Iron County news. [volume] (Hurley, Wis.) 1913-1950, 1924-08-09
How About The
Gasoline Tax?
F. A. Cannon Discusses One of the
Big Issues of the Coming
Primary Campaign
BY F. A. CANNON
Executive Secretary, Good Roads
Association of Wisconsin.

Article /
The gasoline tax question has
gotter into the political camgaign.
As usual when a public question gets
into politics, confusion follows.
Statements are made pro and con
until the public is at loss to know
who is right and who is wrong. For
this reason | propose to discuss the
gasoline tax in a series of articles
and to quote from the records. The
people are interested and want to
know the facts.
When the legislature met the Joint
highway committee of both houses
drafted and had introduced a bill
providing for a gasoline tax of
cents a gallon. 1t was for all
practical purposes the same as the
bin later vetoed by the governor with
the exception of the matter of dis
tribution. 1t provided for distribut-
ing the proceeds of the tax among
the several counties Sin the proper
ton that the mileage of rural high
ways, not a part of the state trunk
highway system, in each county
bears to the total mileage of rural
highways not a part Of the state
trunk highway system in all coun-
ties This bill was overwhelmingly
beaten in the senate, not because of
opposition to the gasoline tax, but
because of the distribution of the
funds provided.
The committee thereupon drafted
new gasoline tax bill, which was
the same as the previous bill, with
the exception of the distribution.
Under this bill it was provided that
one-quarter of the gasoline fund
should be returned to the counties
on the basis of their contribution to
be used for highway construction
and maintenance. This would be in
addition to returning 25R of the
motor license fees. The balance of
the gasoline tax funds would, with
the automobile license fees, be
utilized to provide $168, 900 for the
overhead of the highway department,
$2,200,000 to meet federal aid,
s785, 600 for state aid, $125,00 for
the special bridge fund, $4,000 for
roads in and to state parks, $4,000
for material surveys, and not less
than $500 or more than S450 a mile
for the maintenance of the 10000
mile state trunk highway system.
This would mean from $780, 900
the minimum, to $4.500,000 the
maximum.
The theory of this bin was to
lump the automobile licenses and the
gasoline tax into one fund and
return one-quarter Of it Immediately
to the counties and use the balance
to meet state aid for the counties. to
meet federal aid for moneys to be
spent in the counties on federal aid
roads, and to provide state trunk
highway maintenance for funds to be
spent for state trunk highways in the
counties.
There was nothing whatsoever in
this law that gave the state highway
commission the power to distribute
this fund as they saw fit Every
cent Of it was to be distributed as
the law directed and would have been
50 distributed, with this exception;
One half Of the federal funds were
allotted to the counties and the other
half to the state trunk highway
fund, the latter to be used by the
state yartment in filling up the
gaps on important state trunk high
ways. ] want here and now to say
that the statement that the gasoline
tax under this bin was to be dis
tributed as the state highway depart
ment directed was wholly groundless
Next Article-"The veto Of the
Gasoline Tax Bill and the Reasons. "
Advertising Pays; try the News