Evening star., 1936-09-08
Streets and Gas Tax.

Highways not only makes out con-
vincing case for Highway Department
estimates but in a statement accom-
panying his estimates discusses gaso-
line tax expenditures in fashion that
should put an end, once and for all,
to the occasional propositions at the
District Building for further diversion
of gasoline tax funds to general fund
uses-such as payment of Salaries OF
policemen in the Traffic Bureau
There has been an amazing amount
Of gasoline tax diversion already One
result, coupled with diminishing appro-
priations for highways out of the gen.
eral fund, has been to overburden
gasoline tax funds thus cutting down
the amount that should be expendable
on highways. The gasoline tex ieve-
nues were originally spent entirely on
new paving and specific grading items.
After few years curbing and gutter
work was added, plus new paving and
large part of reSurfacing and repaV.ng.
change over to the gasoline tax fund
of all highway activities, including
bridge work and the entire maintenance
expense of the Department OF Highways.
In 1885 the personnel item of the De-
partment of Highways was made a
charge against the gasoline tax fund,
and in 1896 part of the cost of street
extension, previously borne from the
general fund and assessments was
charged against gasoline taxes.
The gradual assumption Of highway
expense by the gasoline tax is shown
in the following percentages of total
highway cost charged against the gaso-
line tax fund:
1925-27 per cent. 1928 per cent.
1926 per cent. 1855 per cent.
1928 per cent 1934-71 per cent.
1885 per cent. 1856 per cent.
1922 per cent. 1864 per cent.
1930-39 per cent 1874 per cent.
1873 per cent.
Diminution of general tax fund par
ticipation in highway costs has meant.
as in other cases, reduced participation
by the United States in Capital City
street and highway expense. For the
lump sum, of course becomes part of
the general tax revenues of the District.
Just as the expense of Water Depart
ment supply and distribution gradually
has been placed upon water taxpayers
in the District, with the National Gov
ernment obtaining its water free, so
the process of street maintenance and
improvement expense is being shifted
to the shoulders of the gasoline tax
payers. The National Government, of
course, pays no gas tax. There are
special reasons why this shift is in
equitable. The streets of the District
conform to scale established for the
National Capital. The United States
is owner in fee simple of the streets CT
the original city, which were dedicated
by the landowners with the under
standing that they would be developed
and maintained by the National Gov
ernment, and the National Govern
ment, of course, is a heavy user of the
streets.
During the depression years the Dis
trict was placed on a par with the
States in receiving grants for road
building, such grants enabling the
Highway Department to carry on a
modest program of development Now
that highway grants to the District
have been withdrawn, the Highway
Department appropriations, IN Capt.
Whitehurst's opinion. have reached a
dangerous minimum" Gasoline tax
revenues, because they have been so
heavily burdened by diversion, may be
inadequate without substantial addi-
tions, or rather renewals, of appropria-
tions from general funds. Despite the
inadequacy of funds for needed highway
use, there exists the paradox of a
surplus in the gasoline tax fund, through
failure to appropriate available revenues.
Beyond the need for cash balances, such
surpluses should not exist and all the
money raised in gasoline taxes should
be spent.