Evening star., 1924-05-29
Give Us a Full Inquiry I!

The Senate having voted to adopt
the committee amendment to the
District bill making the appropria
1ion of federal funds stand at
$l4 900 900, or in lieu thereof 40 per
gent of the sums named in the bill.
1t is to he accepted that the measure
will go to conference in that form In
conference this clause will be the
major subject of discussion. Its exact
meaning. which is not altogether
clear, will he in debate The House
proposed lump sum of $1,000 900,
which the Senate has increased TO
$l4,000000. which is more than the
10 per cent of the ratio established
in 1922. The Senate proposal is both
lump sum and fixed ratio. con
nary 10 the hopes and expectations
OF the District, which looked for
defnit" return to the ratio plan
When the ratio was written into
the bill by the House appropriations
committee ii was thought and believed
That there would be no controversy
over the matter this wear When by
appeal to the Su-called Holman rule
of the House the lump-sum plan was
advanced as a means of reducing the
amount of the federal appropriation
ii WAS adopted. hastily and by ii mere
handful of members. No Legislative
committee had acted upon it, No
hearing had been held on the sub
ject. No inquiry had been made
into the amount and sufficiency of the
local taxes. The District. voteless and
helpless. was "railrOaded" into an as
sured increase of taxation. The Sen.
ate has compromised the matter by
adopting the strange provision of
both lump-sum and ratio. Nobody
knows just what it entails.
In these circumstances it would
seem To he only proper for the con
ference to agree upon provision
which is definite and equitable Let
there be adopted in lieu of both House
and Senate enactments fixed ratio
contribution by the United States, at
40 per cent. in accordance with the
agreement of 1922, together with pro-
vision for IA joint committee Of in
quiry, which will have the power to
sit in recess and Seek. by a thorough
inquiry into the Districts tax burden
and resources and its needs and the
equities of government contribution.
t" arrive al such d proportion of fed
eral funds as will meet the require
mentS of fiscal Justice.
Much misinformation prevails re-
garding the Districts tax burden.
Critics of the District point to GER
tain figures as proof that the average
local taxpayer is escaping a fair share
of the cost of community mainte-
nance. Other figures. which are
susceptible of complete demonstration.
indicate that the average Washing
tnnian is as heavily taxed today as
is the average of any other American
municipality of comparative size
Whenever this matter has been re-
ferred by Congress to a commission
Of inquiry the District has been en-
ahled to demonstrate that it is not
undertaXed. 1t is only when the mat
ter is discussed in the course OF lesis- |
lative sessions, when there is no time
for the preparation of full showing
of defensive material. that the Dis
trirt is made to appear in the light of
tax-dodger. If this question were
referred once more to a joint COM
mittee there would be a chance for
the District to show it's books. to
point to the comparisons and to clear
itself of the charge that it is profiting
from federal contributions in excess
of equity.
Congress is the legisla ture OF the
District. 1t contains no direct repre-
sentative of the taxed community. 1t
is presumably as much the repre-
sentative of Washington az of the
United States. Will it not now act
thus as the defender of the local
rights and give to this matter the
full, careful and exhaustive considera-
ton which is required?
------------sA&$<--