Posted on 06/15/2005 6:39:14 AM PDT by SheLion
Dems propose $125M in cuts
AUGUSTA - Majority Democrats on the Legislature's Appropriations Committee repealed a $250 million, budget-balancing loan Tuesday, replacing it with $125 million in spending cuts and a $1 hike in the state cigarette tax.
At $2 per pack in taxes, Maine would have the third highest cigarette tax in the country, according to Dan Riley, an Augusta-based lobbyist for the tobacco industry. The increase would effectively drive up the over-the-counter price for a pack of premium cigarettes like Marlboro from $4.19 to $5.19.
"We have selected some new revenue to bring us to the $250 million target," said Sen. Peggy Rotundo, D-Lewiston and co-chairman of the Appropriations Committee. "We cut as far as we felt we could."
Gov. John E. Baldacci said Tuesday he will support the cigarette tax increase as the best available solution to eliminating the $250 million state revenue bond included in the two-year, $5.7 billion state budget to take effect July 1. Like the 8-5 vote on the budget panel Tuesday, the state budget was advanced in March by majority Democrats who believed the $250 million loan was an acceptable alternative to deep spending cuts in state programs.
The proposal now goes to the printer, where it will be assigned an LD number. Legislative leaders essentially abandoned a planned Wednesday adjournment and anticipated debate on the new tax-and-spending package would begin sometime Thursday in the House.
Republicans on the panel have prepared their own proposal to reach the $250 million target that relies on severe cuts to state health care services and defers salary increases to state employees. The package also restores numerous proposals that were rejected by Democrats on the Appropriations Committee.
"A lot of our initiatives are about the size of state government and the costs associated with state employees," said Sen. Richard Nass, R-Acton and the senior Republican on the budget panel.
Republicans were essentially bypassed by Democrats in March when the majority budget was passed. The GOP responded by launching a people's veto of the borrowing component with the hope of overturning the provision at the ballot box in November. About 40,000 of the required 51,000 signatures have been gathered, according to Sen. Peter Mills, R-Skowhegan. In response to Tuesday's vote by the Appropriations Committee, Mills indicated final approval by the Legislature of either proposal to eliminate the borrowing provision of the budget was all that was needed to terminate the people's veto effort.
"When it looks like this has passed in the House and Senate, we'll declare victory and the signature-gathering effort will stop," Mills said.
In a closely divided House and Senate, however, such conclusions cannot be presumed lightly. Republicans and some Democrats were not sure how the majority report from Appropriations would be received by rank-and-file Democrats in the House. The Democratic plan:
. Cuts $10.4 million from mental health programs by revamping the delivery of those services.
. Saves $5.9 million by delaying school construction projects by one year.
. Cuts $2.2 million from the DirgoHealth program.
. Cuts $5.5 million from the Veterans Tax Reimbursement program.
. Cuts about $7.2 million from the Business Equipment Tax Reimbursement program.
By contrast, the GOP plan:
. Delays $20 million in state employee salary increases until the next budget cycle.
. Cuts $20 million in health care services to poor working Mainers.
. Transfers $32 million from the DirigoHealth program to the General Fund, leaving DirigoHealth with a balance of about $6 million.
. Eliminates the governor's Office of Health Policy and Finance with a $2 million deappropriation.
. Eliminates the reduction to the BETR program proposed by Democrats.
Rotundo said Democrats could not support the level of cuts Republicans wanted to make to the state's social service programs.
"In order to cut more we were going to have to get into those programs that provide health insurance for some of the poorest people in the state - the working poor," she said. "We just didn't want to go there. We did not want to remove thousands of people from programs that were providing them with some kind of health care."
No! Not yet. I pay just 25 cents surcharge for a bag of loose tobacco.
..raise the tax to $70. A tax has been deemed legal, and what is the difference if you tax it $10 or $70. Smokers are a minority, and cant do anything about it - and why hot have more revenue coming in to the state coffers.
Well, aren't you a "sweet little Conservative." We sure need more like you. I think you are on the wrong forum.
Yes, we are a minority. I thought it was illegal to segregate against a minority? Or did I read wrong?
We can't do anything about it? LOL! I beg to differ with you.
And when the smokers revenue is gone from the state, guess who they will be going after? YOU!
..raise the tax to $70. A tax has been deemed legal, and what is the difference if you tax it $10 or $70. Smokers are a minority, and cant do anything about it - and why hot have more revenue coming in to the state coffers.
Well, aren't you a "sweet little Conservative." We sure need more like you. I think you are on the wrong forum.
Yes, we are a minority. I thought it was illegal to segregate against a minority? Or did I read wrong?
We can't do anything about it? LOL! I beg to differ with you.
And when the smokers revenue is gone from the state, guess who they will be going after? YOU!
Bonus!!! New Hampshire will reap the benefits again. Thanks, Mainers!
That's what New Jersey was screaming across the water when New York City went smoke free:
'HURRY TO OUR SIDE HURRY TO OUR SIDE!' LOL! All the smokers are taking their money to New Jersey!
I never meant to imply that you were poor. Back then cigarettes were about 35 cents a pack and I couldnt afford them.
A carton of Marlboros are under $30 in new Hampshire. They are closer to $45 in Maine now. Same for Mass and VT. Our state govt. just voted down a 28 cent increase.
While they are here, the out-of-staters buy our booze and large appliances as well. The lack of sales tax makes for some prosperous retailers near the borders.
State liquor stores are on the highways, near the borders. A fifth of Bacardi is under $10.
Because SandyB, when you have the state's coffers relying on revenues from tyrannical taxes imposed on users of a legal product, those users are either going to obtain said product from either out of state or thru the blackmarket. When that happens, as it is going to, your state will now claim that those lost revenues actually resulted in $...xxxxx.xxx increase to your state budget but due to whatever reason, we now find it necessary to raise the taxes on Gas, income, or whatever they deem accessible......
In other words, their failure will once again be turned into a financial victory with the assistance of a willing MSM........
Oh no! I didn't mean anything by that either. But can you imagine going from 35 cents for a pack to $5.19 today? The lawmakers are plain nuts.
I remember that liquor store right off of the interstate. We used to stop there and stock up on our way back from the Cape. That's a great place!
" I remember that liquor store right off of the interstate."
We've got one on both sides of I95 just north of the Mass border and another at the Portsmouth traffic circle, just south of the Maine border.
As the prices go up in Maine and Mass, our profits go up! Bonus.
Funny how some people on "our" side think, eh?
You better believe it! And I don't fault your state one bit. Reap the bennies while you can. :)
Now, let's see if the revenues really go up in Maine. At five bucks a pack, the marginal revenue from cigarette tax increases may turn out to be elastic.
The revenue won't go up. This will just drive more people to quit, or buy off of the Internet or roll their own. Remember, it's the American Way to Shop Cheap.
But when the coffers aren't filling up like in the past, the lawmakers will just spew more lies that their anti-smoking propaganda is working. People are quitting. And we all know that isn't the truth.
Smokers who travel south may want to consider swinging over to Route 301 through Virginia rather than taking I-95. Route 301 swings off I-95 just north or Richmond and goes through southern Maryland. You can follow I-97 in MD and get back on I-95. At the intersections of Route 3 and Route 301 and the next couple intersections before the Potomac river bridge, cigarettes are still in the $22-$23 a carton range even after VA succombed to the Washington post continual nagging to raise it's cig tax last year. The gas station at the intersection of Route 3 and 301 I have found to have the most consistent low prices. These prices are for premium cigarettes.
OBone
...they will find something else to tax to make up for the loss in revenue.
This thread is fun for a change.....
So at some point I start growing tobacco in the basement :-)
So far. :) There has been a few "testy's." :)
Don't they tax the loose tobacco the same as the factory cigs?
I just bought my annual bag of pipe tobacco, and didn't pay much attention how much of it was taxed.
Personally, I'm too lazy to roll my own "fags"; the pipe is easier in my opinion.
As to growing tobacco; they use "hothouses" and such to grow marijuhanna up here year round, don't they?
I would suppose that if you had a good sized barn or greenhouse, that you could probably culture a sufficient tax-free crop to feed your personal addiction for a while.
And you could probably get all the info you neen on drying, curing, and processing it on the internet.
Since it's a legal crop, they can't bust you for growning it like it was pot, can they? The only way you could get in trouble with the law is if you tried to sell it without collecting the tax, I suppose, much like "moonshine".
The last I knew you could set up a still and run off about 55 gallons of "white lightning" as long as it was for your "personal use" and not sold to anyone.
If you (and perhaps a few close friends) "consumed" your product as you went along, how are the Revenooer's ever going to prove if or when you've surpassed your 55 gallon annual allotment, I wonder?
Home - grown obacco is probably a similar deal, don't you think?
Has anyone ever really tried growing tobacco at home in this sort of climate?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.