This is another year, and new

This is another year, and new highway bilb will be up lor discussion in Congress. Federal road officials still want the National Interstate System completed to Federal standards as soon as possible, so there will be proposals for the Federal Government to put up 90% or more of the cost, instead of 60%, as at present, for these major roads.

If Federal money .is used, there, is no doubt Federal design standards will have to be observed. A key point to look for in highway bills, however, is whether we will be given a new superhighway, a new and relocated Valley Pike, for instance, whether we want it or not or have a chance, through the State Highway Commission, to decide which roads we want built or improved, and for which of these we Will ask Federal money.

It has been suggested that Virginia might be able to handle most of its road construction with its own tax funds if the Federal Government gave up the 2-cent excise tax on gasoline. (Th$ State then could raise its own gasoline tax 2 cents without increasing the burden on the highway user.)

At present, the Federal gasoline tax produces approximately a billion dollars in revenue—almost double the federal contribution to the cost of building roads—so much of this money is used for other Federal expenses.

Last week, during consideration in the House Committee on Ways and Means of a proposal to relieve fanners from the Federal gasoline tax with respect to fuel used off the highway (in tractors, etc.), I moved to abolish the federal tax on gasoline. My motion was defeated by an overwhelming margin. This indicated clearly {hat the Federal Government will continue to collect its gasoline tax. The only way in which all of this money can be obtained for highway work, therefore, is by increasing the federal share of the cost of highway construction.

There was a man who called a spade a spade ... until be stumbled over one in the dark.