Evening star., 1938-03-24
Brazen Discrimination.

Brazen Discrimination.
The reported decision of the subcom-
mittee of the House District Committee
to exempt members of Congress and
their secretaries, with other elected"
officials and cabinet officers, from local
income tax is incredible because of its
brazen discrimination.
These gentlemen, who propose to ex-
empt themselves and the higher-paid
Federal employees from tax designed to
support the community in which they
make their homes during their in
cumbency, are already neatly exempt
from comparable taxes back home. 1t
IS difficult to believe that, using the
extraordinary powers reserved to them
under the Constitution, they would work
both ends against the middle and not
merely exempt themselves from the pro-
posed District tax, but, while doing SO,
leave the great army of lower paid Fed
eral employees in Westinghouse great
number of whom occupy similar status
as to residence-subject to the tax.
If Congress chooses to make effective
this unjust discrimination in taxation
In an election year, when the members
of the House will soon be on the stump
back home beating their breasts over the
high burdens Of taxation which less
fortunate, non offlce-holding citizens
must carry-so much for that. The tax
payers of the country will read with
relish the news from Washington of
another exemption voted to class which
might be termed, in the lingo of the day,
political royalists."
But for the District of Columbia, this
inequitable discrimination holds serious
threat. 1t should be removed by those
members Of Congress who will indig-
nantly refuse to exempt themselves from
taxes which they levy on others.
In the District, real estate bears the
major portion of the local tax burden.
The Districts whole tax base is made
less stable by the already large, and
constantly increasing, exemption of real
estate. Well over half of the real estate
In the District is tax exempt, far larger
proportion than exists in any other city
Of the United States. To this large
class of exemption, the subcommittee
now proposes to add another-another
which is so illogical in its conception, so
discriminatory in its effect, so selfish in
its motives that 1t deserves and doubt
less will receive the ridicule of the
country.
IT the theory of exemption holds good
In this case, why should 1t not apply to
others? Why should not the office
holders with preferred legislative au-
thority not exempt themselves and their
favorites from all local taxes, on the
ground that they maintain residence
elsewhere? OF course, they receive the
benefits of community services-schools,
police and fire protection, all the other
countless and expensive services rem
dered the community for the time they
are in Congress and for the period in
which they live here. There is no earthly
reason why those who receive these
benefits should not be taxed to pay for
them.
The fact that they enjoy an exemption
from local income taxes back home
makes it all the more mandatory that,
IN seeking to establish the local income
tax liability under the law of other Fed
eral employees in the District, they in
clude themselves among the taxed.
1t Is to be hoped that the District Com
mittee will shun this amazing proposal
and, If determined upon local income
tax, report an honest bill to the House,
making no exemptions beyond those
permitted in the customary reciprocal
arrangement between the States.