Opposes alcohol tax

To the editor:

Soon, Mat-Su Borough residents will have a chance to force a tax increase on a minority, those who consume alcohol. This is cause for celebration; we get to reduce our tax load at the expense of others. This an obvious winner with voters.

Does anyone think a 5 percent increase in alcohol tax will reduce traffic fatalities or crime or health costs? I have heard recently that alcohol consumption has risen faster than the population since alcohol-specific taxes have started going up.

For the record, I don’t drink alcohol, never have. I do have friends who drink, and most of them do it responsibly and sparingly. This tax has nothing to do with reducing alcohol problems. It is clearly a way to get people to vote for a tax because they (the majority) won’t have to pay for it and can justify it because they don’t like drunks (who does?).

This is a lot more like the aircraft tax, a tax that can be collected on a small group of people without a large enough voting block to fight it, one that will not offer any services to the people paying the tax.

I have some suggestions for the Mat-Su Assembly to consider next time it runs short of money and needs to tax a specific group that does not have enough voters to oppose it effectively.

1) A tithing tax. You could collect 1 percent of all tithes given to religious organizations. Since Christians are a minority, you could probably get it passed.

2) A swimming tax. Tax all the people who swim. You could get the local pools to collect it.

3) How about a tax on motorcycles? They are in the minority. What would they do to fight it?

I could go on and on, but I hope my point is made. If you vote for a tax because someone else will be paying, remember that you are in some minority too, and you will be next to pay.

Jim Frisby

Palmer