South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1922-12-06
TAX ON GASOLINE

IA Wv OdCOLI4hE
There Is under way in this state at this time
web defined movement, led by the governor OF the
state the session OF the legislature
Law ievyins a tax gasoline.
Unless this proposal meets the concerted condem-
which so justly deserves from every citizen
OF tho state unless the members OF the legislature
and the governor brought realize that this is
time, not for new methods OF taxation but for
r!gid economy It IS quite possible that the 1923
legislature OF Indiana offset really beneficial
legislation by the greatest betrayal Of trust Of
generation.
This proposal for new taxes IS OF the most
insbdaous schemes that has ever been attempted TO
he foisted uron trusting democratic people. It
has not single recon endaton for adoption other
than viii tap a fruitful Of revenue and
is a pet proposal Of the states executive. Certainly
party measure, cannot command party
support. and Republicans and Democrats alike
should not countenance the possibility Of putting
such a law on Indiana statute books.
While It has so little 10 recommend #. there
many vital reasons why 1t should not be allowed
TO become law. In the first place it makes
srecious and treacherous appeal as class legisla-
ton. on the face Of it the Law would but impose a
tax on owners Of gasoline vehicles. automobiles
trucks tractors etc. As a matter Of fact such tax
would be the entire state just surely and
certainly as IL It the form Of increase in
the general levy OF the state, and, SUCH would
be paid fer in higher prices for necessities OF hfe
The automobile IS no longer IN the luxury class,
and a tax on gasoline cannot be justified luxury
tax. The automobile IS now essential unit OF the
transportation system OF the state and nation and
it has been a most important factor in low s-tng
transportation costs. particularly in instances of
short hauls Any further this means of trans
portation will just surely increase costs Of neces
stiles OF life a tax railroads
Take for instance. the manner in which the auto
mobile truck and tractor have revolutionized the
character Of agriculture. The proposed law would
unquest onabiy hit farmers class hardest. Does
1t need TO be shown more clearly that such tax
could have but resuIt-the direct increase in
cost Of food? or would It be expected that the
farmer should accept this additional tax per-
sonaI burden on him. and not 20 be added TO his
costs OF producing and marketing his crops?
II the proposal were to levy direct on bread.
milk. meat coal clothing the indignant protests
OF the people OF the state would quickly halt any
sEch movement and your representatives and your
governor well know this. Yet there is the demand
from them FOR a levy which Is an indirect tax
these same essentials For what difference is there
between levying a tax directly necessities and
on something which viii inevitably increase the
cost of these necessities?
Accept this principle of taxation and it will be
hut short step TO tax food, fuel clothing, etc.
directly the principle has been conceded in
directly 10 is only proper assumption 10 DeHeNe
that IL Is right Certainly these commodities n
fruitful OF taxation revenue. and that seems
20 be the main point your lawmakers and your gov
ernor have in mind.
Accept this principle and you put premium on
reckless and extravagant expenditure of your
sources and reckless and extravaganza expenditure
Is just as vicious in government it is in private
life
What We need now is not sources CT taxation.
but new methods Of economy 10 reduce tho present
burden OF taxation The executive and the law
makers OF this state It is likewise true Of the
nation would be contributing a far greater service
70 the people they represent If they devoted more
time 20 seeking methods Of curtailing expenses
rather than ending sources OF revenue to meet in
creased expenses This is the logical and only
edy IN te present case IL taxation in
suHc.ent 90 meet present expenditures.