|
Marin Institute pushes for raising state's alcohol tax |
|
|
Thursday, 31 January 2008 |
Industry watchdog wants state to pay its fair share
By Stacey Powells
Mammoth Times Staff Writer
On Jan. 7, the Marin Institute, a California based alcohol industry watchdog, sent out a press release on its motives behind wanting to increase the State alcohol tax to $.25 per drink. “A simple $.25 per drink increase would generate almost $3 billion in revenue,” said Bruce Livingston, Executive Director of the Marin Institute. “Raising the alcohol tax for the first time in 16 years is a commonsense and fiscally responsible option to help close the budget gap.”
Marin Institute feels that by not requiring the industry to pay its fair share of the massive costs of its products, the state is actually subsidizing the alcohol industry.
The Mammoth Times interviewed Michele Simon, Research and Policy Director of the Marin Institute, about its alcohol tax proposal.
Mammoth Times: Which state legislators are behind your proposal?
Michele Simon: At this point no one has stepped up to the plate with a concrete proposal or bill language. Senate Member Dean Florez (D-Shafter) stated last week that he would like to hold hearings on the subject.
MT: When was the last time an increase in the alcohol tax was proposed?
MS: The last time any legislation got through was in 1992 and that was only a penny on a glass of wine and two cents per can of beer and shot of spirits. Since that time, rising inflation has led to a 33 percent net decrease in state alcohol taxes. Since then there may have been a few proposals suggested with no traction gained, largely thanks to industry lobbying.
MT: How long do you think it will take to get this passed?
MS: One to three years if the legislature can muster the political will to do the right thing.
MT: When will it be presented to the state government?
MS: We are hoping Mr. Florez and/or other leaders step forward with actual bills this legislative session. If not, then during the next two-year session that begins in 2009.
MT: Who will be making the proposal?
MS: We will with the help of a coalition that we are forming.
MT: Why does the Marin Institute think this is necessary?
MS: Our mission dictates that we fight to protect the public from the impact of the alcohol industry’s negative practices. With alcohol use costing the California health care system close to $4 billion per year, an increase in alcohol taxes is long past due to help mitigate the harm.
MT: What is the process in getting this passed?
MS: A bill would be introduced in either the assembly or the senate by leaders courageous enough to go head to head with one of the most well financed, effective industry lobbies in the country. To insure passage of the bill through both the assembly and the senate, as well as the governor’s signature, will require the concerted efforts of public health advocates and a broad coalition of individuals and groups and a media who will see the value of this campaign to the people and state.
MT: Will this be a tax also on drinks the average person buys in a bar?
MS: The tax is per gallon, collected at the distributor and manufacturer level. It is up to the industry to decide if and how to pass it along to consumers. Most likely it will be passed on to the consumer, but what we are proposing, if the industry passes it along, translates to just a 25 cents per drink increase.
MT: I'm guessing the proprietors will have to raise their prices on alcoholic drinks to cover the tax.
MS: Increasing taxes will not only make additional funds available for health and prevention programs, but may also put alcohol beyond the reach of youth, who are especially sensitive to price. This of course, also reduces costs.
MT: How much do alcohol-related problems cost the state?
MS: We are currently calculating the costs in California, which we estimate to be in the tens of billions of dollars. This includes health service, substance abuse treatment/prevention, lost productivity from premature deaths, pain and suffering, and criminal justice system costs.
Sean Turner who works with Mammoth Brewing Company wouldn't be so opposed to the increase in an alcohol tax if the micro brewing industry wasn't already taking a hit. “We already pay a beer manufactures excise tax which goes to the state and federal government,” Turner said. “We are paying about $.25 per six pack or about $6.50 per keg. That's not the problem. The problem is that our expenses to make beer right now have dramatically increased. There is a shortage of barley and grains and on hops there is a worldwide shortage. I got my first grain bill of the new year last week and we use a lot of organic grains which are already pricey. We went from paying $.75 to a $1.12 per pound. We would not be as opposed to the tax if not for the dramatic increases in raw ingredients. We are opposed because the timing is really bad because micro-beer prices are really increasing within the next year. Many within the industry predict a six-pac of micro-beer going for at least $10.00 by the end of the year.”
Todd Nagy, Owner of Angel's restaurant says they'll have to work the increase into the prices they charge their patrons. “Even though there might be an increase I don't think that will stop people from drinking.”
To voice your opinion on the alcohol tax, contact local representatives Senator Dave Cox at (916) 651-4001 and/or Assemblyman Tom Berryhill at (916) 319-2025.
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 08 February 2008 )
|
