Green Room

The pole tax and mandate politics

posted at 11:12 am on February 18, 2012 by

Obligatory cheap shot: What would Rick Santorum think?

An Illinois lawmaker wants to tax admissions to strip clubs to raise money for sexual assault prevention, arguing that a mix of alcohol and nude dancing contribute to violence against women.

Whether adult entertainment contributes to violence against woment is a subject of much dispute. But the Santorum joke is not entirely unwarranted, as Blue Illinois is only following the model of Red Texas, where the state supreme court upheld a pole tax against a constitutional challenge. Of course, as with other Illinois tax hikes, there is the question of whether it will actually raise money, or simply kill businesses.

The story is small by itself, and amusing to some. But it is likely the wave of the future. Governments running out of money and unwilling to to rightsize will inevitably look for more sources of revenue. Sin taxes are an easy target. Tax-hungry progressives will need more sins, which is why sugar and transfats have made the list for demonization. As the State becomes more pinched, statists will increasingly turn to unfunded and underfunded mandate politics — Obamacare’s health insurance mandate being the most prominent example. And if everyone is required to purchase health insurance, the government will have much greater control over everything you do and everything you consume; just ask the tobacco companies.

Recently in the Green Room:

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I’d be right interested in seeing some data that compares the rise in home-brewing and home-distilling with the rise in alcohol taxes over the past 20 years or so.

In Maine, under former Governor Baldacci, the state legislature raised taxes on cigarettes by $1 a pack, on top of already onerous taxes. The leftists figured that they would raise around $92 million dollars.

What these same folks forgot was that when taxes reach a certain level, people either cut back or quit using those products to stay within their budgets.

For these same Maine legislators, this was a disatser, as because of this reaction, the state’s revenues from this new tax only brought in some $78 million dollars. The problem? These legislators had already spent the money they anticipated coming in and now, faced with a $14 million dollar shortfall, were scrambling to find new “revenue” to replace their “lost” revenue.

Morons. This, among many other such actions over the past 20+ years is why Maine’s citizens finally elected a GOP governor, AND the GOP took control of BOTH houses of the legislature for the first time since around WWII.

Ordinary folks have to live within their means. It isn’t rocket science. Expenses MUST equal or be less than income. Why government can’t seem to fathom that concept is beyond me.

TKindred on February 18, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Gov’t does what the voters demand. American voters demand unlimited goodies from gov’t, so politicians try to oblige.

OhioCoastie on February 18, 2012 at 3:17 PM

Dear Legislature,

1. Stop it already with the new taxes.

2. Spend less money.

3. Retire after two terms and actually go to work doing something.

Thank you,

Citizens Everywhere

MunDane68 on February 18, 2012 at 3:20 PM

@TKindred

I think it’s because the average person doesn’t have the power to print his own money.

In some respects, there are parallels in the “average person” environment – the availability of credit. A lot of Americans have borrowed money with no real plan to repay it – the payments aren’t much, surely I’ll be able to make the payments as I go along, etc. – only to discover, eventually, that it just doesn’t work. We buy flat screen TVs, clothes, electronics, entertainment, etc. and then wonder why we’re in over our heads.

The big difference, though, is we can’t expand our money supply at will.

BD57 on February 18, 2012 at 3:22 PM

And when they can’t raise taxes they call them fees. In Colorado, where TABOR prevents tax increases without a public vote, our previous Dem Governor jacked up existing fees and stuck in lots of new ones. Where our license plate cost used to be heavily weighted by the “ownership tax” which is a deductible on federal income tax returns, we now have the all new “road fee” and “bridge fee” – increasing registration costs by about $50 a year. It’s all about the money – more more more to feed the gubmint pig.

dentarthurdent on February 18, 2012 at 3:44 PM

As long as governments don’t pretend to use “sin taxes” to prevent sin, and don’t budget on the basis of projected increases in collections, it’s fair game.

But the huge monies from the tobacco settlements weren’t used to treat smoking-related illnesses OR to discourage smoking, and the increased cigarette taxes yielded precisely the diminishing returns cited in the article.

Strip clubs are unlikely to be much affected by admissions taxes, though. People who enter are ready to throw their money away anyway.

Adjoran on February 18, 2012 at 4:18 PM

Obviously, the veneer of “sexual assault prevention” is a cheap dodge to justify the tax.

It’s hard to get people who don’t purchase these services to get worked up about special taxes on them. It can set bad precedents, which bad public officials will eventually take advantage of to repress things that more people consider good. But it’s very hard for the average person, oversaturated with half-true (or all-false) news of his world, to foresee that.

J.E. Dyer on February 18, 2012 at 6:16 PM

What these same folks forgot was that when taxes reach a certain level, people either cut back or quit using those products to stay within their budgets.
TKindred on February 18, 2012 at 11:33 AM

Or, as in the case of alcohol and tobacco, and other not necessarily sinful products, bootleg them over the state lines or from out of country.

Not sure how that would work out in this case …

AesopFan on February 18, 2012 at 9:19 PM