Evening star., 1933-02-13
Abuse of the Taxing Power.

-,s Abuse of the Taxing Power.
r. The attempt to increase taxation
In the District of Columbia through
legislation in the local appropriation
bill Is an astonishing departure from
legislative practice and an act Of
gross unfairness to the local tax
payers. The decision by some members
of the Appropriations Committee to seek
a special rule from the Rules Com
mittee In order to prevent challenge
of the tax-boosting section Of the bill on
1 point of order Is self-condemnatory
Revenue raising measures affecting
the District of Columbia should, OF
course. be referred to the legislative
committee of the House which consid-
ers District affairs. Failure thus to
refer tax proposals to this committee
is not only an affront to the District
Committee and a bold assumption OF
extraordinary power by the Appropr1a-
tions Committee, but it is contrary to
elementary considerations OF fairness
and Justice toward those who are taxed
should increasing local taxes through
legislation In an appropriation bill be
sanctioned by the House membership
or the Rules Committee, citizens OF the
District of Columbia will be threatened
by an abuse of the taxing power that
NAV well be considered as inviting dis
astrous consequences. The Appropria-
tions Committee functions behind closed
doors. Its duties relate strictly to the
expenditure of public money. Because
Of the nature of such duties, 1t does
net hold open hearings or conduct the
careful Investigations into the merits OF
legislative proposals that are customary
parts of the procedure of committees
dealing with such proposals.
z-Levying a tax or increasing tax
more directly affects the welfare OF
the individual than any other legisla-
ton. It Is indeed difficult to conceive a
condition by which Congress would
grant. to its Appropriations Subcommit-
tees the drastic power to levy taxes.
For under any circumstances, and espe-
cially under those affecting the local
taxpayer, granting such authority would
in effect nullify and abrogate the nor
mai checks and balances set up to pre-
vent arbitrary abuse of the taxing
power.
The District of Columbia has been
the, victim in the past of Appropriations
Committee legislation on appropriation
bills. The Federal appropriation has
been annually reduced by legislative
riders against which points of order
are not sustained because of peculiar
application Of the so-called Holman
rule, while substantive law directing
appropriations in fixed ratio remains
unaltered. Under the Holman rule,
points of order are not applicable to
legislation in an appropriation bill
which reduces expenditures. Reducing
the lump sum does not necessarily re-
duce appropriations, for the reduction
in the Federal share is offset by in
creases in the local share. So the Hol-
man rule, as applied to the District bill,
means that legislation on an appropria-
ton bill is in order when it saves the
Federal Government something, regard
less Of how much it increases the con-
tribution of local taxpayers, or how
much it violates Uncle Sans self
imposed financial obligation that re-
mains mrepealed in the Districts
substantive law.
But even the twisted application OF
the Holman rule cannot save revenue
raising and tax-levying item in the
District appropriation bill from chal-
lenge, according to well-informed men,
bers of the House, which explains the
resort to the Rules Committee for a
special rule
The suggested increase in the intan-
gibles tax has no merit. 1t is one o1
the most illogical proposals ever put in
legislative form. But aside from the
merits of higher rate on intangibles,
the House should defeat this par
ticular proposal in order to preserve
established and traditional processes oi
legislation and prevent the creation OF
a dangerous and wholly unwise prece-
dent.