Atlanta tri-weekly journal. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1920-19??, 1921-01-29
A Government Run on Smoke
BY Frederic j. Haskin
AsH1NGToN, D. c., Jan. 24.-Tae
smokers or the United states alone

| "
| w smokers Of the United States alone
by the taxes they pay through the in
ternal revenue department on cigars and to-
bacco, more than -upOrt the civil government
of this country, including all its public works,
such as improving rivers and harbor, reclaim
ing lands, building roads and the like. For
the average annual cost Of all these govern
mental activities for the last ten years was
considerably less than the internal revenue
tax on cigars and tobacco yielded in 1920.
| This int eresting fact is brought out by DR..
E. B. Rosa, of the bureau of :andards, who
has set himself the important task of finding
out for the American people just how the
money they spend for federal taxes is used.
He recently set forth proof that out Of every
dollar spent by the federal government In
| 1920, SO cents was spent to pay for past wars
| or to prepare for the wars of the future, and
only cents for all civil activities. He has
now elaborated his study, setting forth many
| facts which illuminate the current vague and
voluminous discussion of governmental ex-
travagance like searchlights in fog.
| Not a Criticism
| DR.. Rosa specifically disavows a critical at
titude toward any group of governmental ex-
penditures He does not pretend to discuss
whether it is necessary to spend more than
nine-tenths of all our federal money past
and future wars. But he bel1eves that the
taxpayer should have the facts about how
this money is used. And he points out that
not only the taxpayer, but journalists and
| legislators appear to be lamentably ignorant
of these facts. Daily we hear and read much
about the growth of government expense. We
are daily told that government expenses are
increasing. Clerk hire, the pay of govern
ment scientists, the cost of maintaining bu-
reaus are always mentioned as chief among
| the creatures which devour our taxes We are
| told that in these bureaus there Is much du-
| plication, waste and red tape. Every admin
istration comes in with promises of retrench-
fS nd Whi Nh will he h
| lie money by cutting down the appropria-
| lions for government bureaus, and this seems
| generally to refer to the civil government
primarily Army, navy and pensions are sell
| dom mentioned.
| DR.. Rosa sets out to show Just how much
this civil government costs His method has
been to analyZe the cost of civil government
| for ten years, disregarding war costs. By do
ing this, he succeeds in showing that the cost
of maintaining the civil government, includ-
ing all of it's scientific and engineering work,
has increased in actual dollars and cents
barely as fast as the population has increased,
and that this increase takes no account of
the falling value of the said dollars and cents.
This is the important point: If you express
the cost of civil government in terms of &C
tual commodities instead of dollars, far from
increasing, it has decreased more than so per
cent. That is, the purely civil activities Of
the government cost, in bushels of wheat, for
instance, more than SO per cect less in 1920
than they did in 1910 AS result, during
that period much of this civil governmental
activity has become far less efficient. Sal
aries have become so low, as the cost of liv-
ing has risen, that the bureaus cannot hold
their employees, especially their scientific
men. The labor turnover is rapid. 1t would
ruin any private enterprise. 1t means that
nearly all of the civil bureaus are under
manned and that nearly all or them are be-
coming merely training Schools which men
rapidly desert for more remuneratfve places
Cost of Government Lower
Thus the figures amply refute the charge
that the cost of civil government has greatly
increased On the contrary, it has greatly
decreased. Our increased tax burdens are
made necessary by the burdens which the
war visited upon us, and by the greatly in
creased army and navy which we are now
maintaining. If civil government were COM
pletely abolished it would have we'd you but
per cent on your federal taxes in 1920, and
if all scientific and engineering work had
been suspended it would have saved you but
per cent. Disarmament is the only thing
that would cut federal taxes heavily.
DR.. Rosa further shows that the expenses
of government, as usually set forth, are not
accurate because they fail to show the earn
ings of the government. The land office, the
reclamation service, the bureau of naviga-
ton, the forest service and the postoffice all
have receipts as we'll as disbursements. But
in summarizing th3 expenses of government,
it is usual merely to add up the total appro-
priations for the various bureaus. Thus in
pre-war days we used to be scandalized by
the term "a bilion-dollar congress-" But as
matter of fact, the net cost of the govern
ment to the federal taxpayers before the war
was never as much as seven hundred millions
in year.
DR.. Rosa concludes his argument with a
plea for the support of the scientific and
engineering work of the government. In this
part of his argument he probably comes clos
est to the real question at issue. That queS-
ton is: What are the legitimate and neces-
sary activities of the federal government?
Whether certain bureaus are expanding or
contracting, it is certainly true that the &C
tivities of the federal government as WHOLE
ever since it's establishment, have been stead
ilv dwindled The percentage or the popula-
ton which works for the federal government
steadily grows In word, the United States
is said to be turning into bureaucracy, say
the critics OF this expansion. For example,
Senator Thomas, of Colorado, recently at
tracted attention by a speech in the senate In
which he convincingly pointed out this ten
dency. And these critics further point out
that bureaucracy is not democracy. 1t is op-
posed to the principles for which this govern
ment is supposed to stand. And the dangers
of it have been strikingly illustrated by sew
eral European countries, notably France.
In word, the many publicists who attack
the activities of tho federal government are
probably motivated at bottom by this feeling
that the government is degenerating into
bureaucracy, and by a desire to check this
degeneration. DR.. Rosas analysis suggests
that this attack has been somewhat lndts-
criminate. The tendency has been to attack
federal expansion as a whole, or, more often,
to attack it where the interests of the at
aO@