Evening star., 1919-04-06
FEDERAL HIGHWAY
DISPUTE SETTLED
ConstitutionaIity and Other
Questions Are Definitely
Decided.
NOW A SETTLED POLICY

1915. approved the federal aid road
act and a consequent federal appro-
priation of 3s5.eoO,0 ,0oo." says Presi-
dent David Jameson Of the American
Automobile Association. 1.-The long
controversy over the constitutionality
OF federal highway appropriations,
for all practical purposes. was set
tied. Congress again. in the closing
days of the recent session. by an
other appropriation of $2os,0oo.oo0.
emphasized the laying away Of this
question Of constitutional powers
Its further discussion must, therefore.
be clased as academic.
Estates Rights Buried.
When forty-eight states assented
through their legislatures to the fed
eraI highway measure they buried
that further disturber known as
states rights SO far as it had any
bearing upon federal participation in
Highway improvement. Any national
highway act the benefits of which
may be had only when the state leg
islature Assents to the federal meas
tre successfully meets any conten-
tion that the federal government is
|
Pork barrel can only be applied
to a federal highway measure when
the federal funds are So expended as
to produces inadequate or inequitable
results. The building Of an important
Highway in an appropriate manner
through the medium Of federal ap-
preparations in these days of motor
travel and transportation can never
be termed as pork barrel expendi-
ture, for the benefits are so immediate
and far-reachihg as to be utterly in
customary pork barrel outlays. 1t is
necessary, therefore. merely to frame
the federal measure to insure building
the right roads and to build them
right to remove any taint of pork
barrel
Not Paternalis,n, But Duty. :.
Paternalism' is term loosely
used, but If it is to be regarded as
describing policy fundamentally un-
sound. 1t must be used to mean the
doing Of those things by the federal
government which the states and
selves. II under this definition a
purely local highway is to be built,
the federal government would be pa
ternalistic If 1T took upon itself this
purely local duty. If, on the other
hand. the federal government Under
eral counties or states ana recurring
4 type Of construction beyond the
means OF any single local unit, this
federal action would not be paternal-
istic, but would be merely a recog-
milton Of a duty which had become
national in character.
"Those who 'viAw with alarm see
IN the building of a system of federal
highways by the federal government
an unlimited invitation to states and
counties to make a raid on the ma
tionai Treasury and an indiscriminate te
scrampie to nave all highways in
ciuded N the federal system. These
ala rftiists also have visions Of states
and counties folding their arms, SO to
speak. and waiting Tor the federal
government to build their highways.
States Cannot Fold Arms.
These alarmist views take no ac-
count OF the fact that a national high.
way system would be based upon the
binSTayn ,.pps;Ss psF;aS%iss that only main
OF Importance and limited to a given
psfcentAge 6f the total mileage would
be Included in the federal system
They overlook the fact that the fed.
sraF MEASURE could call upon the
states e build an Equivalent mileage
OF secohdAry roads to form an auto.
matte check upon the demands fol
fedefal appropriations. They overlook
the further fact that with. a federal
! system probably not exceedins pei
cent OF tho total mileage the states
IN view of the enormous requireme emit
OF local tfAfnc,- could not adopt ans
policy Of folding arms and waitine
while they neglected the other sS Del
cent.
| Except for the amusement of thos.
who love to argue these question.
| pork barrel and 'paternalism' the,
may. be considered as laid on the
shelf. The federal government i.
! committed to appropriations for high
ways, the state governments are ir
accord with an active federal policy
the only question of real importanc,
relates to the Form in which the fed
erAl highNAy policy can most practi
cAlly benefit the nation.