Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Rauner names new DC director
Next Post: The governor’s AV caught Republicans by surprise
Posted in:
* I’m thinking that the state Senators who worked on the Grand Bargain are now thanking their lucky stars that they resisted attempts by Gov. Rauner to include a sugary beverage tax in their revenue mix. From We Ask America…
As you may know, a new tax has taken effect in Cook County that places a one cent per ounce tax on most sweetened beverages. We’d like to know if you APPROVE, or DISAPPROVE of the new Cook County beverage tax that places a new tax on most sweetened beverages.
Approve 12.34%
Disapprove 86.64%
Undecided 1.02%Some of the Cook County Commissioners who voted for the tax say they did so to improve the health of Cook County residents, while many in the press speculate that the tax was passed merely to raise more money for County officials to spend. We’d like to know which reason for passing the tax YOU think is more accurate.
Raise money 80.33%
Improve health 8.44%
Unsure 11.22%Will you be MORE LIKELY or LESS LIKELY to re-elect a Cook County commissioner who voted for this new beverage tax?
More likely 10.48%
Less likely 82.56%
No difference 6.96%
* Methodology…
This poll was conducted from August 3 through August 6, 2017 using both automated (recorded) and live operator-initiated calls. In all, 1,119 registered voters completed all questions on the poll. About 46% (515) of the responses came from cell phones. The voters dialed were randomly selected from a proprietary registered-voter database of likely voters to assure the greatest chance of providing an accurate cross-section of opinion from the county-wide sample. No weighting formulas were applied to correct any over- and under-sampling.
…Adding… Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle was on WGN Radio over the weekend and explained her side. Click here.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:32 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Rauner names new DC director
Next Post: The governor’s AV caught Republicans by surprise
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
I wish they would have asked the “more-likely/less-likely-to-re-elect” question about Preckwinkle.
Comment by Roman Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:39 am
This is like an extension of “sin” taxes. Problem: 95% of people commit this sin.
Comment by A guy Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:39 am
Couldn’t get any stronger of a statement than that. Preckwinkle and her staff blundered this one up bad. You can’t say with a straight face that this is only about public health when you threaten layoffs the next week if the beverage tax isn’t upheld. Leaves a bitter taste in people’s mouths (and not only because they aren’t drinking sugary drinks anymore)
Comment by Too Much to Handle Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:42 am
Beverage tax is obviously having some serious roll out problems. There’s sticker shock at what’s actually being charged, and paying a tax for a formerly-free refill leaves a bad taste in people’s mouths. I thought Preckwinkle might go unopposed, but she’ll definitely catch a serious opponent now. If they can revisit the vote on this, I wouldn’t be surprised if it gets rescinded soon.
Comment by TopHatMonocle Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:44 am
Cook County Commissioner Richard Boykin has been vocal in criticizing this tax. Maybe he challenges Preckwinkle in the primary? Runs as an independent?
Comment by New Saints Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:45 am
The tax eaters will stop at nothing to keep eating - or in this case - drinking.
We better get used to this. This is our future.
Comment by DuPage Moderate Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:46 am
Preckwinkle has an easy solution. Just add the 87% to her lawsuit.
Comment by striketoo Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:48 am
The only way to stop these kinds of egregious tax grabs is to actually stop voting for the people that pass this.
This means that opposition candidates have to organize, file, run and get their message out. Otherwise it is just a bunch of hot air and the feed the beast process will continue.
Comment by BIG R. Ph. Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:50 am
The effect isn’t confined to the Cook County Board races. I can easily imagine Rauner making hey of this.
TV ad: “Mike Madigan raised your income taxes. Mike Madigan’s minion, Cook County Board President Toni Prekwinkle, raised your sales taxes and hit you with a massive soda tax. Mike Madigan’s minion at the Board of Assessors raised your property taxes while cutting deals with big corporate clients like JB Pritzker and the law firm of…wait for it…Mike Madigan.
(cue uplifting music)
Don’t wait to see what Mike Madigan’s Minions will take from you next. Support Bruce Rauner and tell Mike Madigan “Enough is Enough.”
Yes, Rauner has a chance to be reelected.
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:51 am
And hay
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:52 am
I’d rather have this than Rahm’s 7¢ bag tax.
Comment by JoanP Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:58 am
By Federal rules The new sugar tax does not get added to food stamp recpients when they purchase soda or sugary drinks. What I don’t understand is why tax money is allowed to be used to buy sugar drinks in the first place?
Comment by Confused Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:58 am
More than the dollar value I get angry at the condescension inherent in these “sin” taxes. Same thing with smoking, it’s stupid to smoke and you shouldn’t do it but we don’t need this passive aggressive baloney trying to control our choices. Either outlaw the practice and see how that works, or get out of our faces. Same basic idea with the “new” abortion laws in some states, what with forcing expecting women to have ultrasounds before an abortion.
Maybe if I actually believed, for one second, that the additional revenue would be earmarked for healthcare costs associated with diabetes or other weight related problems I would be OK with it, but we all know it’s not.
Comment by Perrid Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:00 pm
the lawsuit against IRMA just adds to the insult. Silver lining? Cook Co. sugary drink tax probably dooms statewide effort.
Comment by Dozer Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:01 pm
===Either outlaw the practice and see how that works, or get out of our faces===
That’s kinda goofy. The cig taxes worked to help bring down consumption. That’s a good thing overall, fiscally and economically for this state.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:02 pm
===I’d rather have this than Rahm’s 7¢ bag tax.===
Really? I am honestly curious, why? You can buy your own reusable bags and skip the bag tax. Unless you’re brewing your own pop at home, it’s really hard to avoid the new beverage tax.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:02 pm
“This is like an extension of “sin” taxes. Problem: 95% of people commit this sin.”
And that’s the problem Guy. Soda can causes obesity and obesity is big problem for the nation.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:03 pm
Seems like a battle of the will of the people vs. the bloat/corruption of Cook County gov’t; tough call on this one.
Comment by Texas Red Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:05 pm
So Confused, you want everyone to be on bread on water diet huh? I’ll never understand people who look at needy people and say “They have it too good.”
Comment by Perrid Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:05 pm
I think Preckwinkle et al made an enormous - perhaps politically fatal - mistake in trying to sell the tax as a health-related movement. It won’t take much next fall for decently financed challengers who surfs a repeal wave to put some of them out of office. This issue is going to leave a big nasty bruise.
Comment by Downers Grove Guy Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:06 pm
Confused, yo¨ write: ” What I don’t understand is why tax money is allowed to be used to buy sugar drinks in the first place?”
Really? It is called lobbying. Maybe the makers of these sugary drinks need to be taxed more. Why are we subsidizing their profits?
Comment by Terry Salad Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:06 pm
Very bad idea by team Preckwinkle on soda tax. Richard Boykin will be next CC president if he runs. I don’t know what she was thinking.
Comment by Rocky Rosi Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:07 pm
JoanP, what’s so hard about bringing your own re-usable bag? I’m not some gung-ho environmentalist by any means, but bringing my own bag is a very small inconvenience compared to the good it does in protecting the environment from a bunch of plastic bags that take 800 years to degrade.
Comment by ??? Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:07 pm
The tax really seems ham-fisted. Especially because it avoids the SNAP eligible population (which I don’t believe can be taxed), so it compounds the “unfair” tax messaging that the beverage industry is already running on.
I like Preckwinkle a lot, but the one is likely a vote killer going forward.
Comment by marrs96 Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:08 pm
I went to McDonald’s yesterday in Countryside. Ordered an unsweetened ice tea and asked for a packet of sweetener. Saved 18-cents. Take that Madam President!
Comment by Wylie Coyote Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:08 pm
Boykin is seriously considering running against Preckwinkle in the primary. At this point I think the only thing that would stop him is if Danny Davis decided not to run & Boykin ran for Congress instead.
Comment by Fax Machine Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:10 pm
I have the General Lee loaded up with Dew headed up I57.
Comment by Nieva Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:10 pm
The tax applies to zero calorie drinks, so talk about improving health is nonsense.
Comment by George Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:12 pm
Wylie - I always order unsweetened tea when I eat out - are you confirming it is not taxed?
I also am curious how they treat these “freestyle” machines where they give you a cup & pick what you want - what if I’m only getting unsweetened tea or seltzer from it?
Comment by Fax Machine Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:12 pm
The idea that the tax was intended to promote public health went out of the window when Preckwinkle and her allies exempted LINK card users from the sugary beverage tax. These are the same citizens most likely to wind up at the county hospital.
Comment by W Flag Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:15 pm
To be honest, I think Preckwinkle’s trying to get the $17 Million from IRMA because she knows if they don’t give it to the County, they’ll spend that money backing Boykin in a primary against her.
Comment by Fax Machine Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:16 pm
Pretty sure the 20 piece McNugget for lunch feeds more into the obesity than a zero calorie drink does.
Can we add a Nugget tax?
Comment by Dublin Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:17 pm
The same point can be made with people who get their insurance thru their employer or receive VA benefits. I mean if the “gov-mint” is going to scrutinize individual behavior, may as well include everyone getting Government Entitlements.
***
- Confused - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 11:58 am:
By Federal rules The new sugar tax does not get added to food stamp recpients when they purchase soda or sugary drinks. What I don’t understand is why tax money is allowed to be used to buy sugar drinks in the first place?
Comment by Mike Cirrincione Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:19 pm
===than a zero calorie drink does===
You might wanna do a bit of basic research into how bad for you those “diet” pops really are. Like drinking chemical stews. And it makes you crave sugar even more.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:21 pm
@ 47th Ward and ???:
1. I don’t buy sweetened beverages, so this tax doesn’t affect me.
2. I DO re-use plastic bags for cleaning out the cats’ litter boxes, lining bathroom wastebaskets, containing food scraps for disposal, etc. Can’t do any of that with a reusable bag!
Comment by JoanP Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:21 pm
@ Fax Machine:
Excluded from the tax (inter alia) are “Unsweetened drinks to which a purchaser can add, or can request that a retailer add, sugar, at the point of sale”
Comment by JoanP Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:23 pm
Rich, I don’t think that the tax itself is so awful, it is that the tax rate is so ridiculously high, almost as high as alcohol. This could be Preckwinkle’s version of a parking meter fiasco.
Comment by Just Me Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:23 pm
=== The tax applies to zero calorie drinks, so talk about improving health is nonsense. ===
Although I am 101% opposed to this tax, one could argue that zero calorie drinks, sweetened with artificial sweeteners, is worse or just as bad for you as drinks sweetened with natural sweeteners.
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:25 pm
Thanks JoanP. That makes sense.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:26 pm
Rich, I wasn’t saying taxes aren’t effective on changing behavior, I was objecting to trying to control or change behavior like that. Social engineering, manipulation on that level, is very morally grey in my opinion.
Comment by Perrid Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:26 pm
===And it makes you crave sugar even more.===
Fair enough. But, if we’re taxing a single product that leads to obesity - why aren’t we taxing them all? It’s not like Diet Soda or Soda in general - or even lemonade - is the single cause for obesity.
Comment by Dublin Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:27 pm
Rich has there been a tax that polled well indicating people supported it?
this seems like doing a poll to ask if people like having pieces of skin removed with the old tuna can lid keys…
Comment by Ghost Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:27 pm
Also, for what its worth, political gadfly Frank Coconate has announced he is running in the GOP primary for Cook County Board Prez
Comment by Fax Machine Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:28 pm
==The idea that the tax was intended to promote public health went out of the window when Preckwinkle and her allies exempted LINK card users from the sugary beverage tax.==
Preckwinkle and her allies didn’t exempt LINK card users, the federal government did.
Comment by City Zen Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:29 pm
And the “zero tax hikes, ever!” crowd strikes again.
Go vote for Rauner again. Watch the state continue to burn.
Comment by ZC Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:31 pm
Toni:
You might want to spend some time reading up on the whole Philadelphia, PA recent experience on the whole soda tax deal.
It’s not exactly been a screaming success.
Piece of advice: “Don’t lead with your chin”.
Comment by Judgment Day Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:31 pm
Perrid, So you are saying that anybody that has government support to buy their basic food needs should be allowed to buy “soda pop” at taxpayer expense when the average working man can not afford to buy “soda pop” Beside the luxury item it also adds to obesity and causes health problems that must be paid by the working man or woman
Comment by Confused Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:31 pm
@Ghost, a millionaire’s tax polls well at times.
Comment by Robert the Bruce Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:33 pm
JoanP, I used to use the plastic bags for litterbox cleanout, but I found a box of 300 bio-degradable pet waste bags online for $15! They are awesome, and cheaper over the long run than paying 7 cents per bag.
Sorry to go off topic for a moment, Rich.
Comment by ??? Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:35 pm
You can fool some of the people some of the time. It didn’t work this time. Political ploys seldom get more disingenuous than this one.
Comment by Keyser Soze Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:36 pm
Lets hope Preckwinkle does get a credible challenge in Dem Primary next year. I got a kick last year when she was calling Ken Dunkin a career politician in his primary vs Stratton.
Preckwinkle is the personification of a career politician. Cook County and Chicago taxpayers have been paying her salary for over 30 years
Comment by Etown Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:37 pm
A tax on sugary beverages I could understand and accept. The County tax isn’t that…it’s an abomination.
Comment by Anon Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:41 pm
Toni, Toni, Toni, you’ve given so many people so much ammunition, including with your talk on the radio.
1) beverage tax is not like the cigarette tax. that one is straightforward, and applicable to all. beverage tax is confusing. if in fact the consumption goes down, as you hope for cigarette taxes, what is your plan for raising revenue, or better yet, management of services? and we know from your answer to whether you would scale this tax back that “the pattern is not to decrease.”
2) people on food stamps don’t pay the beverage tax. everyone else does. yet you cry that poorer communities get 25% of their calories from sweetened beverages. disconnect.
3) Toni claims that the two alternatives for finances of Cook County government are raise revenues and layoffs. With 46% of your budget in healthcare, we are way past time that you analyze the effectiveness and usefulness of Oak Forest Hospital and Provident Hospital. Check your log of lawsuits for those two places while you are at it. layoffs is not the only answer to government management. Reconfigure how you deliver services.
This beverage tax is the most angering thing to come the way of Cook County residents. Not smart, Toni.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:43 pm
I still don’t understand how it is good policy to predicate your “minimum viable budget” on sin taxes. If it is successful, you have less revenues and still need to lay people off.
It’s also interesting to note that this tax is more than twice the amount that alcohol is taxed at. Which is worse for your health, alcohol or sugar? One is literally a poison.
Comment by ChrisB Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:44 pm
===One is literally a poison===
My doctor tells me to drink red wine. Hardly think it’s a poison.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:45 pm
====My doctor tells me to drink red wine. Hardly think its a poison====
Unless your doctor really doesn’t like you and “forgets” to tell you to drink one glass of red wine per day…
Comment by Commonsense in Illinois Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:50 pm
====My doctor tells me to drink red wine. Hardly think its a poison====
=======Unless your doctor really doesn’t like you and “forgets” to tell you to drink one glass of red wine per day…======
You mean I’m not supposed to drink the whole bottle? D’Oh-
Comment by TMI Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:55 pm
Rich - though cigarette taxes do curb smoking, they have some negatives associated with them.
1) They’re regressive - poor people tend to smoke more than rich people. (of course, you can argue that this means “curbing smoking” is progressive)
2) They may lead some smokers to worse nicotine and other products. https://phys.org/news/2015-10-cigarette-taxes-shifts-consumers-dangerous.html
3)some evidence they increase smuggling.
I’m not against cigarette taxes, but not for revenue - all the money should go into anti-smoking programs or somesuch. Revenue should primarily be based on income and the rates should be progressive.
Comment by lake county democrat Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:57 pm
Confused, data shows that SNAP users are just barely more likely to buy soda than the average household, so I’m not sure where you’re pulling “the average working man can not afford to buy “soda pop””. You’re trying to make it seem like they are living better than average, when that just isn’t true. For example, the average monthly benefit per person was $125 ( https://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/SNAPsummary.pdf ) last year which is just over $4 a day. Compare that to this chart, with USDA food plans, and you can see they fall squarely into the thrifty section https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usda_food_plans_cost_of_food/CostofFoodJul2014.pdf
Comment by Perrid Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:59 pm
Robert good point
Comment by Ghost Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:00 pm
They should ban LINK cards from being used on soda altogether. It’s hypocritical to have this tax and at the same time allow people to use government subsidies to buy this poison. Not sure if that would be a Federal or State decision though.
Comment by Fax Machine Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:02 pm
Even if the health benefits are included in the argument, voters don’t believe that Ms Preckwinkle and her cohorts passed this tax for their benefit. They believe it was done for one purpose: to raise more money through yet another tax.
The person who correctly stated that NO tax every polls well is missing the point. Many taxes poll in the 50-65% disapproval range because the so-called tax eaters defend it. An 87% approval rate shows there’s more to the discontent than usual.
A lot more.
Comment by Downers Grove Guy Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:02 pm
=== has there been a tax that polled well indicating people supported it? ===
Some taxes are gonna poll better than others. I believe the state income tax increase, which will hit people’s pocketbooks a lot harder, polled better than the soda tax. This soda tax left a very bad taste in my mouth (no pun intended).
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:06 pm
Do any other counties in IL run public hospitals?
Maybe CC should close their hospitals, but I would prefer keeping them open and paying higher taxes.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:07 pm
=I’d rather have this than Rahm’s 7¢ bag tax.=
The City is reporting that this tax has actually caused a decline in the use of plastic bags. I think the City was hoping for the revenue it would generate. The City’s estimates have fallen far short of what was expected.
Comment by Because I said so.... Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:31 pm
Now that they’ve actually experienced it people should try extrapolating a year’s worth of additional cost for their regular normal consumption of say, diet coke. For some people that mathematical exercise may reduce consumption. For most, though, it will just additionally tick them off and they’ll find ways around it until it is repealed. I do not drink any form of pop or sweetened beverage nor do I live in Cook County, so the new tax affects me not at all. But I recognize a political landmine when I see it and Toni’s tax is a political landmine writ large.
Comment by Responsa Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:35 pm
Brace yourselves for more of these types of taxes, fees, user fees, etc.
Comment by Mike Royko Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:41 pm
Yeah, but 98% disapprove of raising property taxes, so really it’s a win.
Comment by From the 'Dale to HP Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:45 pm
Another place for Toni to look for management streamlining…..the courts. there’s a lot of data on judges and how much time they spend on the bench.
what percentage of the judges continue their call when they have a jury going? it’s probably, actually just a few in number. Make them do that. It’s not like all courtrooms have ASAs and PDs working on a jury at the same time, and even then judges have been known to keep going with the call and the jury. And then there are the civil courts. Those have multiple attorneys working and the judge can keep going. Make justice move more swiftly.
do that and you can probably see how you can actually leave judicial posts unfilled, close courtrooms, shift staff as there are retirements, people leaving posts in the Clerk of the Court and Sheriff’s Office.
Yes, you have to get Judge Tim Evans to go along. He used to be a reformer. What happened to you Judge Evans?
Comment by Amalia Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:47 pm
If this tax gets Toni out of office, it will be worth it. Run Boykin, run.
Comment by Trapped in the 'burbs Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:51 pm
Boykin will not run he cant afford to lose a race. Long term goal is still to be Davis replacement.
The County Commish with big goals and high self opinion is the one to watch, Gaynor…..
Comment by Inspector Gadget Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 1:55 pm
Also let me add, could Proft be calling his old Buddy Tony Peraica for another run at it. Proft could make another 250-300k off Tony to boot.
Comment by Inspector Gadget Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:00 pm
Don’t blame me, Rich. Blame biology. Your body sees alcohol as a poison and sends it to your liver to get broken down into stuff it can actually use.
Sugar is an easy source of energy. So much so that most people don’t use it fast enough, and it gets stored for later.
It’s science, man.
The tax is bad though. It’s insanely high, regressive and awful policy if Toni is redlining her budget this much.
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:03 pm
==Toni, Toni, Toni, you’ve given so many people so much ammunition, including with your talk on the radio.==
Toni’s tight voice and continual throat clearing was a sure tell of how stressed and nervous she is about this. Obviously Rick P. tried to be fair in his questions but it was not a good interview from her. Regardless of the reasons for it the issue of who must pay and who will not be required to pay the tax juxtaposed against the purported “health benefits” came across as nothing but pure hypocrisy.
Comment by Responsa Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:06 pm
@ Responsa, agree on Toni’s demeanor. As for Rick being fair, that caller question was right to the heart of the hypocrisy you accurately state.
Comment by Amalia Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:09 pm
Thought I had a name. 203 was me.
Comment by ChrisB Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:10 pm
I keep wondering why it’s so bad for the County to “raise revenue”?! That’s what governments do to provide services. So who cares if the tax helps raise revenue for important county services when it also has positive health effects? Also, I’d love to see the questions/explanations provided to poll participants before the questions that were shared were asked. I have a feeling it was funded by Big Soda…
Comment by Chicago J Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:16 pm
This is a tax you can avoid. Don’t complain to me about this tax when you have 100% control over whether or not you pay it.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:16 pm
I always say you don’t beat somebody with nobody. And with all due respect to Boykin, he ain’t gonna be taking out Toni Preckwinkle any time soon.
The pop tax hurts and will continue to hurt her in ways she can’t even dream of. But it’s hard to see it killing her re-election prospects.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:21 pm
For Boykin to be competitive, he needs a huge proportion of the Republicans in Cook County to pull Democratic ballots (because there likely won’t be any action on the GOP primary ballot), plus he needs the beverage industry to shell out at least $5 Million for him.
Comment by Grand Avenue Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:27 pm
If Toni Preckwinkle was so concerned about health she’d come out for market based health insurance.
Comment by Steve Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:29 pm
Preckwinkle is the same hypocrite who ran against Stroger in the primaries arguing that sales taxes in Cook County were too high.
She wants to empty the jails to save money, but the reality is that she is giving pay raises to her cronies.
Comment by Walter Concrete Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:31 pm
Demorilzed. You Republicans sure get a kick out of taxing the little guys.
Comment by blue dog dem Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:35 pm
Cook County Jail is the largest Provider of Mental Health services in the county, and the most expensive.
Comment by Mike Cirrincione Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 2:36 pm
But you can’t beat somebody with nobody…who is going to run against Taxwinkle?
Comment by northshore cynic Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 3:17 pm
==Demorilzed. You Republicans sure get a kick out of taxing the little guys.==
1. You have no idea what I am.
2. As I said, you can avoid this tax. Don’t like it? Don’t but those goods. Nobody is forcing you to.
You expend and incredible amount of energy complaining about taxes.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 3:22 pm
Dem. I get that energy from my once a week diet dr. Pepper.
Taxes. Me I am for a progressive income tax. It will affect me. What I am against is people insistence on taxing those who can afford it the least. Democrats and Republicans are identical when it comes this tactic.
Comment by blue dog dem Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 3:28 pm
I approve. Ok to tax unhealthy drinks.
Comment by Mr B. Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 3:47 pm
The COunty’s fiscal year ends at the end of November, so I wish someone would ask what went wrong with wither the revenue or expense estimates.
I drink a lot of diet coke and I am going to try to view it that Pres Preckwinkle is curing me of a bad habit, it is no good for me.
Comment by James the Intolerant Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 3:54 pm
=demoralized
“This is a tax you can avoid”
Yep and retailers and the jobs and sales tax they generate can also avoid it; by moving or locating outside of Cook County.
Comment by Texas Red Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 4:00 pm
==My doctor tells me to drink red wine. Hardly think it’s a poison.==
Your excellent caring and loving Doctor understands the alternative!
Comment by A guy Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 4:05 pm
“At this point I think the only thing that would stop him is if Danny Davis decided not to run & Boykin ran for Congress instead.”
Or a look at his opposition research.
Comment by Seriously? Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 4:06 pm
=== This is a tax you can avoid. Don’t complain to me about this tax when you have 100% control over whether or not you pay it. ===
People give up their right to criticize and petition government tax policies when it relates to a tax they could avoid? That’s, frankly, one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.
What if we raise the state automobile registration fee to $1,000 a year? I mean, people can just avoid it by not owning a car, or reduce the burden by downsizing from two cars to one car.
Comment by Just Observing Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 4:17 pm
You can complain about it all you want. Go for it. But, the fact is you can choose whether or not you want to pay it. That’s not ridiculous. That’s a fact.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 4:24 pm
- Perrid - Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 12:00 p
This has Nothing in common with Abortion
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 4:28 pm
“Nothing is certain, except death and taxes.”
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 5:07 pm
Meh - I’ll simply buy soda in IN along with my gas and booze while visiting my South Side relatives. I refuse to pay that and the bag tax and I pray that Binny’s and Costco open somewhere on Indianapolis BLVD just over the border. I will also be certain to vote for the opponent of Preckwinkle and any county commissioner that advanced this nonsense upon us.
Comment by Frank O'Pinion Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 5:19 pm
Guess who RECOMMENDS diet soda as a substitute for regular soda? the ADA - American Diabetic Association. Who do I trust more? The ADA or TP?
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 6:25 pm
I drink probiotics (medicinal). My mother takes her probiotics this way as well. We are going to other counties because these are being charged the extra tax. Also some waters are being charged the extra tax. These are UNSWEETENED.
This is BIG BROTHER. They just want more money and lets squeeze any and all money we can out of these people.
It is the little Mom and Pop stores that are going to be hurt by this.
I watch every penny I spend and I am not going to give one xtra cent if I do not have to.
Comment by anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 8:00 pm
I pose three questions. 1). Didn’t President Preckwinkle run against Todd Stroger focusing on the issue of reducing the 1% county sales tax? 2). Given the Affordable Care Act has given Cook County government $300 million in additional monies, where were the previous allocated revenues from the county appropriated? 3). According to President Preckwinkle Affordable Care Act has a ripple effect on county government of savings of potentially $800 million, where did the monies saved go? President Preckwinkle I do not see Benjamin Franklin (figure in Preckwinkle’s commercial against Todd Stroger) in the room. “A penny saved is a penny earned.”
Comment by Anonymous Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 8:51 pm
My penny an oreo cookie tax wasn’t so outrageous after all.
Comment by blue dog dem Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 8:56 pm
There’s the either/or fallacy at work here: Either the tax is to improve public health, or it’s to raise revenue. Human beings, even politicos, often have mixed motives.
Comment by anon2 Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 9:13 pm
Blue Dog, Never.
I’ve cut back, but Oreos used to be one of AA’s four food groups.
Comment by Arthur Andersen Monday, Aug 7, 17 @ 9:43 pm
AA. I FEEL YOUR PAIN. HAD TO GO COLD TURKEY. CUT A FEW YEARS OFF MY LIFE I AM SURE.
Comment by blue dog dem Tuesday, Aug 8, 17 @ 5:33 am
How good it feels to walk into my local (Florida) store and buy a coke when I want one for a fair price. Oh how fleeing Illinois has been more rewarding every day. Of course the ZERO state tax is even a better feeling or the fact my house has substancialy appreciated. So many good things. How sad for those who stay onboard a sinking ship listening to the music.
Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Aug 8, 17 @ 7:32 am
==Either the tax is to improve public health, or it’s to raise revenue.==
It can be both. That was the purpose of the cigarette tax. To make people quit smoking while simultaneously raising revenue.
Comment by Demoralized Tuesday, Aug 8, 17 @ 7:58 am
I think it is time the suburbs secede from Cook and form a new county.
That way Toni has a smaller area to support.
Comment by Suburb Guy Tuesday, Aug 8, 17 @ 12:48 pm