Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-06-20
No Change of Conditions
Since Last Years Vigorous
Refusal to Repeal.
THIS YEARS REPEAL RIDER
SAME AS LAST YEARS
Joint Committees Report, Cited to
Destroy This Law, Demolishes
Every Reason for It's Death,
and, Like Balaam, Instead
of Cursing, Blesses It.
Editorial Correspondence of The Star.
. BY THEODORE W. MOVES.

Editorial Correspondence of The Star
BY THEODORE W. MOVES.
The assault Of this year on the half
and-half law duplicates in essentfals
| that of last year. The difference be-
tween tweedledum and tweedledee is no
| less than that between the johnson
amendment of 1918 and the legislative
rider carried by this years District ap-
preparation bill.
| Both destroy the half-and-half law by
| indirection, suggesting vague scheme
of indefinite proportionate contribution
and repeating inconsistent legisla ton.
| The johnson amendment provides for
payment Of the expenses of the District
out of District revenues, to the extent
that they ARE available" and the bal
| ance" shall be paid out of the Treasury.
| This years rider provides that appro-
priations for the support of the District
shall be paid out Of District revenues
to the extent that the same shall be
Sufficient therefor and the remainder
| out OF the Treasury.
! Both legislative provisions suggest an
| intent that the nation shall not pay as
| much as one-half of District expenses
The johnson amendment carries the spe-
| cific provision that the national con-
tribution shall be less than one-half Of
the total appropriation. But this pro-
vision does not indicate that last years
appropriation bin was any more hostile
TO half payment by the nation than
this years bill. These words were intro
duced last year to suggest reduction Of
expenses, and thus to avoid the point OF
order against new legislation on an ap-
preparation bill. This device was not
| necessary In 1915. for the legislative rider
was made in order this year by a rule
which the House rules committee re-
ported by vote Of 8 to 2. and the House
ratified by vote Of III to 1856
Both appropriation bills carry the same
evidences of hostility to a national half
contribution and of a determine ton to
increase the local tax burden and to de-
crease the capital contribution of the
House sf.s06. .ss5.7s. This wear the
House cut down the Commissioners es-
Inmates $s.57s.s3s. This year the local
is incressed and the national contribu.
ton correspondingiy decreased in even
greater proportion than last year by an
extension Of the Borland amendment to
aqueduct and filtration plant mainte-
| nance from the water rentals in which
the United States. getting its water free
does not participate and by the extraction
from District citizens of a rental tax for
the use OF vault space under side walks
Thus the Johnson amendment of last
year and the Legislative rider of this
year are the same in purpose, in sub
stance. and In effect. The johnson
amendment was rejected oyervhelm-
ingIy last year by the senate appro-
priatiOns committee and by the senate
by n vote Of % to 70. Unless conditions
have changed or new evidence has been
uncovered the senate would naturally
act now as II did last year ON q renewal
Of last years. Objectionable proposition.
Why Change and Vote Repeale
What. if anything, has happened
| since last year to suggest to. the Senate
| change Of mind on this issue.
The congressional joint fiscal COM
| mittee has reported that there is no
necessity today for the half and half
provision and no reason for any pre-
else arbitrary proportionate contribu-
ton. In the same breath the joint COM
| mittee declares that the haIf-and-half
law is fair to the nation; that under 1t
Washington pays its full equitable con-
tribution toward capital upbuilding
and is adequately assessed and taxed; !;
| and that instead of paying less than
at present for capital development the
| nation should in equity and in response
to patriotic pride pay more.
While the committee thus holds up
the finger Of dubious disapproval at
the half-and-haIf law In the abstract,
| 1t riddles and destroys In specific de-
| tail the reasons advanced last year for
the repeal Of the half-and-half law. 1t
suggests that there II NO reason or ne
| cessity to continue the half-and- half
| law and then proceeds to demonstrate
| that there II NO reasOn or necessity to
repeal 1t.
The reasons assigned last year for
repeal in congressional debate were:
% Washingtonians are grossly under
assessed. Their realty in 1912 was
properly valued at $744.000.000. where
as the assessor on the 100 per cent
basis valued it at only $4s5.000.0 900.
taxed of American cities. about half
| taxed compared witff>the average large
| city. go II Washington realty were
assessed and taxed like that of other
cities enough money would be raised to
| meet all expenses of capital upbuild-
| ing without cent Of contribution by
the United States. Therefore most
| logically and naturally the half-and-
| half law should be repealed.
! To be convinced that these were the
! reasons assigned for the repeal of the
half-and half law 1t will be necessary
only to glance at the following refer
/ ences 10 last years DEBATES: repre-
| sentative Prouty, Cong. Rec, vol. 81. PIP.
661s-6617-6626: vol. 81. p. 1853. Repre-
sentative Crisp. Cong. Rec, vol 81. PIP.
1002-1o03; Cong. Rec. vol. 50. PIP. 1856
| 1887. Representative Sisson. Cong. Rec.
vol So. p. 1853. Senator Kenyon. Cong.
Rec. vol. 81. PIP. 1123-1163. Senator
James. Cong. Rec. vol. So, p. 1174.
The orotesque Realty Generalization
| Error.
! At the hearing before the joint con-
gressional committee the following
facts were developed. showing the
gross generalization of the 3744.OOO. 900
estimate OF Washington reality in 1912,
made by Mr.. H. J. Browne before the
George committee:
% This valuation is reduced to an
absurdity by the preposterous results
which follow in a comparison of this
valuation with realty valuations in
other large cities.
Washington's taxed realty. 1t Is con-
c -ded. 10 only a fraction of its area
and constantly decreasing fraction.
owing to successive condemnations OF
taxed raai property by the govern-