid for from the proceeds of long-term
loan, as is the practice of every other
municipality and by every corporation in
/ the country taxation could ha lamarad