11/14/12 No new taxes - unless they're local

  • By Nick Sabo
  • November 14, 2012
  • 330
                        
SUMMARY: Ohio lawmakers toss suggestion for sin tax to fund public health districts Opposition to new taxes led Ohio lawmakers to edit out a suggestion of a sin tax by a committee examining the future of public health. Lawmakers sitting on the Legislative Committee on Public Health Futures made it clear Oct. 23 that county health districts won’t be getting new revenues at the state level, favoring instead taxing local populations through levies. When a investigation of a sin tax as a means of sustainable funding was voted through Oct. 9 by the futures committee, the recommendation was thrown out without so much as consulting them. The committee was assembled to draft a list of recommendations to improve the Ohio public health system. It was composed of public health officials and representatives of the Ohio house and senate, and was chaired by State Senator David Burke. Among the state representatives on the board was Lynn Watchmann, chairman of the health and aging committee. When the committee met for the last time in Columbus Oct. 9, it submitted 11 recommendations. The eleventh recommendation, submitted by Holmes County Health Commissioner Dr. D.J. McFadden, suggested exploring an excise tax, also known as a “sin tax” as a means of new revenue. McFadden made the recommendation noting that because tobacco and sugary drinks contribute to health problems, they should be taxed to offset the burden they place on public health. The sin tax was suggested as a means to find a sustainable way to increase the amount of state funding for health districts, which currently stands at $.17 per capita. Several committee members, including Delaware County assistant health commissioner Nancy Shapiro, would tell the committee they felt the $.17 is inadequate. Shapiro also discussed a sin tax as a source of sustainable revenue Oct. 23. When the recommendations were posted online Oct. 16, the list was shortened to 10 recommendations. The sin tax didn’t make the cut. McFadden fired off several angry e-mails to committee members beginning Oct. 17. The Bargain Hunter obtained the e-mails through a public records request. In a Oct. 17 e-mail to committee members, McFadden stated he believed the committee had been subverted for political reasons. In the e-mail, McFadden blames Watchmann for pulling the recommendation, and says the Ohio Department of Health Director “is ok with leaving it out because he doesn’t want to have the governor mad at him”. McFadden further writes: How is this democracy? How is this the American way. You form a committee, you have public meetings, you vote on what the recommendations are, and one or two people can arbitrarily say this recommendation will not be allowed to come forward? This is what is at the heart of the problem in our country. Politicians think they can do anything. They do not need to listen to the people. In other e-mails, McFadden compared the decision to strike the recommendation without first consulting the committee as the “process that occurs in North Korea, China”. Not willing to give up on the recommendation, McFadden sent his copy of the recommendations back to committee members asking the 11th recommendation be restored. As a result, an Oct. 23 special meeting of the committee was called. Transcripts of the meeting posted at the Ohio Department of Health website have Burke taking responsibility for pulling the recommendation. At the special meeting, Watchmann said “it would extremely premature and inappropriate for us to recommend any reference to increase taxes, whatever fancy way you want to say that”. He continues to state that if the report mentions taxes it “will be dead before it gets to the House”. Watchmann said taxes as new revenues would be seen as “distasteful” to the general assembly. Instead, he floated local tax levies as a possible source of income. Watchmann said that while “driving through northwest Ohio I believe I see a number of health department levies on the ballot of which maybe in some counties are more successful, but there are certainly avenues within the Ohio Revised Code for health departments to seek revenue from taxpayers, one of those being the current structure of property taxes.” McFadden’s recommendation was thrown out as a whole, then rewritten to include a reference to local and federal sources for revenue. As per the suggestion of several state representatives, including Watchmann, no mention is made for finding a sustainable solution through taxes at the state level. Watchmann, speaking before the committee, said grant money is available from the state for local governments that meet efficiency standards. He was unsure if health districts were eligible for the grants. Commenting on his experience Nov. 1 with the committee, McFadden says he believes the state made it very clear where new revenues should come from. “I feel that, given the opportunity to support local public health through state funds, or to return more to local communities, the legislature opted for a local solution, specifically tax levies,” McFadden said. The transcripts and final report can be viewed at http://www.odh.ohio.gov/localhealthdistricts/PublicHealthFutures.aspx


Loading next article...

End of content

No more pages to load