The New York herald., 1921-06-06
MONDAY. JUNE 6. 1921.
How Much Congress Didn't Save.

How Much Congress Didn't Save.
For the headache the New York
Trtbane is going to get trying to
prove that Congress has succeeded In
saving the mythical S1,474,00O,OOC
which II says was cut out of the esti'
mates of the Treasury by the appro-
priation bills actually passed for the
fiscal year 1921 we recommend little
brisk exercise in the refreshing at
mosphere Of frankness. The Tribune
attempts to dispute the statements IN
an editorial article in THE New YORK
HERALD. reprinted with approving re-
marks by the World. This newspaper
pointed out that for the present fiscal
year, ending with this month. the
Democratic Administration asked the
Republican Congress for S5,064,350,'
793, but the Republican Congress cut
this to $3,717,441, ,4s4, and the diner
ence OF S1,346, 100000 was acclaimed
as a saving. The Tribune says:
This indictment is based on erro-
neous figures. II the World and THE
NEW YORK HERALD would take the
trouble to consult the statement OF
appropriations for the fiscal year
1s20-21, contained in the Congress
sional Record OF June IA. 1920. they
would fnd that the estimates sub
mitted totalled s6.334. 900. 900. not
s5,os4. .ooo, 900. and that the appro-
priations totalled s4.S5s. 100000. not
ss.717.ooo.o 900.
Congress cut down the Wilson Ad-
ministration estimates s1.474. 900, goo.
II was working under a crushing
handicap. The 1s2O-21 appropriation
bills carried s4ss.o00.Ooo to meet
deficits for the fiscal year 1920 and
prior years. and s725.OOo.OOo to meet
in part the debt created by Federal
mlsmanagement of the railroads"
The Tribune apparently looked cas-
ually at the statistics 1t cites or II
would have seen that the SIPS, ,000. 900
for the railroads was not included In
the estimates at all. 1t was arbi-
trarily added to the total estimates:
otherwise, by this one item alone. the
alleged savings on the difference be-
tween appropriations and estimates
would have been cut in half.
But this is not the whole Of the
argument. The Tribune's own fig
ures and it's own words only increase
the force OF the indictment that Con-
gress did not actually make any saw.
ings by reducing appropriations. Our
neighbor included in its figures the
estimates for the railroad deficiencies,
for war hangovers, and for all sorts
of expenses in the fiscal year 1920.
BY doing this It was able to show cuts
in appropriations OF $1,474,000,000.
In our own figures the deficiencies,
the war hangovers and the miscella-
neous expenditures for 1920 were
omitted and only the net regular ap-
propriations we're shown, because we
were talking about squander in actual
running Of the Government. In these
figures the difference between appro-
priations and estimates was s1,346..
100000. There was, therefore. no ma.
terial difference between our figure
and that OF the Tribune.
But we did not call this a saving
for the good and sufficient reason that
II was not a saving. We could have
dragged in a vast array OF figures TO
show that Congress was putting
through lot of dead horse appropri-
ations, deficiencies and indefinite au-
thorizations to spend more money on
wild schemes inaugurated during the
war. But because we were talking
about new spendings. not old spedd.
ings. and because we were criticising
present waste, not past waste, we
stuck to the argument and subtracted
those other sums, giving Congress the
whole benefit OF the doubt And then
we did what the Tribune neglects TO
do, and which must be done in any
honest attempt to show the real status
OF the Government finances We gave
the figures OF Secretary of the Treas.
ury MELLON himself on the actual ex.
penditures for the fiscal year 1921.
These figures show that no matter
what the Democratic Secretary OF the
Treasury asked for last year, or what
Congress appropriated. the Govern.
ment during the current fiscal year
soon to close will spend $500. .024..
SCI. and II postal disbursements arc
counted in the total will be above
$4,000, 100000. This Is within 1894.
100000 OF the gross estimates ~
$6,334. 100000 (including the 1925.
100000 arbitrarily added for the rail
rorfs) which are cited by the Tribune
as horrible example of what the