Evening star., 1923-04-23
Let Us Have Fiscal Peace!

ACt Oo 4AdfC klSCdA SoSSs
1t is to be hoped that Representa-
live Cramton's proposition, made in
the last Congress, TO substitute lump
sum contribution by the nation toward
capital upbuilding in place Of it's pro-
portionate contribution on the 1880
basis, will not be revived in the next
Congress.
The effect Of its revival will be TO
reopen the fiscal relations peace set
alement of June 90. 1922, and to plunge
The House and Senate into the old
hurtful. hateful, wearisome wrangle
over the issue of definite or indefinite
sproportionate contributions toward
capital upbuilding, and over the ratio
t50-5o. or 60-40, or some other) of def
mite proportionate contribution.
The understanding when the act of
June 90, 1922, was agreed upon by
House and Senate construed that act
ss a compromise measure. disposing
for many years of these troublesome
fiscal relation issues. The Districts
con tribution toward capital upbuilding
was increased from so TO 90 per cent;
It's tax on intangible personally was
increased 66 2-3 per cent, and the
foundation was laid for increasing it's
realty tax; it was deprived of exclusive
credit. for large sums of miscellaneous
receipts hitherto solely enjoyed. this
action inf1ictinS d heavy loss. and it
was compelled to accumulate from its
d tax money Of present years (every cent
Of which was needed to meet the
urgent municipal needs of today a
fund of millions to provide in advance
for meeting the first half-year ex-
penses of 1928. In partial compensa-
tion for these drastic cXactions the
District was to enjoy for five years
specifically. and indefinitely thereafter,
The benefit of approximate certainty
as to its rates of proportionate con-
tribution: it was through increased
respect to be shown to the Commits
sioners' estimates to have in substance
the privilege of influential participa-
lion in shaping appropriations of
which it should pay so per cent, and
It was to be spared for long period
the hurtful deadlocks over ratios be-
tween House and Senate which an
nually endangered the District appro-
priations and undeservedly prejudiced
House sentiment against the capital
community.
The vital feature of the act Of 1922,
. carried over from the act OF 1878. is
that it fixes a definite equitable
standard of national participation in
capital making, related to the contri.
button exacted in taxes from the capi-
tai community, and does not leave this
standard to the shiftings of caprice.
In 1873. in taking from the District
the power of self.taxatiOn and i'm eIer-
cising the power of taxation without
representation over the District. the
nation safeguarded the capital COM
Inunfty by the pledge that to every
dollar collected in taxes from the local
taxpayers should be added dollar
from the national Treasury, and that
the aggregate revenue should be ex-
pended for capital upbuilding. This
provision protected the District from
excessive taxation by causing a tax.
gatherer, alien to the unrepresented
District. to appropriate from his own
treasury for the Districts benefit
Districts tax revenue. Every dollar
be took under the taxing power from
The local community increased corre-
spondingly his own capital contribu-
ti0n.
The law of 1922 retains the prin-
riple of definite related capital con-
,ti.ibutions in which the law of 1878
was rooted. That the ratio of this re-
IA tion was changed from $3.50 to 60-40
1does not alter the ba sic principle in
N7olved.
Tho Cramton proposition destroys
all relation between the national and
local contributions, and. leaving all
taxing power in the hands of the
United States, deprives the unrepre.
scented capital Of its safeguard against
excessive taxation by a taxing body
in which it is not represented.
Adoption of the Cramton plan would
,faobably deprive the District of the
nations proportionate contribution,
when the surplus. which the Treasury
authorities officially report 70 be in the
Treasury TO the Districts credit,
comes to be appropriated and expend-
ed for the Districts benefit.
This surplus was accumulated un-
der the half-and-half law, and is part
Of tax money collected to pay the
Districts half Of estimated capital ex-
penditures, but left by Congress un-
expended. Since the only authority to
collect this tax money was the law
applying the money to payment Of the
Districts half OF capital expenditures.
whenever it is actually appropriated
and used for the Districts benefit it
should equitably be expended with a
corresponding contribution Of a like
axmount from the Treasury in ac-
-cordance with the half-and.half law
under which it was collected, even II
fhe nations proportionate contribution
has in the meanwhile been changed.
But some influential and able leSisla-
tors think that law and equity will be
observed if the surplus is used as part
of the Districts proportionate contri-
button in accordance with the ratio
at the time of appropriation instead
ct the ratio at the time Of collection.
If this theory prevailed our surplus,
when appropriated under the 6o-40