OCR Text |
Show 1 Si'jfesM )nn-Tvo actions of sec-Ifl sec-Ifl congress lately deserve rftlieC more than ordi-Cnneress ordi-Cnneress nary attention. C .,., One of these was jffli eW5 probably as cou-, cou-, cosltion as any group of Jr ha. taken. The other 'b majority of the house- ardice and selfishness. , ( iv a group of senators, near-La'n near-La'n mocrats. took their political ffi band, and delivered ts 11 ,,. a report from its judi-jSStk judi-jSStk advising defeat of 'cnt Roosevelt's proposal to t new justices of his own to the Supreme court of united States. "bmy time in Washington, I be-I be-I can say without qualifica-never qualifica-never has been a com-t:ee com-t:ee action in the house or sen-!t sen-!t which the President as the j"r of the dominant party, re-such re-such a cassation on a legis-uL legis-uL proposal as was given Mr. , Lvelt by Democrats who con-ftted con-ftted the majority of the senate , Jary committee. They did not Le words in any respect. What-; What-; fflaybethe merit of Mr. Roos- rfs proposal to add six justices i ,1 Us own choosing to the highest ; KUrt, the majority report of the ;udiciary committee left no stone ' turned in disclosing objections to He proposal as opponents of the court reorganization scheme see Item. Almost on the same day that - ,esate Democrats were, in effect, breaking or revolting from the President's Pres-ident's leadership, the Democratic majority in the house killed off a proposal for new taxes in the District Dis-trict of Columbia that would have resulted in taxing the salaries of representatives and senators and ' their office staffs. They were brazen - about it They were not going to " vote an income tax upon themselves them-selves and they made no effort to j conceal their reasons for refusing J to accept the recommendations of a special tax subcommittee which was acting for the permanent committee com-mittee in the house on the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia committee, com-mittee, examining the budget for the seat of the federal government, was confronted with a deficit in the district finances and instructed , its tax subcommittee to develop new I sources of revenue in order that the District of Columbia might not Set into debt. Among the taxes pro-. pro-. posed was a tax on income of res-. res-. iJents of the District of Columbia, ; which is synonymous with Wash-.'. Wash-.'. ington, and it provided for taxing earnings here whether the person , who earned the income was a resident resi-dent of the capital city or not. i That was too much. The majority ' in the house of representatives just could not take it. They voiced their objections openly and, being supe-: supe-: nor in numbers to those who believed be-lieved that income in the District : ! Columbia should be taxed, they " 'rced the tax biU back to the District of Columbia committee for revision. Indeed, they went further. ' The line of criticism of an income ., that would touch the sacred aknes of congressmen and seniors sen-iors was such as to have the effect 01 forcing the committee to bring a tax bill that would increase "e tax on property in the federal Now, it is a fact that few mkr. of the house and a very , L ' DUmber of senators have , residences in Washington. 1 ' m live in apartments or t s or lease homes for the period W ongress is in session. Conse-a Conse-a reaI tate tax will not m most of the representatives 130 senators. . 6fpr!"fHicent b against Resident's court plan by the Court Plan s e n a e judiciary rian committee was "enori quite unusual in ' In te first intmany , resPects- in lenuth ! " thousand words being m that regard prob- tre enX 'nge,St nd most com-,te com-,te 've analysi that ade of nCmmittee ever has '4 ll uT f halation. Cer- ' ! to h 'm0f 6XtenSiVe eX" 21 bemcluded in a com- ZrT lhe last quarter f ZlrZmmt advanced bv the l to Publ o t0 Pi6Ces and held teason Public ga2e. every poss.ble - b-r the aHHi. Pansi0n of the court ' ! dMd Enounced and, i ttee put forth some force to the judiciary." ',hatCitu 6aid in a tence 6erCw , d ne Pagraph and ! "The emphasized. : tt!as'wS arSument for the in-' in-' 'fpon added8""-768 analvsis." the ' iimi enlar ' '"'S that coneress : "thenoif the court so as to CnefrectPivt ,;eSoJthis admitra- The bill was found by the seven Democrats and three Republicans who constituted a majority of the senate judiciary committee, to be "a needless, futile and utterly dangerous dan-gerous abandonment of constitutional constitution-al principle." It charged that the "American system" of independence independ-ence of the courts would be violated and that if the bill were to be enacted en-acted into law, "political control" over the judiciary branch of tha government would pass into the hands of the President. With the presentation of this terrific ter-rific attack on the bill to the senate, a second unusual circumstance developed. de-veloped. Those Democrats who were opposed to the President's proposal decided to go about the job of fighting the measure on the floor In a manner seldom seen in the congress. These opponents from the Democratic ranks got together and chose Senator Wheeler of Montana as leader of the Democratic opposition oppo-sition to the Democratic President's Presi-dent's court revision program. They gave him full authority to act, including in-cluding the selection of a steering committee, a committee on strategy, strat-egy, to aid him. Thus, in the senate now we have three major leaders. Senator Wheeler Wheel-er will speak for the court opposition; opposi-tion; Senator Robinson of Arkansas as the leader of the Democratic party in the senate will lead the fight for passage of the court bill; and Senator McNary of Oregon win head up the Republicans as usual. Since all of the Republicans and Independents excepting only Senator La Follette, Progressive, of Wisconsin, Wis-consin, are opposed to the court revision plan, Senator McNary and Senator Wheeler are working hand in glove against the regular Democratic Demo-cratic line-up headed by Senator Robinson. It appears that the President is going to be badly defeated on this piece of legislation, but it is too early to be sure. Mr. Roosevelt is a powerful figure and he has political politi-cal knowledge that must be described de-scribed as remarkable. He has with him in the senate some exceedingly able political strategists. It is thus a battle of wits. Mr. Roosevelt has said several times that he will accept no compromises. com-promises. There is a very definite feeling at the Capitol, however, that the President will be glad to have a compromise if he can get one and save the bill from complete wreckage. On the other hand, Senator Sen-ator Wheeler and his strategy committee have announced in no uncertain terms that they will defeat de-feat the bill or any compromise that is offered. Time alone can answer the question of what will come out of the President's proposal. At this writing, the odds certainly are against the President on the proposition. Speaking of taxes and the selfishness selfish-ness that was evident in the house action, as men-Hunt men-Hunt Tax t i o n e d earlier, Evaders calls to mind the investigation b y the joint house and senate committee com-mittee that is now under way. This committee, made up of five representatives repre-sentatives and five senators has begun be-gun a search to find out how taxpayers tax-payers avoid taxes or reduce the amounts they would otherwise have to pay by various trick schemes. The committee has been given fifty thousand dollars with which to make the investigation and it is receiving re-ceiving able assistance from Under Secretary Roswell Magill and other Treasury experts on taxation. Contrary to the outlook when Mr. Roosevelt released a vicious attack on tax dodgers and tax avoiders, this committee is getting down to real business and there is every reason to believe it will be able to recommend to congress changes in the law that will stop some of the schemes and tricks to which large taxpayers have resorted. I have sat in on a number of the hearings thus far, including the opening session when Secretary Morgenthau made the opening statement state-ment and disclosed to the satisfaction satisfac-tion of everyone that he was not conversant with the problem at hand. Like the President, Mr. Morgenthau Mor-genthau attempted to place the tax problem confronting the government govern-ment on moral grounds. His statement state-ment did not click with the committee com-mittee at all. With two or three exceptions, ex-ceptions, the committee members recognized the problem as purely a question of law and Senator Pat Harrison, Democrat of Mississippi, vice chairman, said that there was no point in making the investigation "a Roman holiday." Therefore, the thing settled down very quickly to an earnest study of cases where men have resorted to various kinds of subterfuges of law, to reduce their tax liability. In this connection, it seemed to me that too much credit cannot be given Under Secretary Magill who apparently is anxious to get to the bottom of the problem. Western Newspaper Union. |