New Iberia enterprise and independent observer. (New Iberia, La.) 1902-1944, 1917-09-15
BROUSSARD LEAD FIGHT FOR
SUGAR

| OouSuIHptlOu CdAtS were tlluA'
mated from the bill by a larger
majority than anyone had antic-
/! ipated. This decided victory by
the opponents Of the consumption
tax. led by Senator Broussard,
puts an end for all time, it is be-
/ lieved, to the efforts to single out
| certain food products for taxa
ton. The manner in which Sen
ator Broussard maneuvered the
situation called forth much com
mandatory comment from sena-
tors and others who are familiar
with the technical parliamentary
tactics employed.
During the course Of the debate
lit seemed evident that the senti-
ment was strongest against plac-
ing a consumption tax on coffee.
With this in mind Senator Brous
| sard first called up his amendment
! to strike out the tax on coffee.
This was carried by vote Of SO
to 81. He then called up the
amendment to eliminate the tax
on molasses. By proposing to as
/ sess this tax on Louisiana molas-
ses and exclude other kinds of
! molasses, it had been shown to be
particularly discriminatory. This
led Senator Broussard to present
the molasses amendment next.
That he judged the temper of the
Senate Alright was proven when
the molasses tax was eliminated
by vote Of so to %.
The vote on these 'feelers"
was SO encouraging that Senator
Broussard grouped sugar, tea.
saccharine, glucose and cocoa in
one amendment and moved to
strike out the consumption tax
which the bill proposed to lesy
on these articles. Fifty-two SEN
atbrs voted to strike out the tax
on the articles mentioned, while
twenty-eight voted to retain thu
consumption tax.
Senator Broussard S proposal to
repeal the customs drawback was
l6s3 3essrwhelmhigl Only eleven
senator's supported this amend
ment. while sixty-nine voted
against it. Those voting with
Senator Broussard to eliminate
the drawback were Cummins
(Iowa), Gerry (Rhode Island),
Gronna North Dakota), Kirby
(Arkansas), La Toilette (Wiscon-
SIM, Poindexter (Washington),
Pomerene (Ohio), Ransdell Lou
Stone (Missouri) and
Williams (Mississippi). The i'm I
portance Of the drawback amend-
ment was greatly decreased by the
elimination Of the consumption
taxes.
"This settles with fnalitv."
Senator Broussard stated, after
the votes had been taken, the
matter Of placing an excise tax
ON sugar. which the refners have
been seeking so industriously to
do. In the future refiners will
cave the Louisiana planters alore. ]
believe. Our victory could be
no more complete or satisfactory.
f it ever becomes necessary to
place a tax on foodstuffs as they
20 into consumption, it will be
placed on~ wheat, corn, potatoes
md all other foods along with
,ugar and coffee. If this neces-
'ity should arise there will be no
objection from the Louisiana su-
yar industry, which objected to
his revenue. bill only because su.
yar was singled out from all other
lomestically produced food !
tufts. I"
The fact that the Senate voted 4
lown the drawback amendment /,
no way impairs its value to the 4
louisiana industry as 4 weapon
gainst any discrimination which /
nay be practiced by the reiners, /
'aul Christian. the Washington |
representative of the American {
Jane Growers Association. be-
ieves. The fact that the finance
ommittee' voted to repeal the
in addition to the fact
hat the leader Of each party in
he House is opposed to this re-
und at the customs houses will
lake it possible to bring up this
uestion again at the December
ession Of Congress, when it is adj
litted that q revision of the
ariff must be undertaken.
The Cane Growers Association
, SO impressed with the value Of
I