Evening star., 1934-11-25

and directed that the proceeds should
be applied to the Districts so per cent
contribution and to the building up by
1927 Of q surplus to put the District
On a cash paying basis. The District
was thus to be spared for q long
period hurtful deadlocks over ratios
between House and Senate. which
annually endangered the District ap-
propriatiCns and undeservedly preju-
diced House sentiment against the
Capital community.
Unjust and HurtfuI Discrimination.
The District has been compelled to
carry out faithfully all the provisions
Of the five-year program that mean
loss and injury to it; but in appropri-
ating for the fiscal year 1925 Congress
nullified for that year the 60-40 pro-
vision Of the law of 1922 (the only
pledge in the compromise distinctly
beneficial to the DISTRICT by attaching
to that bill the vicious and demoraliz-
ing lump-sum payment rider.
The all-powerful National partner
has in each Of the fiscal years since
that Of 1925 repeated this unjustly and
discreditably discriminating exaction
from the impotent local partner.
When Congress ceases to enact this
annual exception to the Jaw OF 1922,
the 60-40 rates directed by that law
will automatically operate and the
promised era Of peace, good will and
good faith will be enjoyed.
(D The vicious influence in the di-
rection Of reputation and bad faith of
the lump sum payment practice Is fur
ther suggested in the exaction In full
from the local partner, the District
taxpayers, Of the final payment on the
parkway connection between Potomac
and Rock Creek Parks. At first the
Nation paid in full for the National
Parks to which it secured title. Then
for parks at the Capital it exacted
from the District taxpayers so per
cent Of the cost and later 90 per cent.
But In this parkway case the final
payment was made solely from Dis
trict tax money.
No Offsetting Benefits for Injuries.
4. There are no offsettinx benefits
10 the injuries inflicted by the lump
sum payment practice. All the pre-
dictions of evil concerning 1t have
been 100 per cent fulfilled. Not one Of
the benefits promised for 1t has been
enjoyed.
washington was tempted to assent
to surrender its safeguard Of National
proportionate contribution by the as
surance that II q fixed lump-sum pay
ment were made by the Nation, the
taxpayers would have practical control
Of the question of the amount of tax
money to be raised by themselves, Of
the forms Of taxation to be adopted
and Of the objects for which their tax
money should be spent: that since
none Of their tax money came from
the Nation or National Treasury they
could, with few limitations, raise and
spend their own money to suit them
selves, dominated by neither Budget
Bureau nor Congress.
Our experience has demonstrated
that the hlmp-sum payment practice
has given no greater freedom in any
respect whatever from the rigid super
vision and arbitrary control of Budget
Bureau and Congress; that it has not
increased particle the Districts
power to participate in its fiscal taxing
and appropriating legislation. Con-
gress still has and jealousy exercises
exclusive power to determine how
much it shall be taxed, In what forms
it shall be taxed and for what pur-
poses its tax money shall be expended.
With gross unfairness it gives back
to the Nation its pledge Of proportion
ate contribution which accompanied
National seizure Of the Capitals power
of self-taxation without restoring to
the District this self-taxing power Of
which it had been deprived. It's prac-
tical effect Is to place . maximum
limit on the contribution Of Uncle
Sam, who needs no protection, and to
remove the limit entirely from the
contribution under compulsion Of the
local taxpayers, who. impotent, des-
perately need protection from the un-
exactions Of the National
partner. Some q cur legislators at