Evening star., 1936-09-16
COP. P.H|TSFEDERA[.
LOANS TO STATES.
Only Half of Fl Billions in
Grants Returned, Com
mittee States.

During the last three years the
New Deal has given the States nearly
$21. .000, 900 900 in loans and grants,
receiving in return less than SIC, $780,
100000 in tax receipts.
These figures were released by the
Republican Congressional Committee
in statement suggesting that the
Democratic administration, In allo-
eating the money among the States,
has been governed to large extent
by political considerations.
One table. for example. showed that
Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi and
South Carolina received $l,147,347.-
300 in grants and loans, returning
only $99, ,483, ,278 in taxes. Indiana
and Massachusetts,, however. received
$1,000, ,139.453 in grants and loans,
but returned $584,970,971 in taxes
Committee Offers Comment.
Commenting on this, the committee
statement said:
1.-The loans and grants to these two
groups of States are comparable in
size, but the amounts Of money which
was returned from them in taxes
show wide divergence. The ratio for
the Southern group is 1112 to /, for
the other group, 1 u to 1.
"The Southern group Of States was
selected because three of them con-
tain President Roosevelt,s most
trusted Senate leaders, who faced
hard fghts-Joe r. Robinson, the
Senate leader; Chairman Harrison of
the Finance Committee, who handles
the tax bills, and Senator Byrns Of
South Carolina, who handled many of
the great spending bills. All three
have been renominated.
Alabama was included, as it is the
State of Speaker Bankhead of the
House, which originates both tax and
spending bills"
The compilation Of loans and grants,
according to the statement, did not
include funds from the regular ap-
preparation bills nor payments of the
soldiers bonus.
See Interference With Employers.
The Federal funds sent into Missis-
sippi have been so large, proportion
ately, that they have been interfering
with private employment, the state
ment added.
only last week." it stated, "the
w. P. A. administrator there an
nounced that all w. P. A. projects in
the Mississippi delta had been ordered
suspended to provide cotton pickers
for distressed plantation owners"
Washington w. P. A. headquarters,
however, amended this order in the
following language, according to the
committee:
However, a worker is not expected
to seek private employment unless it
Is a full-time job, paying standard
or going rate of wages"
AS an Illustration of the manner in
which some New Deal leaders have
used the disbursement of relief funds
for campaign purposes the committee
quoted the following excerpt from a
statement put out by the New Deal
Campaign Committee of Texas, a
State that received $1,OO0,000,o 900 of
relief funds.
when thus fund of 81 ZOO, ,00o, 900
sent to Texas is analyzed. compared
and contrasted, it presents an un-
usual picture. For instance, the
Roosevelt-Garner administration gave
to Texas four thousand times the
amount sought as a campaign con-
tribution in this State, which is only
$250,000. Expressed in another way,
Texas, is asked to give but one-fortieth
OF / per cent Of the $1,000, 600, 900
toward the campaign war chest.
Again, it means $167 per capita,
that sum going to every man, woman
and child in Texas. Another side
Of the picture is that the Washington
Government gave to Texas ten times
the total annual expenditures of the
State government, for, in round num-
bers, the State government costs
$100, 100000 year."
Further analysis of the figures
showed that Maryland received $685.
889,196.79 in loans and grants, re-
turning $208, 1894 in taxes, while
Virginia got $319,239, ,445.78 in loans
and grants and returned $439, ,957 1856
in taxes. There was no breakdown
for the District.