Show 0 r national topics interpreted td are by y william am bruckart press building D C washington Washing tow in days not so BO far I 1 la the distant past an argument could be devel states aped in any com rights where there were more than a handful of democrats it if one took the position that the rights of 0 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 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 baa come to life in a really big way new deal policies have been con 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 pear r to be contrary to the views which used to be held by advocates ates 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 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 thirty 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 nere and are intended to provide apartments or small email homes for families in the very low income brackets and to provide work tor for labor in their construction eventually it was hoped the program would use up a good many hundred million dollars of work re lief ilef funds some has bas already been spent some projects have been completed and these results coincided with the arrival of tax paying time in certain localities that was the crux 0 0 0 to show what has happened in those cities and areas area wherein the low cost housing atlanta projects have project been planned or completed let us take a partle particular illar 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 housing layout no sooner had this been accomplished however horev er than the city of 0 atlanta awa bened to the fact that it would pet get no taxes nor cor will the stated state of 0 georgia ret get taxes from froin this great investment the project was ruled by comptroller general J it mccarl to be federally owned As such 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 cow owned by uncle sam it was At lantas turn to move it announced through its properly constituted city authorities that if there were no taxes tames 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 schools as free students atlanta lanta contended that it bears the burden of these expenses and it was not going to add to that burden without reimbursement secretary ickes sought then to offset the atlanta ultimatum by tendering funds taxpayers money to the city ot of atlanta equal to the amount he thought the city would receive in taxes again mr tic carl stepped in lie ile said that since the property was owned by the federal government it was not subject to taxes and therefore a payment to the city of atlanta out of federal funds funda constituted a gratuity in other words it was an illegal apropo the comptroller generals ruling was so definite and po positive sItIvi that those who have been beca 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 dot discovered a ray of light to lend lead them the housing projects are held in abeyance 0 0 the housing project situation brings to the fore a condit condition loa which apparently had enter not been general Tax taxation atlon ly recognized recognised it relates of course to the general subject of taxation but it has a bearing upon many policies now operative and which it la Is fair to say have been described by president roosevelt as expert mental since they are experimental it seems to we me they ought to be examined from rom tills this taxation phase one can understand readily the base ot 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 rates are not at the very peak which the people can carry that was shown vividly a year ag ago go when congress thought it necessary to enact legislation permitting municipalities the privilege of declaring themselves virtually bankrupts and according them the tha right of compromising with the bondholders bond holders under a decree of a united states court so when we think of taking away taxable property in any city and making it nontaxable non taxable by conversion from rom private to federal government we vve see how it adds a further burden of taxes to the remaining privately owned property that Is the reason why many municipalities are fearful of government ownership of railroads for example since the railroads tire 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 railroads no municipality can afford to overlook the loss of tax receipts that would woold 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 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 in project in this statement sta lenient I 1 mean only as to the local t tax as phase it has however another very I 1 important in tax angle property Iro perty or the income from property everywhere Is subjected to three tax tac assessments first the county or city in which the property Is located takes it a tax toll second the state gets a share and thirdly the federal government either by income or some other tax gets its hand into the pocket of a property on owner ner in the case of the low cost housing project it was necessary to calculate the re rental lal rate 0 on a base so low that it would be impossible for the total receipts to pay oft off the goern government ment investment this had to be done it if the low cost housing was to io be supplied a at t a a t rate the poorer classes could pay it is seen therefore that there was a deficit staring the project in the face ace and so it Is with a great many other of the experiments where such programs place government govern men t owned agencies or industries in competition with ith citizens take the tennessee te valley hydroelectric hydro electric 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 a net loss to the government but bu i that Is not all the vast project that has been developed 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 on local affairs sooner or later will cause a new explosion earlier in this discussion I 1 mentioned the tha ruling by comptroller general mccart mccarl always who acted of the goat course as the head of the general accounting office this agency was created with a very definite purpose in mind con congress gress wanted some independent group or authority to watch all federal expenditures to malie make certain that they were makle made in accordance 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 tho the comptroller in a tough spot mr bir fir cCarl Is not popular privately and publicly lie ho has been criticized sometimes in language hardly printable these complaints always have come from someone whose idea of spending money was found by sir mr lile mccarl Carl not to be in accordance with the law always lie he was the goat lie he has been the goat much more under ahe the new deal than ever before every time ho he kicks over a yew new deal plan the sponsors of that plan brand him as a tory or a reactionary or as being just plain dumb ile he has engaged in controversy with none of then them he has contended that his decisions were rendered in accordance with the law which he was directed by congress to co construe astrue dut but it Is true of all humans when a pet plan Is destroyed st one tries 0 o find somebody tome body on whom to pin the blame C New anlon |