Evening star., 1934-02-25
Adequacy of the Gas Tax.

Adequacy of the Gas Tax.
One highly important feature of
Capt. Whitehursts six-year bridge
and street work program which as
sumes additional significance at this
time is that the financing of the
proposed expenditures is predicated
upon continuance of the existing two
cent gasoline tax That should be
enough to relegate to absurdity and
certainly to show the gross inequity
of the proposals to increase the gas
cline tax.
Proponents of this increased gaso-
line tax, however, do not attempt to
demonstrate the need or pressing ne
cessity of additional gas tax revenues
Their argument is based upon the
odd contention that certain burdens,
Imposed by the highly controversial
oil code, on filling station proprietors
In Immediately adjacent sections OF
Virginia and Maryland should be
shifted to the taxpayers Of the Dis
trict of Columbia. If there is any
rule to guide those who possess the
power to tax. it should be the rule
that increased taxes are warranted
only when the absolute need of the
revenue thus derived is clearly dem
onstrated.
Capt. Whitehurst, a wise advocate
of planning ahead, has prepared an
itemized list of expenditures for street
and bridge improvements and re-
placements to be spread over the next
six years, including the coming fiscal
year. The recommendations, if car
ried out, would produce many and
marked Improvements. 1t is worthy
of note that the existing gasoline tax
produces not only the revenue nee
sssary to carry out such a program
and leave a comfortable balance. but
that the nature of some of the con-
templated improvements raises the
question of the propriety Of charging
them off to the gasoline taxpayers.
This program enlarges and perpet-
yates the recently applied principle Of
using gasoline tax funds for bridge
construction, placing the cost of new
bridges, widening and strengthening
Of old bridges and construction of
viaducts or underpasses to eliminate
grade crossings on the gasoline tax
payer, charging him in addition with
the cost OF studies of plans for bridges
and grade crossing projects of the
future. For instance, Klingle Bridge
over Rock Greek, Pierce Mill Bridge
and the Twentieth Street (or Park
Road Bridge, which would be re-
placed, are park bridges. The i'm
position of expenses of their replace
ment on the gasoline taxpayer not
only relieves the general taxpayer OF
costs which in fairness might be con-
strued as representing payment for
general property benefits, but relieves
the National Government of a direct
and due participation in improve
ments to the National Capital. The
National Government pays no gasoline
tax. When the gasoline tax is used
for such Improvements, the cost of
which should in equity be shared by
the National Government, the gasoline
tax has thus been charged with an
extraordinary burden A new bridge
to replace the Chain Bridge is one OF
the necessary improvements of the
relatively near future. But this new
bridge, if the city planners have their
way, will be located up the river at
some new site, and beyond the Dis
trict line. Why the gasoline taxpayers
of the District should be assessed the
cost of studies of plans for this new
bridge in Maryland and Virginia, thus
establishing dangerous precedent for
charging them with the expense OF
its future construction, is beyond
comprehension.
The program itself, as far as con-
Germs the projects it embraces, seems
we'll balanced, containing many de-
sirable improvements in bridge con-
struction, grade crossing elimination
and street work. It Is erninently wise
to plan for these things ahead, and
to make the plans available for study
and criticism by interested citizens.
The main showing of the program,
however, aside from the physical i'm
provements included, is the adequacy
Of the existing gasoline tax not only
In meeting normal demands but in
assuming new and extraordinary
burdens.