The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1922-08-08
ROAD BUILDING WITHOUT BONDS

The Bennington Banner is quite
sure that a ten-milllOn dollar bond Is.
sue for roads would be a bad tling
for Vermont. Now that does not make
IT so simply because the Banner says
SO. There are other minds In the
state that take just the opposite view,
The Banner editor Is usually pro.
gressiye on general principles but he
Is far behind I'm his road policy. To
say that a bond issue would be iniu-
rious Is simply boyish and does not
show a clear perspective Of the fu.
ture. In the Banners own town
they built some permanent roads and
borrowed the money. II that policy
was good for Bennington 1t should be
good for the state.
Thirty millions Of dollars Is the
amount the Banner states that should
be raised without bonding. That Is
about eighty dollars for each person
in Vermont. Now will the Banner tell
the people just how this money is to
be raised.
This paper Is not so insistent for a
bond Issue, First it wants good roads.
The matter Of payment can be ar.
ranged in any way that will come the
easiest. VIII the Banner support q
proposition to spend thirty millions of
dollars for roads during the next
five years. Burlington Clipper.
No, the Banner will not support a
proposition TO spend thirty million
dollars for roads in five years. The
burden Is too heavy to Sconsider, in
view OF other necessary expenses.
What the Banner Will support Is a
proposition to spend thirty million
dollars In fifteen years, provided Che
money is all spent for road building
and not half OF 1t for interest, as
would be done under the proposals.
put forward by most Of the advocates
of bonding.
The Clipper and other advocates Of
bonding are undoubtedly sincere in
their proposal. but II seems to The
Banner that they do not Apply cor.
rect business principles to TIER own
plan. Should the state bond for
thirty millions, II would mea that
right away the state would begin pay
ing a million and a half eacsi year in
interest. We're the state bond issue
ten millions the interest charge would
be half a million dollars a year and
this would have to be paid before even
starting to retire the principal. Also
a ten million dollar bond issue would
build no more than $50 miles of
cement road and that is not enough
to fiji the most moderate demand.
The Banner may be boyish ard
weak In its perspective but it finds
others of supposedly sound mind who
agree with 1t that 1t is better to raise
what money we do raise for the par
pose OF building roads and NOT to pay
interest on bonds. TIE pan support
ed by the Clipper and other bond
advocates, if carried out, would re-
suit in paying fully one half Of the
money for interest.
The plan proposed by the Banner
CT spending two million dollars !
year 'cr fifteen years could te linanc-
ed by raising a hall million dollars
i year by a spec!,l tax on gasoline,
using another half million from the
present road funds (now being spent
for this purpose 20 :; would be 10
particular changel. and a million do
lars a year by direct tax.
Such a plan would require a tax Of
about three dollars per preson per
year for fifteen years. This would
be some considerable burden but not
half of what it would be If the money
were raised by bond issue.
1t might be possible to squeeze out
more than a hat million a year from
the present road funds, in which case
the direct tax would be less but it
would be enough to make the tax
paying public aware that it was en-
gagged in an important and expensive
work. Direct taxes have their use
as an educating force.
Another argument in favor Of the
plan proposed by the Banner is that
the state highway department could
supervise and manage the expendi-
ture of two million dollars a year for
cement road building, while to handle
ten millions or thirty millions at once
the department would have to be
largely increased, and, once enlarged
1t would be hard to ever get it down
again.