* Sun-Times…
Michael Bloomberg’s presence — and money — will not be leaving Cook County any time soon.
The billionaire former mayor of New York City has already spent $5 million on ads supporting the Cook County sweetened beverage tax — and he’s prepared to spend “whatever it takes” to support those who voted for it, according to Howard Wolfson, a Democratic political strategist and top Bloomberg adviser.
Though the primary election for seats on the Cook County Board of Commissioners is not until March, Bloomberg and his money are here for the duration, Wolfson said.
“He is in this fight to ensure not a single person who voted for this tax is defeated. Period,” Wolfson told the Chicago Sun-Times.
It’s gonna take a lot of cash to overcome a tax that has an 87 percent disapproval rating.
* The We Ask America poll numbers for individual county commissioners are bad, but not as bad as the overall tax…
For Commissioner Luis Arroyo Jr., D-Chicago, of 684 questioned, 53 percent said they were less likely to re-elect him, the poll found. For Commissioner John Daley, of 700 questioned, nearly 67 percent said they wouldn’t vote to re-elect. For Commissioner Stanley Moore, nearly 65 percent, of 712 questioned said they would not support his re-election. And for Commissioner Deborah Sims, of 718 questioned, 54.5 percent said they were less likely to re-elect.
One new commissioner has been appointed since the November vote. Commissioner Dennis Deer replaced Robert Steele, who died in June. The poll asked whether voters would support Deer should he choose to support the tax, if the board chooses to take up the matter once again. Of 780 questioned, 58 percent said they wouldn’t vote to re-elect Deer if he chose to support the tax.
* Meanwhile…
Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle was back out defending her controversial beverage tax Friday for the second time in as many days, saying she’s not surprised opponents have formed a political action committee to try to defeat it.
A multimillion-dollar ad war already has been going on for weeks. Preckwinkle said the recent formation of Citizens for a More Affordable Cook County to back County Board candidates who oppose the tax was to be expected given the deep-pocketed beverage industry’s fight to overturn it.
“What’s happened in American politics is that it used to be individual contributions and corporate contributions, and now a lot of the action is in political action committees,” she said. “So it doesn’t surprise me. You know, Big Soda has been spending a fortune to attack our sweetened beverage tax, not only last fall around budget time, but starting in the spring as we were moving toward implementation.”
“These folks have a very problematic product and they know it, and they’re spending a lot of money to promote consumption. I think it’s disgraceful,” Preckwinkle added.
- Fax Machine - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:34 am:
This campaign should have started back wyen they passed the tax. Totally dropped the ball PR-wise
- Too Much to Handle - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:38 am:
TONI! You’re not going to win this argument. LET. IT. GO.
- Streator Curmudgeon - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:39 am:
I have yet to hear a logical argument as to how diet soda which contains zero calories causes obesity. Shouldn’t it be exempt from the tax like bottled water?
- Trapped in the 'burbs - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:40 am:
People will never believe that this was about public health. Each commercial solidifies the voters distrust of Preckwinkle. Boykin, Gainer or Claypool, do you want the job?
- Robert the Bruce - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:43 am:
Why doesn’t Preckwinkle concede some ground here and seek compromise?
“I’m sorry; we went too far.” - would be nice to hear that.
Simple: stop taxing Vitamin Water Zero and diet drinks and reduce the tax rate some on sugary drinks.
- Texas Red - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:43 am:
No one likes outside money, especially from an unpopular New York media mogul. This tax already has huge unfavorable numbers, Bloomberg’s cash will actually ad fire to the opposition. The ads with the doctor shaming us to support the soda tax ( cure Diabetes ??) are totally insulting as well. This could be just the impetus needed to get real change at the county Board.
- Ron Burgundy - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:43 am:
Indeed, this tax was very poorly presented and not thought through. Including diet drinks and exempting SNAP purchasers makes the health message ring phony. On a personal note, this Cook County family spent $250 on groceries this weekend, in Will County. From the look of the parking lots and the soda shelves, we are not alone.
- Ed Higher - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:43 am:
Say the pop tax works, and soda consumption plummets. Then where does Preckwinkle do? Increase the tax to compensate? Tax the poor in some other way?
- Amalia - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:44 am:
This is a ridiculous use of money. The tax as structured is problematic, it does not fully address the problem because it cannot be attached to those who are using Federal assistance dollars and who are clearly the target audience that Preckwinkle claims is the reason for the tax. Think of how this money could work on other important issues which Bloomberg cares about. Also, the commercials of the other side are better.
- Responsa - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:47 am:
Poor Toni. She apparently will not allow herself to see the reality of the situation or the handwriting on the wall. Bloomberg might better spend his extra money lobbying congress to remove sugary drinks from the federally funded and tax free SNAP program. Then people might take him (and Toni) seriously that this is a “health initiative”.
- anon - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 9:49 am:
PR has no impact on me. I’m fine with income, property, and general sales taxes. I know that it takes money to fund programs and services that residents depend on. However, i hate this tax. No amount of commercials telling me how bad or good it is is going to affect me when I’m at the counter paying .20 cents on each 1.50 bottle of power ade zero. I bought 10 bottles the other day and paid 2.00 in sweetened beverage tax lone. Thats just awful, and it will never be a popular tax. Bloomberg is throwing his money away on this one.
- Downstate Illinois - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:02 am:
I don’t known in Cook County but down here my local convenience stores has tags stating SNAP eligible for the Hostess cupcakes, twinkles, and ding dongs display. Leaving SNAP foods and drinks out of the equation does nothing for health.
- DuPage Saint - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:05 am:
You can’t beat somebody with nobody. Who has money and the name to take these people on?
- wordslinger - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:12 am:
This will be a case study on how not to roll out a consumption tax increase.
Consumption taxes have been levied many times for many years all over the world. They don’t have to be this confusing to understand or implement.
- Rich Miller - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:13 am:
===I have yet to hear a logical argument===
Then you’re willfully ignorant. Try the Google.
- City Zen - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:14 am:
This is exactly what the Illinois economy needs: millions of dollars from sources outside the state.
Keep spending, Bloomberg. Drive up those ad rates! A dollar spent here is a dollar you cannot spend elsewhere.
- Responsa - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:25 am:
It’s probably too soon to get good data because many people in Cook County likely stocked up on their favorite beverages in the weeks before the tax went into effect and are currently still using their pantry supply. But I should think that soon there will be sales data that tells us exactly how the implementation of the tax has affected purchase of these products both in Cook County and outside in DuPage, Lake, Will, and Indiana. That will be interesting.
- Anonymous - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:36 am:
“These folks have a very problematic tax structure and they know it, and they’re spending a lot of money to promote taxation. I think it’s disgraceful,” 87 out of every 100 residents added.
Fixed it for ya.
- Educ - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:48 am:
Lake County Costco closest to Cook keeps selling out of Diet Coke.
At first I was annoyed Diet Coke was included but now I just virtuously tell people I’m drinking so many Diet Cokes to fund medical care for the indigent. People will DIE if I cut back! I’m taking one for the team with my six Diet Cokes a day.
- Amalia - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:53 am:
how are the ad buys working? who made the ads, purchased the media time? who is making money from the ads?
- ChrisB - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 11:03 am:
My inlaws went to DuPage county to stock up on pop last weekend. $100 worth. They did the rest of their shopping locally. The Jewel in Clarendon Hills can’t keep up with demand.
But yes, please keep reminding us who passed this tax. Let the out-of-state guy who hasn’t stepped foot in a grocery store in decades pay for it. Sounds like a winning formula.
- DuPage Bard - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 11:05 am:
So the framing of this tax has changed to a health debate. Sadly 2 months ago it was nothing but a budget debate. Pink slips being handed out and programs being cut.
The public won’t remember that part of the equation come March. They’ll eat and sleep “save our kids from diabetes” for the next 5 months.
At the end of the day, say you do reduce the amount of soda consumed, where is the next money grab to cover the costs of what this tax was covering? It is a feature of taxing a declining revenue source. You don’t save enough in health costs to offset the loss in revenue as people adjust their consumption. So where will the next tax be Toni?
Also didn’t Preckwinkle run saying Stroger was a horrible person for raising the sales tax 1%?
- Boone's is Back - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 11:16 am:
===Big Soda===
Seriously, is anyone buying that? The people who sling Dr. Pepper are on the same level as the ones who sell tobacco?
- City Zen - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 11:25 am:
==Big Soda. Seriously, is anyone buying that?==
People fear Big Government more.
- Responsa - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 11:29 am:
==who made the ads,==
==big soda==
Don’t know, but almost certainly they were not local.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/12/soda-vs-pop_n_2103764.html
- Boone's is Back - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 11:30 am:
===Don’t know, but almost certainly they were not local.===
LOL
- FormerParatrooper - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 11:57 am:
They made the tax to gain revenue, they are spending revenue to defend the tax. Will there be another tax to fund the revenue spent defending the tax?
- Chicago Cynic - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 12:29 pm:
“- Amalia - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:53 am:
how are the ad buys working? who made the ads, purchased the media time? who is making money from the ads?”
I’ve seen polling about that. The answer is Bloomberg’s spots aren’t doing diddly squat. People are angry because this tax is regressive and arbitrary with absurd enforcement. The Can the Tax ads in response, where everyone says they’re angry, are spot on. While I rather enjoy being told I’m a tool of “Big Soda (they should have said Big Pop),” I’m pretty sure I’m just a reflection of the 87% who are saying “Enough.”
- blue dog dem - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 12:50 pm:
Illinois does not have a monopoly on billionaire buffoons.
- Ron - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 1:21 pm:
I am extremely excited to vote against Prekwinkle.
She is worse than Todd Stroger.
- You could say that, I couldn't - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 1:22 pm:
This certainly explains why John Fritchey has been all over social media trying to take credit for opposing the tax and pretending he has a primary opponent when in fact it looks like he is unopposed (or as close to it as you get).
- Ron - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 1:27 pm:
Fritchey at least voted against this silly tax. He probably has my vote.
- Lucky Pierre - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 2:11 pm:
If sugary beverages are causing obesity and huge health care expenses through Medicaid how come the Federal Government is paying for them through SNAP?
There is zero nutrition. Seems like Mr Bloomberg should direct his efforts to Washington DC
- Ron - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 3:12 pm:
I completely agree Lucky. It is outrageous that SNAP allows for the purchase of garbage food.
- RoscoeRatMatt - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 3:40 pm:
I’d think the influx of Bloomberg-funded ads would only further enrage the voters…or it perhaps it’s just me. He’s an arrogant interloper who was overruled by the courts in his attempts to ban large soda serving sizes in NYC, and all the money in the world won’t change the fact that this tax was poorly conceived. Especially when the generous provisions outlined in the newest contract provided to county jail workers are considered.
- Ron - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 3:46 pm:
Not just you, RoscoeRatMatt. This will help with the taxpayer revolt that’s brewing here.
- Ron - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 3:47 pm:
Cook County needs 0% spending increase for the next 5 years.
- chitowndrummer - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 4:09 pm:
Ed Higher’s post earlier today hit the nail on the head: in order for this tax to generate the projected revenue, Cook County shoppers need to ignore the health benefit message upon which it’s predicated and buy lots of sweetened beverages.
If the stated objective of the tax — to discourage people from purchasing and consuming sweetened beverages that can lead to obesity, diabetes, etc. — was largely successful, then the anticipated revenue would not materialize. This is further evidence that the health arguments for the tax were not what Preckwinkle and Co. had in mind when they enacted it.
- Ron - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 4:15 pm:
chitowndrummer, this is why we must get rid of her. Cook County needs a good 5 years of austerity budgets.
- Hieronymus - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 4:23 pm:
Wow, I completely agree with both Ron & Lucky, and on the same day (exclamation)
- Hieronymus - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 4:27 pm:
… regarding SNAP allowing junk food & beverages in the program.
- wordslinger - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 5:43 pm:
–No one likes outside money, especially from an unpopular New York media mogul. –
Debbie Halvorson and Toi Hutchinson probably didn’t like that Bloomberg money.
I imagine Robin Kelly did.
What examples are you referring to?
- anon2 - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 6:56 pm:
Almost all of us can agree this tax has problems. Those who want it repealed need to offer a practical substitute. The County of Cook has frozen its property tax levy for decades. How about unfreezing it?
- Ron - Monday, Sep 11, 17 @ 10:11 pm:
anon2, how about freezing spending?