BANGOR, Maine — The doctors and others who oppose Question 1 on the Nov. 4 ballot on Monday blasted new advertisements and an economic study commissioned by their political foes, calling them misleading.
“We ask voters to look beyond the distortions,” Gordon Smith, vice president of the Maine Medical Association, said at a No On One press conference at the office of Neurology Associates of Maine.
Question 1 is the ballot initiative that would repeal a new beverage tax on soda, beer and wine that’s designed to help pay for and expand the DirigoChoice insurance programs. Organizations that want to keep the tax in place include the MMA, AARP and the Maine People’s Alliance.
The tax’s supporters say it would cost Mainers mere pennies per drink and would raise about $17 million in fiscal year 2009.
The money would supplement a 1.8 percent surcharge on paid health insurance claims in order to meet Dirigo’s roughly $50 million operating budget.
It’s a new funding formula designed to replace the unpopular and unreliable savings offset program, say No On One officials.
But Question 1 supporters say the true cost to Mainers of the new tax would be higher than $17 million. It possibly could reach $40 million, according to the study by a University of Maine economist that was paid for by Fed Up With Taxes, the political action committee behind Question 1.
To get the higher figure, the study assumed Mainers drink 72 million gallons of soda and other sugared drinks a year.
“That means every man, woman and child in Maine – from newborn babies to World War II-age retirees — have to drink about two cans of soda or sugared drinks every single day, without fail, for 365 days a year,” Kurt Wise, a fiscal policy analyst from the Maine Center for Economic Policy, said at the press conference.
Also, an ad paid for by Fed Up With Taxes spotlights a Brunswick restaurateur who claims the new tax will cost Mainers $75 million.
Smith said that “$75 million is simply a false statement. Maine’s a small state and people ought to be able to agree on the basics.”
The No On One people said they called the press conference in response to the most recent campaign advertisements in support of the people’s veto. Press conferences — which are free — may be one of the only ways the group can get its word out.
Smith and others pointed out the vast funding gulf that separates No On One from its deeper-pocketed opponents. Health Coverage for Maine, the political action committee fighting the people’s veto, raised just $42,000 during the most recent reporting period, July 16 through Sept. 30. Almost all of the money came from the American Medical Association.
In contrast, Fed Up With Taxes raised $1.5 million in the reporting period — and most of that money came from Coca-Cola bottling companies, Pepsi bottling companies and Anheuser-Busch.
“We don’t have the millions of dollars that the industry has,” Smith said.
Adam Goode of the Maine People’s Alliance said that in the group’s door-to-door work, members are urging Mainers to reject the veto in part because of the out-of-state corporate donors that want it to pass.
“Tell someone that you’re voting against it because you don’t trust Pepsi and Anheuser-Busch to run our state,” Goode said.
Ted O’Meara, spokesman for Fed Up With Taxes, strongly disagreed with that sentiment.
“I think that’s really insulting to Maine voters,” O’Meara said. “Maine voters are going to decide this issue. They will have the final say.”
He said the group stands behind the numbers — even the $75 million figure, which includes money generated by the 1.8 percent surcharge on paid claims.
“No matter how you slice it, it’s a massive new tax for Maine people at a time when the economy is shaky and Maine people are struggling,” O’Meara said.
On 10/21/08 at 3:25 AM,
ryanrrobbins wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Goode's argument that out-of-state beverage companies would run our state should the tax be repealed is ludicrous. We Mainers will run our own state by voting to repeal the tax. In addition, not only should the tax be repealed on principle, but because the Legislature developed and passed the legislation in virtual secrecy, ignoring the public's right to have hearings before legislators voted on the measure.
On 10/21/08 at 6:04 AM,
Thinkaboutit wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
VOTE NO ------------- GERRY PALMER
VOTE NO ------------- JOE PERRY
VOTE YES ----------- QUESTION 1
VOTE YES ----------- QUESTION 2
VOTE NO ------------ QUESTION 3 (BOND ISSUE) ANOTHER FUTURE TAX ON OUR CHILDREN
On 10/21/08 at 6:05 AM,
SunandClouds wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
If this fails is the next step, raise the sales tax? This State does not seem to be able to cut anything only expand and add programs. Is it any wonder there are no jobs? Of course who wants to work if they can get everything for free. Let's start cutting and getting by and see if things start to change for the better or worse.
On 10/21/08 at 6:55 AM,
awchasse wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Quit whining about taxes. If you don't want to pay the tax, don't drink the soda or beer. That stuff is unhealthy anyway. Like tobacco. Ought to have a special tax for fast (junk) food too and use that to pay for the health damage it causes. If you don't want to pay the tax, drink water instead and live healthy.
On 10/21/08 at 8:41 AM,
pseym4 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
You fat Mainers have nothing better to complain about than taxes on your fatty foods? Well you have the luxury of being the fattest state in New England, bravo. I love this tax. Now all the fattys that drink soda and eat fast food all day, which drives up your health care, are thinking twice before getting a devil dog and a dr. pepper 3 times a day!
On 10/21/08 at 8:46 AM,
jms92977 wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
yes on 1- get soda & junk food away from our kids if anything, do not make it chaper for them. Obesity in all ages is a real health problem in this state that is costing EVRYONE. Like it or not there are people that need free health care and a great number of these people have health problems due to obesity. Might as well get something back for it- let them pay when they buy their delicious icy Coke that we all love.
On 10/21/08 at 8:58 AM,
mrclam wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
One extra penny for the Dirigo health Plan is one too many. It's an expensive cancer. Cut it out.
On 10/21/08 at 8:58 AM,
changeneeded wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
"Quit whining about taxes." That's quite a socialist viewpoint you have there.
On 10/21/08 at 9:21 AM,
barbra wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
In the New Testement it states to "take no thought for what you eat or drink". Our health is NOT determined by foods we taste and eat, but by the spiritual foods and thoughts we hold-our belief system. There will come a day when people will not use medicine or doctors.l
On 10/21/08 at 9:51 AM,
frostheev wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
john SOCIALIST balacci, baraka SOCIALIST obama, maine SOCIALIST legislature...WOW, they all have the same middle names!!! What a coincedance!
On 10/21/08 at 9:56 AM,
CGould wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
If Pepsi or Anheuser-Busch raised the price of soda or beer by a few cents, few people would be up in arms or even notice. But with this small tax, instead of sending extra profits to millionaire CEO's, were have a chance to provide health care for people in need. Unfortunately, thanks in large part to over a million dollars of out of state money, a firestorm of deception has been created. Taxes may be too high, but it's not because of a few cents on booze and pop; it's because the mega rich can set up off shore accounts and avoiding paying their fair share, and oil companies making record profits continue get taxes breaks etc. That's what I'm upset about. I'll gladly pay a little extra on my vice beverages to help out community members who have fallen on hard times. And yes, Goode is right about out-of-state corporations having a heavy hand on Maine affairs in this case. It is proven that money talks in politics, and when the gulf is 42,000 vs 1.5 million, it is hard to battle the beverage industry distortions and allow people to vote their conscience. Still, I have faith in the Maine people, and I think they will do the right thing when they step into the polling booth on Nov. 4th.
On 10/21/08 at 10:26 AM,
LarrySG wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Fed up with coporate greed? Vote NO on one. There isn't anything wrong with helping your neighbors.
On 10/21/08 at 11:04 AM,
Joshua wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Mr. Clam, you are a cancer, we should cut you out of society. In all seriousness, though, what we should really cut out is the private insurers. If we did that we could probably cover everyone in Maine and not have to institute this silly tax on beverages, because we wouldn't be sending the insurers all our money to spend on out-of-state advertising campaigns in states with more insurance companies. Dirigo hasn't worked well because it still plays within the realm of private insurance, but it's still saved the state millions in costs associated with uninsured patients.
On 10/21/08 at 11:32 AM,
ClaireC wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
careful -- this is a 'double-negative' bill.
jms92977 said "yes on 1 - get soda & junk food away from our kids if anything, do not make it chaper for them."
Initiative one is a move to REPEAL the tax. So a 'yes' vote will PREVENT the tax from taking effect. I think what you want to do (from what you say) is vote NO on 1, to keep the tax on junk beverages, discourage obesity, and help fund health care.
On 10/21/08 at 11:56 AM,
_Jeff_ wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
For anyone seeking the scripture Barbara refers to, check out Matthew chapter 6. There is some good stuff here, especially... Matthew 6:19-21 "Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."
On 10/21/08 at 12:07 PM,
JWBooth wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
“We don’t have the millions of dollars that the industry has,” Smith said.
Anybody who believes that hasn't looked at a physician's bill lately.
The doctors, poor dears, are crying that they might loose their blank check to plunder the taxpayers.
On 10/21/08 at 2:37 PM,
changeneeded wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
How is this about corporate greed? The savings don't benefit the corporations, they benefit us, the consumers. NO MORE NEW TAXES.
You people need to realize that it's not health INSURANCE that's the problem, it's health CARE. Continue blaming the wrong people. That will fix things.
On 10/21/08 at 2:51 PM,
RocklandPhil wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
I usually post that all bonds pass, all tax repeals/caps flounder, so pay those taxes and do not whine. However, this may be repealed. I see an awful lot of 'Vote Yes On #1' signs out there. BUT!, I could be wrong. So, if it fails------- WRITE THOSE CHECKS, PAY THOSE TAXES, AND SHUT UP !!!
On 10/21/08 at 3:47 PM,
Bandbox wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
You know what, Mr. Goode? I'm not sure that Pepsi and Anheuser-Busch wouldn't do a better job running the state than our elected and appointed officials have. At least they'd pay some attention to revenues and expenses and try to please their customers and shareholders.
On 10/21/08 at 5:09 PM,
Coolfusion wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
At first, it was a few cents on a pack of cigarettes. Then, it was quarters.. followed by a dollar. Then they raided the profits of the cigarette companies for $800,000,000,000 which drove up the base price. Now, It's several dollars of tax per pack.. and they want more next year. If you don't stop them now on the beverage tax.. this tax will follow the same upward trend.. more and more and more and more.
On 10/21/08 at 5:12 PM,
mattecamp wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
As if any of that revenue would end up going to where they claim it would. Remember the cigarrette tax that was supposed to go to medicare and cessation programs? Instead, the bulk of it goes to the general fund. Perhaps this is a appropriate tax but I AM FED UP WITH TAXES and I will make a stand!
On 10/21/08 at 5:38 PM,
sickntired wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Yep... they slipped to us in an underhanded way and just like the tobacco tax it will just keep going up until you are paying more for tax than for the product. I am not foolish enough to think we can have all the benefits of being an American without paying taxes but let the government be open, and up front about how much and on what we should pay. We need to use this to send a message to the lawmakers that we still have the ultimate say. I think we should have a tax freeze and make the State live within their means. The budget should be for two years with no aditional bonds or loans or taxes available until the end of the budget period.
On 10/22/08 at 12:28 AM,
aroostooker wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
A 42 cents/gallon tax on soft drinks?
? Additional 20 cent tax on a 60 cent 2-liter of soda? Total 40% tax?
? Who says all soft drinks are unhealthy? i.e. flavored water, gatorade, iced tea
? Why soft drinks?
? No on 1? What are you thinking?
Before saying how fat Mainers are and how great an excise tax would be, read these:
Taxing Snack Foods: What to Expect for Diet and Tax Revenues - http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/AIB747/aib74708.pdf
An Evaluation of the Snack Tax on the Obesity Rate of Maine - http://ecommons.txstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=arp
On 10/22/08 at 5:39 AM,
markko wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
sickntired said :"" I am not foolish enough to think we can have all the benefits of being an American without paying taxes ""
So what does being American mean to you? An uninterrupted flow of ultra-cheap high fructose corn syrup and Nutrasweet (or whatever it is they put in it these days) into the mouths of you and your children and your children's children?
On 10/22/08 at 5:46 AM,
markko wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Why is it when most of you right wingers complain about taxes it's about small fees attached to "choice" or "lifestyle" products like booze, cigarettes, gas and now sodie pop that are (from the ground up) designated for specific programs like health care for YOU -- but when it is a question of dumping billions upon billions of YOUR TAX DOLLARS into the occupation of what was a sovereign country, it's just hunky dory?
I don't get your ideas of what "freedom" is, I suppose. I think that if there is a tax and it is used for a very specific, generally-benefical purpose then I don't see what is wrong with that... You say you are conservatives but you then let the government spend spend spend on a war that never had to happen in the first place.
On 10/22/08 at 6:41 AM,
anne_of_mdi wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Good morning Markko. Re wingnuts and their tax preferences, the formula is very simple: Hurt the Poor, Help the Rich. Taxes are fine as long as they are paying to hurt people. Tax cuts are fine as long as they enrich the rich. Any other taxes are a no-no.
On 10/22/08 at 7:26 AM,
freedomfighter wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
All this whining about luxury taxes. They are all avoidable. I would rather have a free choice in the taxes I pay rather than just increasing my property taxes and income tax.
On 10/27/08 at 1:51 PM,
mrperry wrote:
Repeated separate thumbs down will cause comment to be hidden
Wait.
“That means every man, woman and child in Maine – from newborn babies to World War II-age retirees — have to drink about two cans of soda or sugared drinks every single day, without fail, for 365 days a year"
One can of soda equals approximately 12 ounces. Two cans would be approximately 24 ounces. But when I do out the math I get only about 19 ounces, which is roughly one bottle of soda, flavored water, or juice drink - all of which fall under this tax.
I'm pretty sure I drink one of those a day. Let's poll the average Mainer and see how many drink only tap water.
Post a comment about this story
You must be logged in to post a comment.
click here to log in.
