Show 0 Z 0 r national topics s inz interpreted pr by y Willi ato aln bruckart blont press pres Wait hIngton D Q C washington in days not so far in the distant past an argument could be developed in any states community where w h a r a rights there were more than a handful of democrats tf it one took the position that the rights of the federal government were predominant over states rights states rights constituted an issue that never died politically until the new deal arrived on the scene at washington through some two years or more now we had bad heard very little about states rights yet within the last few days we have found that the states rights issue was not dead it was only sleeping and it has come to life in a really big way new deal policies have been consistently policies of centralization of power in the hands of the federal government new dealers have enacted much legislation and have carried out many programs that appear to be contrary to the views which used to be held by advocates of states rights these things have been accomplished with almost no complaint from the democratic side and with only a minimum of squawking from new N ew dealoe deal opposition from whence came complaints about regimentation and extension of government functions into the field of private enterprise in competition with the governments citizens lately however some thirty or thir ty five cities have awakened with a shock and have rendered one new deal program a severe jolt by that awakening I 1 refer to the plans for government construction of the so called low cost housing projects these were and are intended to provide apartments or small homes tor for families in the very low income brackets ts and to provide work for labor in their belr construction eventually it was hoped the pr program would use up a good many hundred million dollars of work relief funds some has hag already been spent some projects have been completed and these results coincided with the arrival vil of tai tac paying time in certain localities that was the crux to show what has happened in those cities and areas wherein the low cost housing projects atlanta have been planned project or completed let us take a particular case namely the housing project in atlanta georgia it Is of no use to cite the facts in all of them because the atlanta case Is typical secretary ickes and his public works administration had spent approximately three million dollars in the construction of the atlanta bous ing layout no sooner had bad this been accomplished however than the city of atlanta awakened to the tact fact that it would get no taxes nor will the state of georgia set get taxes from tills this great investment the project was ruled by comptroller general J II 11 mccari to be federally owned As such buch it was not subject to state or municipal taxation the city of atlanta and the state of georgia had been deriving taxes from the real estate now owned by uncle sam it was At lantas turn to move it announced through its properly constituted city authorities that it if thoro there were no taxes then atlanta could not furnish fire and police protection for the property nor could it supply water for the tenants nor would it permit children of those tenants to attend the atlanta At linta schools as free students atlanta contended that it hears bears the burden of those these expenses and it was not acing goc ns to addao that burden without reimbursement secretary ickes sought then to offset the atlanta ultimatum icum by tendering funds taxpayers money to tn the city ef atlanta equal to the amount he thought the city would receive in taxes an again in mr air mccarl stepped in ile iii said that since the po property perty was owned by tho the federal government it was not loot subject S to taxes and therefore a payment to the city of atlanta out of federal funds constituted a gratuity in other words it was an illegal proposition the comptroller generals ruling was so definite and positive that those who live have been boosting and boasting about low cost housing projects have been stunned frankly they do not know which way to turn thus far they have not discovered a ray my of light to lead them the housing projects are held in abeyance the housing project situation situ atton brings to the he t fore for e a condition which apparently had not been gen enter brally recognized it taxation relates of course coarse to the general subject of taxation but it has a bearing upon many policies now operative and which it Is fair to say have been described by president roosevelt as experimental since they are experimental it seems to me they ought to be examined from this Ms taxation phase one can understand readily the base of the objection there Is hardly a city or town or even any other kind of taxing district in the united states where the tax rules rates are not at the wry very peak which the people can carry that was shown hown most vividly a yer year ago when congress thought it necessary to enact legislation permitting municipalities the privilege of declaring themselves virtually bankrupts bankrupt and according them the right of compromising with their bondholders bond holders under a decree of a united states cour court so when we think of taking away taxable property tn in any city and making it nontaxable non taxable by conversion from private to federal government ownership we see how it adds a further burden of taxes to the remaining privately owned property that is the reason why many municipalities alleles are I 1 fearful arf ul of government ownership of railroads for example since the railroads are heavy taxpayers in every community they serve laying aside the question of merit or lack of merit in the proposition of government ownership of rall railroads roads no municipality can afford to overlook the loss of tax rec receipts elpas that would follow government acquisition of those carrier properties they pay real estate taxes in the united states annually of more than three hundred million dollars of course it Is distributed tri trl buted in thousands of places but whatever the amount may be in your community or any other it represents a tax source which the local government can ill afford to lose it Is the same although to a lesser degree with respect to the housing project in this statement I 1 mean only as to the local tax phase it has however another very important tax angle property or the income from property everywhere Is subjected to three tax assessments first the county or city in which the property Is located takes a tax toll second the state gets a shared share and thirdly the th federal government either by income or some other tax gets its hand band into the pocket of a property owner in the case of the low cost housing project it was necessary to calculate the rental rate on a base so low that it would be impossible for the total receipts to pay off the government investment this had to be done if the low cost housing was to be supplied at a rate the poorer classes could pay it Is seen therefore that there was ii a deficit staring the project in the face to meet this deficit certain federal funds were to be set aside regularly which coupled with the receipts from the tenants would serve to amortize the original cost from the standpoint of liquidating the cost of the building this Is fine but it does not impress one as being so wholesome when it Is shown that the governments ern ments contribution comes out of the general fund of the treasury which tn in turn comes out of the general taxpayers of the nation and so it Is with a great many other of the experiments where such programs place govern government ment owned agencies or industries in competition with citizens take the tennessee valley hydroelectric project for another example the federal government has placed more than in that venture the present tennessee valley corporation has taken over these properties at about one third of this amount ir a net loss to the government but that Is not all the vast project that has been developed jn in the tennessee valley and through the adjoining counties and cities is not subject to state taxation nor do the cities that are being served by tennessee river electricity get any taxes from this source it may be sound in the theory but I 1 am fearful that the inbred opposition to federal government encroachment croach ment on local affairs sooner or later will cause a new explosion it will come from the original feeling that states rights ought to be superior to federal rights except where states have bare delegated that authority to the federal government la in the national constitution E earlier artier in this discussion I 1 mentioned the ruling by comptroller general mccarl who act always ed of course as the the goat head bead of the general accounting 0 office f f I 1 c e this agency was created with a very definite purpose in mind congress wanted some independent group or authority to watch all federal expenditures to make certain that they were made in accord accordance a n ce with law A good many years ago when this job was done by the comptroller of the treasury it was not infrequent that an adverse ruling by the comptroller put the comptroller in a tough spot pol mr mccarl Is not popular privately and publicly he has been criticized sometimes la in language hardly printable these complaints always have come from someone whose idea of spending money wax was found by mr mccarl not to be in accordance with the law always he be was the goat coat ile he has been the goat much more under the new deal than ever bedora overy every time he kicks over a now new deal plan the sponsors of that plan brand him as a tory or a reactionary or as n being just plain dumb ue he has engaged in controversy with none of them he has contended that his bis decisions were rendered in accordance with the law which he ws was directed by congress to construe but it la Is true of all humans when a pet plan to li destroyed one tries trie to find bud somebody lome body upon whom the blame can be pinned 6 0 watfa val |