Evening star., 1937-01-28

rQLtOnS III measuring WQSHlHg-
If the taxpayers Of other cities in
vested their borrowing in wise ven-
lures or Improvements. they have en-
joyed the benefits. If not, they are
paying a heavy penalty. But why
should Washington, which has not
enjoyed the benefits and has escaped
the penalties-whateve either may be
be required to pay taxes on basis
which co-ordinates them in per capita
and total tax payments and in tax
rate with cities which are compelled
| to raise millions in taxes to pay in
terest and amortize the principal?
Washington, which has enjoyed the
benefit of no such loans, should not
be required, in order to put itself on
superficial tax-paying equality with
other cities, to tax itself by the amount
represented in interest payments. In
terest payments should be deducted
from the comparisons.
State Taxes Not Comparable.
The same equitable considerations
demand that in the comparison OF
city tax burdens (which should in
clude county taxes. because large cities
dominate or include the counties con-
tanning them) the State taxes should
be eliminated from the comparison.
Taxes, to be equitably compared
should be paid by. contributors SUBJ
stantially in the same area and for
the benefit Of the area alone. In the
light Of this principle. municipal taxes
and State taxes are as far apart as
the poles, being separate and distinct
in personnel Of contributors, in pur-
pose Of creation, in scope and area OF
distribution.
AS Washington does not receive all
the benefits that accompany state
hood, 1t should not be compelled to
bear the burdens which compensate
for such benefits.
II the comparison Is between Wash
ington and Baltimore, the equitable
comparison should be between what
WaShingtonians pay for expenditure
in the District and what Baltimoreans
pay for expenditure in Baltimore.
The comparison should not be be-
tween what Washingtonians pay in
taxes for expenditure in the District
and what Baltimoreans pay in taxes
for expenditure in Baltimore and iE
the State. If State taxes are in
cluded, the comparison might as well
| include National taxes.
Does not Receive State Benefits.
II it is contended that the Wash
ingtonian receives the same benefits
through his municipal government,
alone, that are enjoyed by the resi-
dents of other States through their
city, county and State governments,
the contention should be met by ex-
animation OF some of the benefits Of
statehood. The chief benefit is not
represented in the driblet of State
expenditures which the county govern
ment may permit the municipality to
share. The State tax is representative
Of full citizenship in a sovereign
State, with the full benefits and
privileges of citizenship. These are
not conferred on the citizen Of WASH
ington.
Full citizenship means the right
of representation in Congress and the
electoral college, q recognized status
in the Federal courts and the flnan-
cial benefits which come from the
enjoyment Of subsidies and grants
made to the States, from which the
District is excluded.
The Washingtonian does not enjoy
the full political or judicial rights OF
statehood and does not share in the
financial benefits which accompany
statehood. Why should his tax bur-
den be held to include what the citi-
zen of a State pays in connection
with these rights and privileges?
A State and Not q State.
That proposition carries out the old
idea that Washington is to be viewed
as a State when burdens are imposed
and not viewed as a State when bene-
fits or privileges or rights are to be
conferred. The District has been
pronounced a State under a treaty
with Franco construction confer
ring privileges on aliens-but not a
State under the Constitution, whose
people can sue, either as State citi-
zenS or as aliens, In the Federal courts.
The District Is a State when direct
taxes are to be collected. but not a
State when Representatives are to be
apportioned, though the Constitution
couples the two things. The District
Is not State to make and carry out
through a State Legislature laws Of
its own benefit, but is reproached as
State because 1t escapes tax bur-
dens incident to statehood.
If State taxes are included in a
comparison Of city land county,
taxes, it means that the District is
not to be State to enjoy any Of the
political, judicial and financial bene-
fits, privileges and rights Of State,
but it is to be State to the extent
that the equitable tax burden Of its
people, in comparison with the tax
burden of other Americans, must be
figured to include consideration Of
State taxes.
Pays High National Taxes.
The District Is remembered as o
State when national internal revenue
taxes are collected, but Is ignored as
a State in the distribution of grants,
subsidies, bounties, ETC., to the value