Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-06-18
FAIR PLAY ASKED
FOR DISTRICT BILL
Legal Phases of Lump-Sum
Appropriation Discussed
by Griffin.

FOrceful and authoritative preSenta-
ton Of equities involved in the fiscal re-
lations controversy which has brought
the District appropriation bill to dead
lock between the House and Senate con-
ferees over the 100000 lump sum
contribution by the Federal Government
was made In the House yesterday by
Representative Griffin, Democrat, of
New York, a former member of the
House subcommittee on District appro-
priations
Appealing for fair play" for the Dis
trict, emphasizing that insertion of the
lump sum item is multiplying an act of
Congress-" is IAN arrogant assertion of
a right despite the statute" and clumsy
guesswork," and emphasizing that no
hard and fast. memorable fixed sum can
accord exact justice either to the Fed
eral Government or to the District"
Representative Griffin said:
This is not question of whether
or not the 100000 Federal contribu-
ton should be raised. Neither is it one
that 1t should be lowered. 1t Is ques-
ton wholly of getting at the truth
fairly and squarely, without resentment.
without meretricious arguments that
have no bearing on the issue. Raising
the question of the small tax rate paid
by the citizens of the District is not
relevant A person would imagine from
the criticisms heard today that a low
tax rate for municipality is some
thing to condemn. think the District
ought to be complimented on having a
low rate Likewise, raising the question
as to the amount of money that the
Government pays for property that is
acquired and the injection of other
questions which show feeling and re-
sentiment against the people of the Dis
trict have nothing whatever to do with
the question,
I was on this subcommittee for sew
eral years. was on it until I got tired
OF 1t. What are the facts? And I speak
adv1sedly. I wrote a speech on the sub
1ect and called 1t the Magic Nine Mil
lion,' in which I went into all of the
financial complexities of the situation
What were they? First of all, I assure
gentlemen, that am not fighting for
an increase of the amount of the con-
trloutlon; am not saying that $9, 900. =
600 Is too large or that it is too small
Inc point want to accentuate is this
That the law, which is still on the
statute books, provides that the contri-
Dution shall be 40 per cent. The ratio
of 1880 is now the law. That law was
houted few years ago on the motion
OF the gentleman from Michigan (Mr.
Cramton), who was able to convince the
appropriation committee that $1,000 600
was enough"
Interrupted by Representative COL
ler, Democrat, of Mississippi. a
minority member of the subcommittee
on District appropriations, who argued
that the 100000 lump sum in an ap-
preparation bill made it Legislation
Just as much as any other BILL Mr.
Griffin replied:
1T is an arrogant assertion of a
right despite the statute. The gentle
man Is on the committee with me. and
he knows as well as do that the ap-
preparations committee has no right to
leg1slate, and that Is what they are
doing. They are, in effect, multiplying
an act Of Congress.
They have the right If the House
consents. I am concerned only with
the attitude of this House, and I do
not like the spirit of resentment and
anlmosity and unwillingness to 60 into
the facts.
THE real question is what ratio
should the Federal Government con-
tribute toward the government of the
District. 1t is evident that it ought 20
bear q reasonable proportion, CORE
spending to the amount of property
which the Federal Government owns In
the District. Nobody has ever succeeded
in fixing that definitely. We had the
Bureau of Efficiency working on it, and
the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr.
Simmons) worked on 1t. I worked on it.
and the gentleman from Mississippi
CMr. Collins) worked on 1t. There was
always more or less difference. Our
friend from Nebraska says that the con-
tribution ought to be less than $4,000
lie -
Place 1t at less than $4,000, 900 if that is
found to be proper. am not concerned
about 1t being more than $4,000, 900. but
place in on definite, scientific basis
which bears some ratio to the obliRa-
lions OF the Federal Government to the
District. I welcome the suggestion of
our friend from Virginia CMr. Moore
that commission be appointed to set
tie the question impartially, and not
leave 1t to the arrogant domination of a
few men in the House overwhelming us
with resentment and animosities when
ever the matter comes up for considera-
ton. It ought to be decided by such an
impartial commission, and the contribu-
ton ought TO bear some just proportion
between the obligations of the Federal
Government and those of the District
All am appealing for Is fair play.
1t ought to be obvious that no hard
and fast. inexorably' fixed sum-arro-
gantly set, year after year, at 5000, 900.
or any other sum-can accord exact
justice either to the Federal Govern
ment or to the District. To fix such a
lump sum as the annual contribution of
the Federal Observation-Disclosures the
Total appropriations for the District are
$28 GOO, 900 or $45, 900, COOS inequitable
In its face. 1t is nothing but clumsy
gueSSwork, which any self-respecting
legislative body ought to instantly
repIIdjafa