Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1921-07-21
DEMAND FOR LIMITATIONS
ON INCOME TAX EXPRESSED

go as we'll as the income of indus
tries. An income tax is beautiful IN
theory, I grant you. but in practical
administration, as tried by the fed
eral government, it contains Unequal
tiles and injustices that stagger the
ina gination."
j. N. Barnes spoke briefly against
the bill in behalf of the manufactur-
ing interests. He was followed by
DR.. Edgar H. Johnson, professor OF
political economy at Emory univer-
sity, who spoke for the bill. Tax
Commissioner Fullbright closed the
argument in favor of the bill.
II am here" said he, sin behalf OF
the taxpayers of Georgia. Your ad
valorem system is a demonstrated
failure for more reasons than my
time will allow me to enumerate. one
reason is that it takes all the rev.
enue from one source-real property;
1t taxes all the revenue from real
property without regard to what
that property is producing, while
other kinds Of property producing
many times as much as real property
farms in Georgia which last year did
not produce enough to pay the rem
tai of the troopers, and now they
are being ground to pay the taxes,
yet people in the cities with incomes
ranging from $4,000 to $4,000
year are paying no taxes at ALL De-
cause they own no property.
Government Eas Grown
your ad valorem system was ade-
uuate, perhaps, seventy-ffve years ago,
when the functions of the state were
confined to governmental functions.
Now the government is an organized
dispenser of education and charity in
many different forms. You are call
ed on for millions for the public
schools, millions for pensions, hun
dreds of thousands for higher educa-
ton, hundreds of thousands for ag-
ricu1tural education and experiment
tation, hundreds of thousands to edu-
cate and care for the blind, the deaf,
the insane and the feeble-minded,
hundreds of thousands to safeguard
the public health. Such functions
of government were not Imagined
seventy-five years ago"
Commissioner Fullbright present
ed arguments at length against
Limitation, in the constitution, upon
the rates of income taxes.
"You have tried the experiment OF
a limited state tax rate" said he,
land what has it produced? An ex-
hausted treasury piled up with debt.
You are now supporting, or trying TO
support, your government with an
ad valorem tax system. Your rate
of taxation on that basis is limited
to? 1t amounts to this, that your
legislature has no limit as to the
amount of money it may appropriate,
but your tax collecting authorities
are limited as to the amount OF
money they may collect to pay those
appropriations. Your appropriations
year after year have exceeded your
revenue, until now your treasury oe5
felt approaches 100000. A limited
tax rate has demonstrated conclusive
ly that it will not restrain the legls-
lature from making large appro-
priations.
ga Responsible Legislature"
This income tax bill would make
the legislature what it ought to be
"a responsible body. 1t is composed
of the peoples representatives elect
ed every two years. With an income
tax for state purposes, and all al
valorum taxes for state purposes
done away with, what would the peo-
pie have? They would have an ex.
act barometer from year TO year OF
the appropriations made by their
legislature. If they wanted better
schools, a better university and col
leges. better roads, better lnstltu-
tions for the afflicted, more lloeral
pensions, their legislature could pro-
point the people were willing to pay
for them. But if the people wanted
economy and retrenchment, general
cutting down of governmental eX-
penses, they could get it by the sim
pie process of electing legislature
committed to that policy. AS it is
now, your legislature appropriates
money world without end, knowing
that the revenue will not be suf-
ficient to pay them. and when your
tax commissioner tries to raise the
money by equalizing values under
the equalization law-which is the
only way to raise the money, so long
as your tax rate is limited-the peo-
pie visit their wrath upon the tax
commissioner and demand the repeal
of the tax equalization law, when
the ones they Should blame are the
members of the legislature.
you ought to write the income
tax amendment, if you write 1t at
all, on the theory that your leg1sla-
ture is a responsible body which can !
be trusted to govern your state. That
is the trouble now with the constitu-
tion of 1877, which my friend Mr..
Hall has lauded so highly IT. Is
too much like a code and too little
like a constitution. 1t is not elastic
enough to meet the states need from
one decade to another. much less
from generation to generation. If
you cannot trust the legislature,
composed of the peoples elected rep
resentatives, then you might as we'll
abandon representative government"