Legislative Branch FY 2022

House: Legislative Branch Appropriation, May 8, 2021

Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on the Legislative Branch Appropriation for FY 2022. I will also address the budget process itself, the need for increased professional staffing to prepare more detailed committee reports, and the District of Columbia Appropriation.

The most important issue in enacting this appropriation is that it should be passed last. Doing this would give both houses an incentive to get their work done prior to the end of the fiscal year, or if supplemental appropriations are necessary, then this would be an incentive to move with alacrity.

Appropriations Testimony - Report Language

Funding of the District of Columbia, by which I mean funds for the residual area not included in the Washington, Douglass Commonwealth or federal appropriations proving additional funds to the current District of Columbia government and those state functions which have been assumed by the federal government (although these will be addressed as well.

The Home Rule Act dictated that a single Administrator should be appointed by the President to submit an annual request for reimbursement for services provided to the District in its role as the national capital. The Administrator would also serve as the supervisor for all police forces serving the National Capital Service Area.

This position was never filled. Over the last 44 years, the federal government has incurred quite a large bill. The federal payment was only meant to compensate the District for funds that would have otherwise been collected from a non-resident income tax. As a former staff member in the Office of the City Administrator, I can assure you that no invoice has ever been submitted, largely because there was no one to submit it to.

Likewise, the desire to maintain turf has kept the Federal Protective Service, the National Park Service, the Capitol Police and numerous other forces from being united as a single force, which also doomed the appointment of a single administrator. Currently, the Metropolitan Police take on coordination and incident command when events occur within the NCSA. 

They do an outstanding job of keeping order, as was demonstrated in response to the January 6th insurrection. Had they been deployed earlier, along with the DC National Guard, events may have been controlled sooner. They do this without direct compensation from the Federal Government, essentially offloading such costs to District taxpayers. Indeed, amendments to the Home Rule Act have specifically banned reimbursement for services provided to presidential motorcades. 

The original purpose of having a separate national capital was to see to the protection of the government, which was a reaction to the “Insult in Philadelphia.” The truth of the matter is that members of the Pennsylvania Militia came to the city to demand payment from the government of the state. The United States Congress (of the Confederation) was considered a non-entity, which is the insult that cut most deeply. That for a century, little payment was made to the City (and then Territory) of Washington. This was largely because members had no electoral incentive to do so. 

Aside from public safety, the major expense faced by the District Government, which will likely be born by the 51st State, is the warping of roads caused by buried steam pipes from the congressional heating plant.

With the advent of statehood, and until it is finally achieved, a separate funding stream must be established for services rendered. The ideal vehicle for doing so is this appropriation. In short, Congress wanted a District it could control. It must pay for the costs of services provided to it.

A separate matter is the size of the residual D.C. Government. It should only include the grounds of the Capitol and of the Supreme Court. Other portions of the NCSA, if excluded from the new state would make any non-resident income untouchable for tax purposes. I suspect that this was part of the price for support for statehood by neighboring jurisdictions. 

This deal was made so long ago that it has been lost to memory. Only Delegate Norton is left. Her partners in any such arrangement, with the exception of the Majority Leader, have long ago left the Congress and their service will likely end as well in the not so distant future. H.R. 51 should be amended to allow for establishment of a regional non-resident income tax. 

The desire to preserve the ban on such taxes has led to an imbalance of funds between Maryland and Virginia. Commuting from Tyson’s Corner to Montgomery County features slow traffic all the way from I-66 to the American Legion Bridge. The FY 2000 budget was to include a study of commuter patterns and their impact on all jurisdictions until Mr. Davis had it removed. This was short sighted of him. 

Any non-resident income tax could be dedicated to paying for mental health and corrections expenses for the new state to be provided by the neighboring state. When the Recovery Act was enacted in 1997, federal funds were used to house D.C. felons in Maryland and Virginia while federal arrangements were being made. It is time to bring these inmates back to the area. 

In 1998, I assisted Mayor Barry in preparing remarks to the federal government to assume mental health services, which are generally a state function. As police reform moves forward, corrections reform must follow as I outlined in my testimony to the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Subcommittee of April 29th.

These arrangements will be negotiated in the transition to statehood, but there is no reason not to begin work on them now as doing so removes objections to passing H.R. 51. 

These arrangements will be negotiated in the transition to statehood, but there is no reason not to begin work on them now as doing so removes objections to passing H.R. 51. 

Tax reform, which we have long advocated, would include an employer-paid subtraction VAT. The first tier of this VAT would fund services to families, such as a permanent child tax credit, daycare and sick leave. 

On the state level, such a tax would fund services provided to workers and their families, especially education and social services (including those provided to non-workers. Workers in the current national capital service area would fund services to the new state. In this case, some form of non-resident income tax would be required to fund services to non-resident workers in the District. In essence, the shoes would be on the other feet (Maryland and Virginia).  Again, making these arrangements now would make such arrangements easier to justify in the future.