Evening star., 1925-05-13
Petition Citizens joint Committee Fiscal Relations Between United States and
reservations Principle By onudP Of

Petition to Congress, urging rejection
of III. r. 473, which substitutes lump
sum payment by Nation for Capita
upbuilding in lieu of definite proper
ti0naae contribution payment, a.
Is' gsofsssd .sssa by ne" organic act Of Jun'
To the Congress of the United
States:
Your petitioners, the Citizens john
Com uittee on Fiscal Relations be
tween the United States and the Dis
trict Nf Columbia and the presidents
of its constituent organizations re-
spectfuNy represent:
The Citizens Joint Committee or
Fiscal Relations between the United
States and District of Columbia, or
ganiZed in h915, is now composed OF
authorized, representative of the
Board of Trade, Chamber of Com
merce, Mercha nts and Manufacturers
Association, Federation of Citizens
Associations, Committee of One Hun
dred. Builders and Manufacturers
Exchange, Bar Association, Columbia
Heights Cftizen,'' Association, North
east Citizens Association, Georgetown
Citizens Association, the City Club
the District of Columbia Bankers AS
sociation, the Real Estate Board, the
Rotary Club, the Kiwanis Club, the
Civitan Club and the Cosmopolitan
Club.
The platform OF principles laid
down by the joint committee and ad
hered to in the committees brief in
the hearings before the joint select
committee in 1915, the House District
committee in Decen sber, 1919, and the
Senate appropriations committee in
April, 1920, is as follows:
We contend: First, that the United
States should contribute largely to
the expenses of the District. Second
that this contribution should be a
fixed and definite proportion. Third
that this proportion should be at
least one-haf.
This platform was modified by the
Districts new organic act Of 1922
which reaffirnned the principle of def
mite proportidnate contribution by
local community and Nation toward
Capital upbuildAng, but changed the
$3.50 ratio to 6V-40, imposing the SO
per cent burden upon the local tax
payers.
The committees platform Of prin
ciples. thus modified, was announced
by the executive committee of the
1923, as follows:
We contend: First, that the United
States should contribute largely to
the maintenance and upbuilding OF
the National Capital. Second. that
this contribution should be fixed
and definite proportion. Third, that
this proportion should be 6040, 60 by
the District taxpayers and 40 by the
United States.
H r. bill 473 provides "that on and
after July 1, 1924, the Government of
the United States shall not bear any
fixed proportion of tive expenses of
the District of Columbia, but shall
pay the sum of $4,000, 600 annually to-
ward defraying such expenses of the
District as may be appropriated for
by law" This bill thus destroys ut
terly the definite proportionate re-
lated plan of Capital contribution. to
protect which practically all of organ
lied Washington has united in the
Citizens Joint Committee.
This bill H. r. 473) should be re.
jected for the following reasons:
1. 1t destroys the definite proper
tionate contribution system, under
the benefcent operation of which the
National Capital has wonderfully de-
veloped, and which, after seven years
of exhaustive investigation and pro-
longed discussion, has been vindi-
Gated by retention in the 1922 law.
X X
2. 1t destroys the unrepresented
Capitals safeguard az ainst excessive
and unjust taxation. The compro
mise law of 1922 coupled with the
| imposition of new and heavier ta1
burdens upon the Capital the yitally
| important .offsetting benefit of re
| tention Of the principle of definite
proportionate contribution, the Dis
trict's safeguard against excessive
and unjust taxation by taxing body
in which it is not represented. This
bill deprives the District of the only
feature of the compromise law OF
1922, which is clearly advantageous tc
the people of the Capital.
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 con
tribution exacted in taxes from the
Capital community, and does not
leave this standard to the shiftings
| of caprice.
From 1900 to 1874-8 the nationa
and local Capital contributions were
| indefinite and unrelated. Each con
tributed what it pleased toward Cap
| ital upbuilding. The Nation meas
ured it's own obligations in terms OF
dollars as next to nothing. The local
community raised and disbursed its
own taxes at its pleasure. 1t meas
ured it's Capital obligation consider
ably beyond the limits Of its meager
taxable resources, and twice became
practically bankrupt in performing
almost unaided the Nations task OF
Capital building.
In 1878 the Nation confessed its
violation or gross neglect of its
Capital obligation. 1t gave practical
expression to it's revived sense OF
this obligation in its undertaking tc
| pay one-half the accumulated funded
| Indebtedness Of the District and one
half of future expenses. It took
from the District the power OF self
taxation and assumed completely ex
ercise of the right to fix the local
contribution as well as it's own. In
thus exercising taxation without
representation over the District the
| Nation safeguarded the national COM
munity by the pledge that to every
dollar collected in taxes from the
|