Evening star., 1932-05-26
Weighing the Local Tax Burden
In Comparison of Municipal Tax Burdens Between
Washington and Other Cities, State Taxes Should
Be Eliminated as Non Conn parable Factor,
as D. c. Enjoys No State Benefits.

iIeges rs citizens Of State, it will be
time to charge against the Washing
tonian in comparison with the Balti-
MORGAN the State tax which the latter
pays, not as, Baltimorean, but Is .
Marylander. When Washington has
Senators, Representatives and = State
LEGISLATURE II will be time for II to nay
for such luxuries in the shape Of q
State tax.
OF course, the main consideration for
the payment Of State taxes Is the en-
joyment of the political power and
prestige involved in participation In
the National Government on equal
terms with other Americans. To be
transformed through statehood from
the status of political aliens to that of
full-fledged Americans, with all the
powers, rights and privileges apper-
tanning to that status, confers a bene-
fit upon the individual of a value not
to be calculated in dollars and cents
and deprivation of this benefit involves
a loss which is also incalculable.
Every one, therefore, will recognize
the justice of Washingtons protest
against being taxed to correspond to
what other cities pay to maintain a
State government, since the District
under the Constitution and the laws
enacted by Congress Is not permitted
the right, privilege and benefit of en-
Toying and maintaining State govern
ment. But very few persons in the
whole United States appreciate the
scope Of the material benefits in boun-
ties and subsidies which attach to
statehood of which Washingtonians are
wholly deprived. The Citizens Joint
Committee brief in 1915 recited the mil
lions which in the past had been dis
tributed by the Nation among the
States, onitting the District of Column
bia. But these subsidies by the Nation
to the States are not confined to the
past, but continue in vastly enlarged
proportions in the present.
Federal Aid to States.
A statement of expenditures made by
the Government as direct payments to
States under cooperative arrangements
during the fiscal year ended June 80,
1881 compiled by Treasury Depart
ment, follows:
|. Payments for State agricultural
experiment stations, $4.340,000.
2 Cooperative agricultural exten-
sion work, $8,650,290
g. Payments to States and Territories
from national forest fund, s1.677 $50.
4. Payments to school funds, Ari-
zona and New Mexico, national forest
fund $4l,316.
5. Forest fire cooperative. 1885, ,904.
6. Cooperative distribution of for
est-planting stock, $88,5l4.
7. Cooperative construction OF rural
post roads, S133 ,340,910.
g. Federal aid highway system ad-
vances to States emergency construc-
ton, s20,296,266.
g. Colleges for agriculture and me-
chanic arts, $2.550,000.
10. Payments to States from receipts
uncer mineral leasing act, $l,776,583.
II. Five, three and two per cent
funds to States 0ands), $25, ,448.
IL. Payments to States under special
funds $630,032.
13. State marine schools, 100000.
a. To promote the education of the
blind-American Printing House for
Blind, $4,000.
IS. National Guard, $34,570,2s2.
16. Cooperative vocational educa-
ton and ehabilitation, $8,7l4,33l.
II Payments to States under Fed
eral water power act. $l59l33.
18. State and territorial homes for
disabled soldiers and sailors, $3.50 ,999.
Total payments, s219, ,162,574.
This payment does not include ap-
propriations made by Congress for d.
rect relief or loans to States on account
of floods. hurricanes, fires. drought. etc.
Paid to and by U. S.
1t will be interesting to compare what
Washington pays into and receives from
the National Treasury with what is
i1or y,ayI tv,to
the National Treasury by some Of the
States.
The figures Of payments by the
States into the Federal Treasury are
obtained from the annual report of the
commissioner of internal revenue for
1881, wherein Is printed table giving
q summary of internal revenue receipts
for 1881 bv States, including the Dis
trict of Columbia.
This table gives the total internal
revenue receipts from the District In
1881 at sl4.684,85343
More Than Every One Of 27 States.
II comparison is made with the Fed
eral tax payment Of the District, S14,-
684, ,853.43, the Districts contribution
will be found to exceed those Of any one
OF II States and two Territories; ie..
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida.
Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana,
Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska,
Nevada, New Hampshire. New Mexico,
North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island,
South Carolina, South Dakota. Tennes-
see, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West
Virginia and Wyoming, 81 States, and
Alaska and Hawaii, two Territories.
More Than IL States Combined.
The Districts payment of fourteen
millions plus exceeds the combined pay
ment of II States, whose contributions
total $l3,752.56739 These States are
Arizona. Arkansas, Idaho. Mississippi,
Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North
Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and
Wyoming.
The table which follows below shows
the percentage relation of the money
paid to certain States by the Nation to
the amount paid by the States to the
Nation in Federal taxes. There is in
cluded IN this table the District of Co.
lumbia, and it is interesting to note the
comparison between the percentage for
the District and the percentages of the
II States which contributed in the