Evening star., 1928-03-26

millions OF lump-sum payment in &C.
cordance with the original tentative
precedent. II the 60-40 ratio is not
applied to the whole appropriation and
| If the lump-sum payment Is not In
creased as suggested 1t Is generally
| recognized that every cent OF the Park
Commissions million dollars per year
| cor whatever part of this amount is
appropriately will come from the Dis
trict taxpayers.
Congress will not permit any tenta-
tive juggling with the ratio of National
and local community contribution to-
ward Capital development to throw
the whole burden OF Park Commission
| expenditure upon the local taxpayers.
I. The law specifically fOrbids this
procedure by directing division Of
the cost.
2. The project is broadly National.
patriotic interest In 1t to the extent
Of cent a year contribution Of every
man. woman and child In the Repub-
IiC Congress will detect the gross per-
version of law and equity which results
| I'm "a denial to IO9. SOC, 900 Americans Of
all participation i'm the patriotic priv
ilcgc of parks contribution and exacts
the entire 1I0,0O0,0OO pennies. repre-
Senting the whole Nation, from the
half million Americans lat more than
So annually per head of the District Of
Columbia.
,. The title TO all the land purchased
by the Park Commission is vested in
the United States. The Park Commits
sion can purchase land i'm djacent
the District. III the whole cost falls
Maryland and Virginia as well as In
upon local taxpayers, their tax money
will buy for Uncle Sam exclusive title
to land outside of the District in Mary
land and Virginia.
If there is to be a lump-sum pay
mcnt contribution for 1929. approx
imately 100000 should clearly be added
| to the basic nine million lump-Sum
F, payment.
There are several other National or
! semi National projects which, as n
result Of appropriations on the District
| bill TO finance them with an infieXiblC
| lump sum National contribution, have
been in effect paid for solely by Dis
| triCt taxpayers. Included in this list
arc the appropriation of the accumu
lated surplus of local taxes, without
| any corresponding contribution OF any
kind or amount from the National
| Treasury, and the appropriation solely
| from local taxes of the money TO COM
| plete the parkway connection between
| Potomac and Rock Creek Parks.
Exclude National Projects.
4. II the lump sum payment can
not he equitably increased to provide
for suitable National participation in
financing these National or semi-Na-
tiOnaI projects, then the appropriations
committee is asked to exercise its power
to exclude these appropriations from
the District bill, where their inclusion
results in obvious inequity, and to
finance them in some other supply bill,
where the sharing of the expense.
which the law or equity demands. can
be specifically provided.
5. And, finally, some action is asked
which will limit appropriations OF
District money by Congress (the Dis
trict's legislature. in which 1t is not
represented in the same way that Cap
ital expenditures of National tax money
are limited under the lump-Sum pay
ment plan. When the appropriations
Of local and National tax money for the
| Capital were by law and in practice in
definite percentage relation this limita-
ton automatically resulted. and this
check upon the appropriation of District
tax money unless accompanied by a
related expenditure of National tax
money was the main benefit derived by
the District from the definite proper
tionate contribution plan.
When for the latter plan. at the in
stance of the House appropriations COM
| mittee, the lump-Sum payment plan was
| tentatively substituted IL was suggested
| that loss OF this limitation upon Dis
trict expenditures and taxation would
be cured by permitting the District to
participate so effectively in the raising
and expenditure of its tax money that
1t could be extrayagant or economical,
as II pleased. But, in fact, the District
has no more to say about its taxation
and the expenditure of It's taxes I'M
der the lump-sum payment plan than
under that OF definite proportionate
contribution. And under the infiexi-
pie iump-Sum payment plan Congress
limits itself concerning expenditures
on the Nations city of tax money con-
tributed by the Nation, which It repre-
sents, but removes the limit upon the
raising and expenditure of the tax
| money by the District. which 1t does not
represent and 10 which II is not nc all
responsible. And as a result we have
appropriations from the District tax
money abnormally swelling to meet
| whole-cost expenditures on National and
| semi-National projects
To prevent obvious injustice Congress
should either (l) increase equitabIy the
basic lump sum payment, or (2l ex-
clude great National or semi National
projects from the District bill and
finance them on some other supply bill,
so wording the items thus excluded as
to set forth the exact method of financ-
Ing in relation 70 the amounts of con-
tributiOn by Nation and Capital that Is
thouRht to be just. or t3l provide for a
local as we'll as National maximum of
contribution. or tA by referendum or
otherwise permit the local taxpayers 10
have some effective say In regard 10 the
amount of local taxes and the mr.
poses for which the tax money IL to be
expended.
In appropriating and In legislating
our legislators are urged to recognize
by the wording Of the law. and in con-
STRUNG and applying IL, that since the
Nation is in exclusive control OF the
raising and spending Of all Capital rev.
enue, including the District tax money,
the United States is the primary and
the District only the incidental con-
tfloutor, and not vice versa. as the pres
ent lump-sum payment plan seems to
assume.
District Only Incidental Contributor
Protection was afforded the local tax
payer under the 1873 law not only by
| he provision that the Nation would con-
tribute 50 per cent of the total appro-
prlation but also by the assurance that
The local taxpayers would not be COM
PEELED TO contribute more than so per
cent OF the total So in the law OF 1929
The effect Of the statute was TO pledge
the local taxpayers that not more than
60 per cent Of the total tax would be
exacted from them When the mmp~
| sum payment plan was substituted ten
| tatively for the 60-40 ratio this pledge
was suspended, but Il was suggested that
an effective substitute for this pledge
WAS found I'm the declared datapc.t,at 49,,