Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-10-05
BUDGET BUREAU TAKES POWER
COMMISSIONERS ONCE HELD

written into it. This gave an advantage
at the outset to the House. which was
opposed to increasing the Federal con-
tribution, and placed the local munich
pal officials at a corresponding dis
advantage, because the budget law
binding on the Commissioners as much
as on Federal bureau chiefS-declares
that no official shall request an esti-
mate or an increase of an amount ex-
cept at the request of the committees
in Congress. Thus, the hands of the
Commissioners were tied. unless the
members of the committees in Congress
called on them for an expression Of
opinion as to the adequacy Of the Fed
eral contribution,
Controls Local Taxes.
With the exception, therefore Of the
first few years of the budget system,
when the 60-40 plan was still in opera
ton. the Budget Bureau, in fixing the
total amount to be recommended for
the municipality, has in reality been de-
terminng only how much and for what
purposes the money of District tax
payers should be spent, because regard
less of the total arrived at, the Federal
share did not vary until this year.
While Congress is not bound TO fol-
Bureau, but exercises independent judg-
ment on the figures finally enacted into
law, nevertheless when an issue de-
velops in the House or Senate over a
particular item of appropriation, the
group which has the Budget Bureaus
stamp of approval on its side Of the
argument has a distinct advantage to
start with, even though 1t may not al
ways win.
If the Federal share in District ex-
penses had continued to change each
year in proportion to the total amount
appropriated, 1t Is conceivable that the
Budget Bureau would have had an in
terest in fixing the total to be recon-
mended for the District, in order to
have some control over the Federal
Governments liability. But even under
that set of circumstances the fixing of
a total by the Budget Bureau would
answer the purpose OF ascertaining
Uncle Sans probable expenditure, with
out having the Federal budget officials
review the action of the Commissioners
on all the details of the municipal de-
partments
Can Dictate Policy.
But with only one slight variation
in the Federal contribution during the
last seven fiscal years, and that one in
crease originating after the bill reached
the Senate, the Budget Bureaus super
vision has resolved itself largely into
review of the judgment of the Commits
sioners on the method of expanding
local tax money.
For example, the Budget Bureau last
December inserted in the local budget
a number of school building and ground
items aggregating S675,000, which were
not in the regular school estimates as
transmitted by the Commissioners. The
bureaus object in doing this was to
hasten the elimination of Objectionable
portable school structures. Judged as
to its merits, this was a desirable step
and one which taxpayers generally
would be likely to approve, for no one
wants to see the inadequate portables
retained any longer than necessary. At
the same time, it illustrates how the
placing of District finances under the
Budget Bureau transfers the molding
of municipal policies from municipal
authorities to a Federal agency. Under
previous school building policy, eight