The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1923-10-09
CONGRESS
To HEAR
PLAN
Proponents of Bill Claim 1t
Would Raise Fund to Pay
Veterans in Cash.
BY WILLIAM HARD.

painless method of paying the
bonus is today buzzing its way
around in bonus circles and tariff
circles. 1t will be presented to
the next Congress in a bill as
follows:
"Take the tariff off sugar.
Replace it with a sales tax on
sugar. Let. the tax be exactly
what the present tariff is. De-
vote the proceeds of the tax to
paying the bonus. Result:
"The price of sugar will not
be raised, and an absolutely ade-
quate bonus fund will be secured"
Results from Probes.
This scheme has grown out of a
contemplation OF the present in
Quiries conducted into the subject of
sugar and into the subject of sugar
beets by the Tariff Commission.
The commission presently will hold
public hearings in these matters. 1t
soon thereafter will make report
on them to the President. This re-
port win contain data and conclu
sions on which the President may
revise the sugar tariff under the
''flexibility" clause of the present
tariff law.
Many sugar beet growers have
been complaining that they do not
get much benefit from the present
sugar tariff They claim that al
most all of the benefit goes to the
beet sugar refiners.
Consumer Bears Burden.
Meanwhile the price to the con.
sumner, it is claimed, is raised by the
full margin of the whole sugar tariff
which is 1920 per 100 pounds on
sugar in general and $1.76 per 100
pounds on sugar from Cuba.
The Cuban producers, who now in
considerable part are United States
Americans, want to get the sugar
tariff taken off. and so do the Allan
tic coast cane sugar refiners. So do
various progressive elements in
Congress-. The influences toward
free sugar are strong.
This situation has opened up a
entieing prospect to a
combination of tariff reformers and
bonus promoters They propose
now to step forward with their little
bill for which they claim the follow
ing merit:
$2O0, OOo, 900 Yearly.
II will raise approximately $780,
900 900 a year without adding one
cent to the cost Of living Of the
American consumer.
They reach this view by the fol-
lowing steps:
We now consume in the United
States (roughly and approximately
1900. O0O,O 900 pounds Of sugar a
year.
A large part Of this sugar, being
produced in Hawaii and Porto Rico
and the Philippine Islands and III
Louisiana and certain Northern and
Western beet sugar States, pays no
tariff duty; but it all arrives at the
table OF the ultimate consumer with
the tariff duty added to it's price.
The total price burden therefore
which is laid upon the American
sugar consumer by the sugar tariff
II 1900, 900 pounds of sugar
multiplied by something somewhere
in between $176 and S2.2O per
100 pounds. Call it, however, only
s1.76.
It then works out at $1s3, 500 900
o year.
Would Pay Cash Bonus.
Very well them Instead of plac-
ing an incoming tariff duty on part
Of the sugar used in the United
States. just simply place a sales
tax Of LIS cents a pound on all
Of the sugar used in the United
States; and you raise $193, 500, 900
O year for the United States Treas
ury and for the bonus, and the
price burden on, the ultimate con.
sumner remains altogether |unraised
and unincreased-
Twenty years of this tax, with
the increase of population and with
the increase OF sugar consump-
ton, would produce an amount of
money amply sufficient for all an
nual interest payments and sink
Ing fund payments on all United
States bonus bonds necessary for
paying a full cash bonus
So argue the proponents of the
scheme and they ask who the
people are who would be hurt by it.
Have No Votes.
They admit that the sugar growers
Of Porto Rico and Hawaii and the
Philippines might think themselves
hurt; but the hard.hearted response
IL that the Porto Ricans and Ha-
waiians and ,Filipinos have no votes
at Washington.
They admit that the cane sugar
growers Of Louisiana might feel
themselves hurt by being deprived
OF protection; but the ironic re-
spouse is that those growers are
Democrats and ought not to want
protection.
1t Is again admitted that the
beet sugar farmers in Utah might
complain; but IL is pointed out that
they often now complain that thew
do not get the benefit of the tariff
anyway.
Chance for SmOot.
It IL finally admitted that Sena.
tor Reed Smoot of Utah might Wig
orously and inflaentiaIly complain:
but 1t IL pointed out that Senator
smoot IL passionately devoted to
the sales tax and that here ia a
chance for him to get it on at Least
one commodity.
Thus disposing of all COMPLAIN.
ants. the friends of the scheme arc
dwelling on what they regard as