Evening star., 1937-01-30

iSSS LHG SOUfCCS W LUC CUC5U
centage is steadily increasing, with ad-
ditional acquisitions by the Federal
Government and other non-taxable
institutions. Even III the immediate
effect of acquisitions of land and the
improvements is to increase the value
of remaining private property, the
long grange effect-already noticeable
is to drive property owners or pros
pective purchasers of property beyond
the boundaries Of the District. Should
Congress take the point of view out
lined in the report, it Is only a ques-
tion of time before 1t will be forced to
choose between the alternatives Of
driving its own employees out Of the
District and witnessing the deteriora-
ton of the Capital City community or
of offering compensatory inducements
for them to remain as property owners
and taxpayers.
Bureau Of Efficiency Method.
The Bureau of Efiiciency reached
the conclusion that the solution of
the problem (of measuring the ma
tional obligation) lies in determining
the Federal Governments liability to-
ward the cost of operation and MAIN
tenance. of the City OF Washington
along two lines-namely. Cd It's tax
liability as municipal taxpayer of
Washington in connection with the
ordinary cost of government Of the
municipality: (2) its liability on &C.
count of the loss of revenue and on
account Of the extraordinary expendi-
lures occasioned by the fact that
Washington is the Nations Capital. as
shown by the average experience Of a
group Of comparable cities"
The Federal Governments liability
as a municipal taxpayer was based not
only on its ownership Of real property
but Of personality, including tangibles
as well. This procedure was clearly
equitable in measuring the national
obligation that is based upon its ex-
emption of all its property from tax
alton. Uncle Sam represents. for ex-
ample, the Capitals Henry Ford. II
Ford were exempted from taxation the
exemption would apply to his per-
sonalty. including intangibles, as we'll
as to his real estate. The National
Governments liability on account of
the loss of revenue and on account of
extraordinary expenditures was deter
mined by measuring the excess ordi-
nary real property exemptions-above
exemptions in comparable cities-and
the excess cost of park maintenance
and development resulting from the
system Of National Capital parks.
This total liability. at the time OF
its computation in the fiscal year 1882
has, Of course. increased. Adoption OF
the method would prove a workable
and generally satisfactory solution OF
the fiscal relations issue.
True Basis Of Federal Obligation.
But the true basis Of the Nations
obligation Of proportionate contribu-
ton to maintenance and development
of the Capital is not solely. or even
primarily. its ownership of District real
estate-though substantial and con-
tinuous obligation does exist in that
connection.
The strongest obligation resting on
the Nation arises from the fact that
political power and financial obligation
are inseparably coupled in a manner
which the late Senator Works OF Cali
fornia. in his additional views in the
report Of the Congressional Joint Com
mittee Of 19l5-l6 succintly stated a
follows:
THAT the Government should as.
sumo the attitude of a mere con-
tributor to the support of its Cap
ital is not only illogical and absurd
in itself. but is violation Of the
Constitution, which gives Congress
exclusive jurisdiction over and
thereby makes it exclusively re-
sponsible for it."
The recent fiscal report makes q
formal but feeble gesture in the direc-
ton Of some form Of local suffrage" !"
possibly in defense Of otherwise illog-
ical, not to say inequitable, proposals
that the unrepresented taxpayer of
Washington assume practically the
entire burden of maintenance and de-
velopment costs of the Capital, with
incidental contributions by the exclu-
sively controlling National Govern
ment. But the report lacked the
grace to argue that power must follow
responsibility, and that the equity of
its recommendations placing finan-
cial responsibility with the local tax
payers depended on a like delegat ton
of power to the local taxpayers.
Original Concept Of the Capital.
The general Government, by the
fact Of planning q magnificent Capital
covering large area and character
lied by broad streets and avenues and
reservations unsuitable for a self-sup-
porting commercial city and by found
ing this Capital in q place compara-
lively uninhabited; by the terms OF
the bargain with the owners Of the
soil: by its advertised promises to pur-
chasers of the lots donated to the
Government and by the declarations
of its representatives at the founding
of the city and afterward, plainly in
dicated its intention to build up q
national city at the Nations expense
upon a grand scale irrespective of the
future population of the District. The
Capital was to be primarily q center
of Federal action and the expense of
its support and adornment was not to
be limited by the scanty resources of
whatever permanent population It
might acquire.
Obviously, the primary obligation in
the arrangement between the Nation
and the District taxpayers should be
upon the Nation, which controls every