Evening star., 1932-01-08
Evasion of the Fixed Ratio Law.

The injustice Of evading the fixed
ratio provisions of substantive law by
methods initiated in the House and
forced through the Senate by the ne
cessities Of expediency is doubly appar-
ent wlgen one studies the process OF
such evasion. For, as set forth in the
concluding article today Of The Stars
series on the history of fiscal relations,
such a process is founded not only upon
q rule set up by the House for its own
guidance, but by an Interpretation Of
the application Of that rule. Legisla-
ton on an appropriation bill, by the
so-called Holman rule, is In order when
its purpose is to reduce the expenditure
under the bill. But as the expenditures
under the District appropriation bill
have been increasing steadily from year
to wear, the Holman rule means, as here
applied. that the legislative rider Is In
order when it reduces the Federal ex-
penditure. even though such reduction
is more than Offset by the increase In
the total Of the bill.
No such Interpretation OF rule can
be justified on any equitable or reason
able grounds, especially when one taxes
into consideration the fact that the sp-
nropriations are for the Capital OF the
United States and that, under conu-
tions existing when the rule has peen
applied, the purpose has been 10 repuol-
ate the controlling partners terms Oh
g. bargain. all of which are written by
this controlling partner.
Nor was the resort to the Holman rule
the natural method OF reYoklng SUCH
terms. In q Congress that DIVIDES us
legislative powers between two Houses
the act of repeal should follow the same
processes that led to original enactmehI
OF statute. 1t is significans that "
WIS only when the natural processes OF
formal, legislative repeal met oelesI
because of resistance by the Senate that
the fixed ratio provisions were tempo
rarily but annually annulled by means
Of applying q contestable Interpretation
Of a contestable parliamentary rule.
Today the House is again putting the
cart before the horse. 1t Is again az
tempting to repeal, by formal legislative
action. q statute that has already been
svsded and which, under the plans
recommended to the House, would be
more fsgrantly violated than ever be-
fore, regardless Of how formal repeal
will fare.
To those members Of Congress VINO
believe the Federal Government tnat
established, planned and exclusively
controls the Federal City Is in any de-
gree financially responsible for its up
keep and should in some degree state
those responsibilities in terms that Will
prevent the injustice and evil conse-
quences OF vacillation and caprice In
appropriating Federal funds and In
taxing the unrepresented citizens OF
this community, attention is invited to
the carefully selected language OF the
Mapes bill to repeal the flxed propor-
tionate system.
" such expenses Of the Dis
trict Of Columbia as Congress may ap-
propriate for shall be paid out OF the
revenues Of the District Of Columbia,
except that the United States shall
make such contributions toward defrsy-
ing such expenses as may be provided
IN the acts making appropriations
therefor"
There is comfort, of course, in the
assurance that Congress shall" pay
what 1t may" appropriate.