Evening star., 1949-07-12
Wants District Schools
Included in Barden Bill
To the Editor

To the Editor Of The Star:
We believe one point concerning the Fed
eral-aid- -to-education bills now pending
action in Congress, deserves the attention
of every District citizen, as a taxpayer
concerned with the schools of his COM
munity.
H. r. 4643 sponsored by Mr.. Barden of
North Carolina specifically omits the District
of Columbia. Hearings by the Education
Subcommittee of the House Committee on
Labor and Education have been concluded.
A report to the full committee is expected
soon; and it is our understanding that no
provision for the District appears in H. R.
4643. Why is this? Remarks made by Mr.
Barden on May 18 during the hearings
throw some light on this subject.
To quote Mr.. Barden. IF the schools of
the District Of Columbia are now getting a
direct appropriation from the Federal Gov
ernment, then why should we build up
super structure on top OF that and say we
are going to give two appropriations? Why
not just incorporate the needs Of the Dis
trict of Columbia into the first appropria-
tion?"
This statement, Of course, is based on a
misunderstanding Of District finances. The
schools Of the District Of Columbia do not
receive a direct appropriation from the
the funds necessary for the operation Of the
government of the District of Columbia. in
Guiding the schools. The larger part of the
funds however, do not come from the
Federal Government, but from local taxes
levied in the District. In discussing the
contribution of the Federal Government to
the District of Columbia, it should be noted
that 48 per cent of the lands of the District
are tax-exempt; and that the District of
Columbia provides many essential services
to the Federal Government.
Double Burden on d. C.
State and municipal governments services
are financed from revenues from local.
State and Federal sources. Here in the
District the Federal Government acts as
our State as well as Federal Government;
and by omitting the District from Federal
aid program, it is placing a double burden
on the District taxpayer. District citizens
pay more Federal taxes than each of twenty
five States. yet it appears they are to be
denied Federal funds for education.
In view of the fact that over a period of
years there has been a steady decrease in
the amount of the annual contribution made
by the Federal Government to the District,
it is completely unrealistic to expect an
increase In 1922, the contribution was 500
of the total bodget this year it Is only
149o. The District of Columbia participates
in the established grants-in-aid program
(such as the welfare ones) on the same
basis that a State does. Should these be
eliminated in hopes Of an increased Federal
contribution?
But perhaps the District Of Columbia
schools do not need any further revenues
than they now have. MIR. Barden does not
believe further monies would be necessary
for he has stated that II think the appro-
priations are fairly adequate for the District
of Columbia. They have the finest public
school teachers and the finest schools I
know anything about"
Yes. we may have the finest public
school teachers" but certainly not the finest
paid. In survey of 1947-48 salary scales,
the pay Of the District of Columbia teachers
ranked IA on a list of 81 large cities. The
pupil load" in too many instances exceeds
the desirable number of pupils per teacher.
There is particular disparity here between
the Negro and the white school system.
Schools Overcrowded Now.
AS to the finest Schools" this again is
not realistic picture. Overcrowded facli-
ties strained often to the breaking point
are evident in some of the schools. Base
ments, sidewalks, and corridors are used
for school functions. An estimated 40 mil
lion dollar program Is needed to bring our
school facilities up to satisfactory standards.
Surely. the District should participate in
any program of Federal aid to equalize
educational opportunities-just as will the
forty-eight States and the territories. (S426
passed by the Senate. provided for about
$580,000 for the District of Columbia.)
The purpose of this letter was not to
discuss in detail the complicated provision
of the various bills now pending action by
Congress to provide for Federal aid to edu-
cation. HR. 4643 had many commendable
features; but we do feel that it should con-
tain provision for the District of Columbia.
We are confident that this injustice-based
on misunderstanding of District finances
will be rectif1ed.
MRS. JOHN c. McCLINTOCK,
President, Voteless D. c. League of Women
Voters.
Thinks d. C. Commissioners
Should Get Paw Raise