IT'S no easy job for organized Illi- 

 nois farmers to fight the battles 

 of downstate in the legislature. 



The long drawn out struggle to pul 

 uniformity and justice into the state 

 poor relief laws is a current example. 



Mayor Kelly and Pat Nash, Chicago 

 political leaders, evidently are opposed 

 to levying taxes against property for 

 the relief of their poor. They apparently 

 want to continue getting all their relief 

 funds from the state and federal gov- 

 ernments, from the sales tax, from 

 the gas tax, from anywhere and every- 

 where except the big property owners 

 at home. ^ 



In 1932 in Cook county only 13 cents 

 per capita was levied for poor relief 

 outside of the county institutions. In 

 1933 only 7 cents per capita. 



Not so downstate. Compare the Cook 

 county levy above with the levy of 

 $3.66 per capita in Champaign town- 

 ship in 1932, or $4.70 in 1933. In 

 Bloomington city township the levies 

 those two years ran $6.21 and $4.85 per 

 capita. In Decatur township it was 

 $3.18 and $1.73. In Rock Island town- 

 ship $3.34 and $5.86. In Joliet township 

 $2.02 and $2.06. In Moline township 

 $3.04 and $2.95. In rural townships 

 levies were less but substantially more 

 than those in the metropolitan area. 



■ Tried io Correct 



Yet that situation goes on and on. 

 The lAA tried to correct it by sponsor- 

 ing the Lantz bills three years ago. The 

 bills passed but they were vetoed. Now 

 a new series of bills, the Hickman- 

 Lantz-Finn bills have been introduced 

 to meet the problem, to put Chicago 

 and Cook county on the same basis 

 as all township-governed counties with 

 respect to taxation for poor relief. 

 Four of these bills finally passed both 

 houses of the -legislature in mid-Feb- 

 ruarji. 



Before the final vote was taken in 

 the House, however, Rep. Schnacken- 

 berg of Chicago introduced an amend- 

 ment to exempt property owners in 

 certain areas of Chicago which lie also 

 within outlying townships, from paying 

 a double poor relief tax. This amend- 

 ment, a threat to the successful opera- 

 tion of the program in Cook county, 

 was rejected by the Senate when it re- 

 fused to concur. As we go to press the 

 House has receded from the amend- 

 ment and the bills were passed in their 

 original form. 



The Hickman - Lantz - Finn bills 

 would place pauper relief on a uniform 

 basis throughout the state with equal 

 responsibility mandatory upon all com- 

 munities. Til the township-governed 

 counties taxing piower for poor relief 

 will be restored to the townships. It 



12 



For Justice Jn 



^ 



'/^ 



BOBSLEDS WERE THE ONLY MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION DURING THE HEAVY MID- 

 February snows In Norfhtrn Illinois. These sleds carrying food and supplies are on their way to 

 Winslow, in Stephenson county which was snowbound for five days. 



now rests in the county. Townships 



would be required to levy a property 

 tax of 30 cents per $100 valuation be- 

 fore they can get any state relief 

 money. The same requirement under 

 ■ these bills is made of Chicago and 

 Cook county, also the commission-gov- 

 erned counties. 



The bills finally passed by a simple 

 majority vote and if the Governor 

 signs or allows them to become law 

 they go into effect July 1, 1936. These 

 bills would mark the beginning of a 

 sane policy on poor relief in the state. 

 It means the taxpayers will have more 

 reason to demand careful spending. 

 There has been no incentive in Chicago 

 for economical administration and care 

 in poor relief. Practically no direct 

 taxes have been levied for this purpose 

 in Cook county. Large grants came 

 from federal and state governments. 



A Vexing Problem 



Of the millions of dollars spent on 

 poor relief in Illinois during the past 

 four years, Cook county, it is esti- 

 mated, got 60 to 90 per cent of it. Yet 

 taxpayers throughout Illinois, nearly 

 half of whom reside downstate, help 

 pay the bill. 



Commenting upon relief policies in 

 his recent annual address at Decatur, 

 President Earl C. Smith said: 



"Possibly the most vexing problem 

 confronting America is the problem of 

 unemployment and relief for those who 

 through little or no fault of their own 

 find themselves without a means of 

 livelihood. The Association has re- 

 peatedly recorded its position as favor- 

 ing insofar as possible local respon- 

 sibility in such matters, especially 

 responsibility for taking care of those 

 who are classified as unemployables. 



Extravagance in Relief 



"After witnessing for two years the 

 administration of federal and state pol- 

 icies of unemployment relief, I hold 

 more firmly than ever to the soundness 

 of the position previously taken by 

 the Illinois Agricultural Association. 

 Without in any way questioning the 

 motives or purposes of those adminis- 

 tering both federal and state policies of 

 relief, yet we cannot but witness the 

 extravagance and the misguidance of 

 revenue connected with the present 

 policies of relief of the unemployed. 

 Entirely too many people yet seem to 

 think that by continuing responsibility 

 for relief in the Federal Government, 

 only citizens with income in the higher 

 brackets would carry the ultimate 

 burden. 



"It is high time for a thorough cam- 

 paign of education to disclose who 



; V : 'L A. A. RECORD 



