EYE ON ANNAPOLIS: Coalition calls alcohol tax a success


A coalition that pushed an alcohol tax increase last year is calling the tax a success and turning its efforts toward assuring that the new revenue is spent the way it was intended.

Representatives of the Lorraine Sheehan Alcohol Tax Coalition said Tuesday that the recent increase of the alcohol tax from 6 percent to 9 percent has been successful at achieving its two main goals: raising money for health care and potentially decreasing underage drinking and alcohol abuse.

Of the $70 million in expected revenue from the tax, $64 million in Gov. Martin O’Malley’s FY2013 budget is proposed for health care and community services.

The group now aims to keep the current budget plan intact as it goes to the General Assembly.

“The story’s not done, we need to convince the legislature to keep the budget as the governor proposed it,” said Vincent DeMarco, president of the Maryland Citizens’ Health Initiative.

Projections based on other states with similar increases show the tax should cause a nearly 2 percent decrease in alcohol consumption, according to testimony provided last year by Dr. David H. Jernigan, a professor in the Department of Health, Behavior and Society at Johns Hopkins University.

Most funds raised by the tax went to schools in the first year, DeMarco said.

“We were fine using some of the money for school construction because it was just one year,” he said. “Now that money is all being used for health care and community services.”

Part of the tax revenue was budgeted in FY2012 to help more Marylanders with developmental disabilities receive community service. This $15 million remains in the current plan.

This year, the governor budgeted $5.3 million to support recovery for those suffering from substance abuse, and $4 million to minimize health disparities.

O’Malley included $14.3 million for rebalancing, or favoring community-based care instead of long-term institutions.

Also included is $500,000 to support a fund for identification cards for the homeless, who need them to apply for jobs and receive necessary benefits, said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, secretary of the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.

Bruce Bereano, a lobbyist who opposed the tax last year, said the increase hit businesses hard.

“It really did dramatically hurt a number of small retail businesses,” he said.

However, despite these difficulties, Bereano hopes to see the revenue go towards its original intent.

“The tax was proposed for a specific reason and purpose,” he said. “The whole argument for the increase was the application of the money to the developmentally disabled … which is wonderful.”

About the Author

Capital News Service
Capital News Service is a student-powered news organization run by the Philip Merrill College of Journalism. With bureaus in College Park, Annapolis and Washington run by professional journalists, CNS delivers news in multiple multimedia formats via partner news organizations such as the Voice.

1 Comment on "EYE ON ANNAPOLIS: Coalition calls alcohol tax a success"

  1. What a load of bullshit!

    As we told the world last February:

    “State legislators asked for Takoma Park’s support for this REGRESSIVE tax . . . . They hid their dirty work under a sanctimonious name, calling it
    The Lorraine Sheehan Health and Community Services Act of 2011. Allegedly, the tax revenues will be designated for goody-good public services, specifically addiction programs. While they pick your pocket they point the accusing finger of guilt at you! As if enjoying a glass of wine with your meal enables addiction.
    A more accurate name would be The Desperate Attempt to Get All The Money We Can Without Raising Income Taxes Act of 2011. What’s going on here is that the state’s tax revenues are way down due to the economy. Takoma Park will get shafted along with all the other counties and cities who get a share of those meager state revenues.

    “That’s why the city council is going along with this farce. It is in the best interests of the city to help the state raise more revenue. Raising state income taxes – which would share the burden among all taxpayers in proportion to their income – is politically infeasible. So, our state delegates and state senator are all behind this, our countilmembers behind them. Self-described progressives all (or most) of them, but not when money is involved, it seems.”


Comments are closed.