The Colonial District

City leaders are wrestling with a budget shortfall, just like everyone else in the country, and are wary of raising taxes because the city already has a reputation for being a high-tax area. While I will observe that David Alpert is right, and there are many good opportunities to raise revenue by pricing negative externalities in the city appropriately (especially parking), it remains the case that the District is prevented by the federal government from raising revenues in other ways open to every state in the union. The city can’t tax income earned in the District by residents of other states. It can’t toll key bridges heading into the city. It can’t levy anything like a commuter tax to help pay for the upkeep of infrastructure used daily by hundreds of thousands of suburbanites who work in the city. The fed won’t allow it.

The city has a reputation for being a high tax area, but we really ought to be known for being abused by a government in which we have no voting representation.

Comments

  1. Daniel says:

    Yet another example of the problems with having the capital not be in a natural city.

  2. It can’t toll key bridges heading into the city.

    I’d always thought there was just one Key Bridge heading into the city. But never mind that – it can’t toll Memorial Bridge or Chain Bridge or the TR Bridge or the 14th Street bridges, either.

    No, I can’t resist even a bad joke if the straight line is just sitting there.

  3. Noah Kazis says:

    Although this isn’t different from most cities, which also lack these powers. Pick a major city and you’ll see a state government that hasn’t let them raise revenue how they want to.

    Put differently, if D.C. were retrocessed rather than given statehood, would this change?

  4. jack says:

    Yes. The DC Metro area would form a unified voting bloc in the Maryland general assembly and would control state policy to an unprecedented degree – even for deep blue Maryland.

    I really don’t see the fascination with simple voting rights. DC wouldn’t be given control over its own destiny, it would be given one vote in four hundred.

  5. Adam Bee says:

    Why wouldn’t DC residents pay lower housing prices precisely because they can’t vote? It seems urban economics suggests that people who really care about voting pay more (ceteris paribus, natch) to live where that’s allowed.

    Have you rejected spatial equilibrium for this special case?

  6. Peter Schaeffer says:

    Wow. Having the HQ of the Federal government in your city is a burden. I didn’t know that. I suppose the residents of DC spending their envying the folks in Detroit, Chicago, and LA who are not so afflicted.

    As for taxing people who work in DC but live elsewhere (and therefore consume only very minimal DC services), that is little more than legalized theft.

    No sympathy from the rest of America.