Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1916-05-24


hesitate in adopting a new. indefinite
plan of appropriations, which many
believe will be destructive to the de-
xelopment Of Washington along the
grandly, graciously and wonderfully.
| Mr.. Chairman the committee finds
mat more and more land is being re-
CURED by the federal government and
that more and more land in the Dis
trict of Columbia will be required for
the federal government in the future.
They also find specifically that the So
called half-and-ha1f plan has been fair
| noth to the federal government and
the District of Columbia in the past.
| II this plan has been fair in the past
and more and more property is being
exempt from taxation by being taken
h' the government, then how can it
be claimed that now or in the immedi-
ate future the half -and-half plan will
be unfair, except that the District of
Columbia will be called upon for a
greater proportion than is its fair
share? Is it not rather possible that
the half-andhalf plan today is unfair
and that the federal government should
contribute more rather than less, not
only now. but in the future In any
event. the half-and- plan is not UNI
fair to the federal government and
should be maintained. as is the wish
| of the residents Of the District of Co
| lumbia.
| At the conclusion Of the report of
they say that Congress shall pursue a
| definite policy of regular and liberal
appropriations. If the legislation in
the appropriation bill Is adopted this
| mite policy for definite policy. The
present measure calls for definite
contribution from the District of Co
[ lunlbia. with certain tax rate, but the
contribution of the federal government
is left uncertain. I ask that the rec
concentrations of the committee be ig-
nored and that the half-and-half plan
be maintained as definite and the pro-
posed legislation be defeated as indefi-
mite. Under the half-and-half plan the
appropriations are regular: under the
plan proposed in the appropriation bill
appropriations will be irregular.
Illiberality and Parsimony.
so far as liberality is concerned, the
very first application ofsthis new in
definite policy shows that it will re-
suit in illiberality and parsimony.'
He continued:
Mr.. Chairman, commenting upon the
first product of the proposed new sys-
TEN, let look again to the present
bill. 1t calls for an appropriation from
the District of Columbia of 20 per cent,
and 80 per cent from the federal gov
eminent. I ask you whether that is
| IdlT L ask you IL the 1eueTdl eoNeIii-
ment has not at least a half interest
in the District of Columbia? Is there
an honorable representative upon this
floor who desires to say to his con-
stituents, or to the nation, that the
United States has less than so per cent
less than a half interest in the District
of Columbia?
Mr.. Chairman. on the question at
issue 1 want for a moment to invoke
the history of the past. and l believe
hot he CT hnS fnr
the future. There was once an indefi-
mite plan of appropriations for the
District of Columbia. just such plan
as is now proposed, and that indefinite
plan called upon the District to ap-
propriate what it could and the Fed
eral government would make up the
deficit. That plan was in operation
from 1900 to 1873. The result of that
plan, which was similar to the plan
herein proposed, was a bankrupt city;
la city that all Americans were
ashamed of. and a situation which was
such a scandal that Congress was call
ed upon by the nation to apply cure.
AS a result, after great elaboration,
in 1878 definite plan for regular and
liberal appropriations was evolved
which plan is the plan known as the
half -and-half plan, and which is yet
the law. If the past can give any
guidance for the future. then this COM
mittee should not adopt the proposed
indefinite plan. but should maintain the
present definite and fixed one
Interest on Funded Debt.
Representative Gard of Ohio, a MEM
Der of the joint select committee at
whose suggestion the District bill has
been amended SO as to provide for the
debt by the United States. made a
v1,i iv$
of view on the committees report In
part. he said:
THE committee found that there was
no necessity of determining any pro-
portionate contribution between the
residents of the District of Columbia
and the residents of the United States
outside of the District of Columbia.
but did find that the responsibility of
the residents of the District should be
fixed definitely and absolutely. There
fore it was the finding. just as the
residents of New Orleans and just
the residents of New York and of Ros-
ton and of Cincinnati and other cities
do so the residents of the city of
Washington or of the District of Co
lumbia should return a fair and rea-
sonabIe amount in taxation, and that
that should be their contribution to
the government of this city and of this
District, and that with that contribu-
ton their responsibility should end.
Il do not know that the language in
the bill is most ha ppily chosen with re-
gard to the finding of the joint select
committee, since the finding in effect
was this, that the residents of Wash
ington should pay reasonab BILE amount
of taxes into the Urea sury of the
United States, that this entire amount
should remain in the Urea sury of the
United States as credit to special
District fund, and that this fund should
be used for the maintenance of the gov
eminent in the District of Columbia and
for no other purpose.
with that idea in mind, 1t followed
that there was suggested a definite and
fixed responsibility and that in so far
as the residents of this District were
concerned there could be no greater APP
portionment of municipal expense
against them. Their responsibility was
fixed. was definite and was certain That
was in the minds of the committee, be-
cause the committee not alone found
it impossible to determine any positive
proportion, but under their thought it
was unnecessary, as is stated in the
language of the report:
In seeking to apportion benefits re-
sulting to the general government and
to the citizens and residents of the
District of Columbia it is manifest that
no line or rule of distinction can be
found.
1.-The expenditures of the District of
Columbia are for police and fire pro-
lection, education. sanitation and
health, charities, correction and re-
form, the care of the insane and the
poor, and in each and every one of
these specific items of EXPENSE both the