Evening star., 1935-04-07
The Facts in the Case.

nC L dCLS Ill tIlC CdSC.
In the course of his speech to the
House last Wednesday Representative
Blanton of Texas gave history Of
the S5,700,000 lump sum figure in Dis
trict appropriations which is neither
accurate nor complete as to essential
detail.
What he said was this:
The funny part of it was we Of
fered them that night by way Of
compromise-and conferences are al
ways comprehensive offered them
tthe Senate confcrees) a $6,500,000
Federal contribution. No. They de-
manded $9,500,000 When the next
Congress met the Presidents budget
had gone carefully into the matter.
The first budget of Franklin D.
Roosevelt had gone into the matter
carefully. Do you know what kind of
a budget report President Roosevelt
sent to Congress? He recommended
that that Federal contribution should
be only $500 900; not even the So
100000 that was offered them. and
not the s9,500.000 they (the Senate
conferees) demanded, but IS, 900;
and that has been the Federal con-
tribution ever since
Members of the Seventy second Con-
gress may recall that the District ap-
preparation bill for the fiscal year
1894 was passed by the Senate March
3, the last day of that session. The
bill as it passed the House proposed a
new low lump sum figure OF Sc, 500, 900
and the Senate asked $9,5oo000. The
bill went to conference. Confer
ences," as Mr.. Blanton correctly
states "are always compromises And
that was the attitude of the House and
Senate conferees-witht the single ex-
ception of Mr.. Blanton. The con-
ferees compromised the lump sum
controversy at a figure of s7,600,0o0,
representing a greater concession by
the Senate conferees than by the
House conferees.
Representative Cannon of Missouri,
presenting the conference agreement
to the House on the night of March
3, 1888, explained:
Mr.. Speaker, we present confer
ence report on which I believe we all
can agree. OF course, no one is ever
completely satisfied with the District
bill but We have here a bill
which makes concessions to both. 1t
Is In that respect the most satisfac-
tory bill that has been presented for
years.
Representative Blanton then spoke
for fifteen minutes against adopting
the conference report speech which
may be summarized in his own words:
ct want to kill this bill as dead as hell
tonight"
And in the final hours of the dying
session, with the parliamentary odds
all in his favor, Mr.. Blanton killed the
conference report and the District bill
just as dead as he said he would.
The incoming administration
pledged to a strict campaign of gov
ernmental economy and reduction of
expenses by twenty-five per cent. found
only two regular appropriation bills
for 1884 left over from the preceding
Congress. One was the District bill,
the other the Independent Offices ap-
preparation bill, carrying the great
outlays for veterans. Both were
slashed drastically below the 1893 fig
ures. In statement accompanying
the District budget estimates, Lewis
w. Douglas, former Director of the
Budget, explained that:
The estimate of appropriations for
1884 for the Federal contribution to
the expenditures of the District of Co
lumbia herewith is $5,7O0000, which
is a reduction of approximately 268
per cent from the Federal contribution
ior 1888 of $7,775,0 900. This reduction
Is approximately the same percentage
Of reduction which the total of the
estimates herewith, both annual and
permanent, for 1884 bear to the total
Of the same appropriations for 1888.
The formula thus set forth, that
when the total of the District bill was
reduced the lump sum should propor-
tionately be reduced, coupled with the
realization by everybody of the neces-
sity for drastic economy if drastic
economy was the road to recovery,
brought a minimum of protest from
the District. But it was implied,
through the very nature of the Budget
Bureau formula for reducing the lump
sum, that when the District expenses
went up the National contribution
would increase in like proportion. The
District budget has increased, and the
national policy of strict Federal re-
trenchment has been abandoned in
favor of program of generous spend
ing. Mr.. Blanton himself has been
proud to insert In the Record letter
4IOtA lid 4CAIOW 4CAdAAp Avail ookAnAAs
commencing him for his efforts in
behalf of the soldiers bonus bill which
recently passed the House. Most of
the veterans expenditures, so dras-
tically slashed in that Independent
Offices bill OF 1884, have been restored.
But because the Bureau of the Budget
has adhered to its former policy of
sending to Congress only the lump
sum figure contained in the previous
years appropriation, the District re-
mains practically the only victim of
retIenchment policy which, whether
wisely or unwisely, has been aban-
doped in favor of another approach to
recovery.
The District has few. rights. but one