Evening star., 1936-11-22
District Governmental Costs

District Governmental Costs
The Washington Taxpayers Associa-
ton suggests to the Presidents special
committee studying the fiscal relations
problem that it make thorough in
vestigation of District government costs,
the letter pointing out that the District
government has grown over period of
several generations by one piece being
added to another" resulting in lack
of coordination and departmentaliza
ton. No end of different agencies have
q hand in running the town"
No end of different agencies may have
hand in running the town." but these
different agencies are all Federal
agencies. delegated by the exclusively
governing Congress with one or another
administrative esponsibility-and power
Right now, for instance, we have one
Federal agency, the Bureau of the
Budget, giving its close attention to the
size of the local estimates for the next
fiscal year and, by its control of the
municipal policies The Park and Plan
ming Commission, another Federal
agency, is at the same time bringing
experts to Washington next week to
assist the zoning Commission in its study
of effective ways to bar heavy industries,
or industries of an Objectionable nature,
from the National Capital, while making
plans for further park development as a
National Capital project. And, of course,
within few weeks Congress will be at
work making its own decisions as to
what these and other Federal agencies
may choose to recommend.
The ironical fact that the only people
not represented in the proceedings be-
fore these bodies are the local taxpayers,
now shouldering some eighty-seven per
cent of the burden of contemplated eX-
penditures, will not escape the attention
of the Presidents Fiscal Relations Com
mittee. Cut local costs? If such reduc-
tions are to mean lessening of the local
tax burden or in some manner would
give the local taxpayer more for his
money, they would, of course, be highly
approved. But the local taxpayer has
nothing to do with such costs. And If
current expenditures by the District are
considered too high, the local taxpayer
at the same time knows very well that
in schools, libraries, police protection
and public health protection, particularly,
he is not receiving what he has every
reason to believe he should be receiving
in such services. Would reductions in
local expenditures mean that he is to
receive even less?
Congress controls local expenditures
and if these expenditures are consid-
cred too high, Congress is responsible.
But unless there is fixed ratio between
local and Federal expenditures, SO that
for every dollar of local funds spent
there must be a proportionate expendi-
Capital, Congress has little incentive
really to cut down its cost of local gov
ernment. The disposition, on the other
hand, as amply demonstrated in the
past decade, is to pile additional burdens
on the local taxpayer because it is the
local taxpayers money that is being
spent
The fixed ratio not only adds a power
ful incentive to congressional efforts to
economic wisely, but gives the local tax
payer the necessary protection against
congressional extravaganza with "other
peoples" money. As praiseworthy as the
objectives may be, an effort to reduce
so-called municipal costs is somewhat
pointless as long as Congress exercises
the exclusive power of appropriating
local funds without the concurrent re-
sponsibility of contributing, in fixed pro-
portion, Federal dollars to match local
dollars. The effort at remedy in other
words, is applied at the wrong end.
If the Presidents fiscal relations study
should conclude that District govern
mental costs are too high, it will also be
necessary to show specifically the source
of extravaganza. And it will likewise be
necessary to show why, if District ex-
penditures are too high, such an i'm
posing list of real District needs remains
unmet.