From The Plain Dealer --
Great things are happening in Cleveland, there's no doubt about it. As a downtown resident, immediate past president of the Downtown Cleveland Residents Association, and senior pastor of the historic Old Stone Church on Public Square, I have seen, firsthand, the emerging strength of our city core over the last six years, and would be discouraged, to say the least, to see it stop or even slow now. But a new Cleveland needs a new way of doing business and that could very well start by ending the so called “sin tax.”Do our stadiums bring added economic and social value to downtown Cleveland and the region as a whole? Yes; clearly! The Gateway District alone is booming with new restaurants, pubs and, most importantly, new residents who bring a demand for more housing and retail in downtown such as the new Heinen's 33,000-square-foot grocery store at East Ninth Street and Euclid Avenue. Do the stadiums belong to us and not the teams who play in them? Yes; we are all shareholders. As owners and landlords of these community assets, do we need to provide periodic maintenance and upgrades? Again, yes; if we want pro sports teams and the ability to host major concerts and events, of course we do. But is a sin tax the way to get the job done in the most equitable and helpful way? Probably not.Growing cities look for smart ways of powering their cultural economic engines. Let our esteemed council people take the lead by exploring more just and contemporary ways of funding our important stadiums and the economic dividend they bring.Besides, the research shows that sin taxes do not work the way some revenue-hungry benefactors claim they do. In their 2009 article, "Taxing Sin," for the market-oriented research group, the Mercatus Center of George Mason University, Richard Williams and Katelyn Christ debunk the myths surrounding sin taxes: Sin taxes don't discourage unhealthy behaviors such as drinking and smoking (the original argument for sin tax). And more often than not, monies raised are less likely to fund programs that help those with unhealthy behaviors (research, cessation programs, etc.) and more likely to fund stadiums and the arts. Moreover, sin taxes create a codependent relationship, where those funded need those taxed to continue in their unhealthy ways in order to keep the revenue stream flowing.Of greatest concern to me, and anyone else who cares about what is just, is the fact that a sin tax is a tax where a targeted group of citizens bears the burden of the whole. And sin taxes usually fall, say Williams and Christ, "disproportionately on consumers at the lower end of the income distribution," those least likely, financially speaking, to be able to enjoy the benefits of our pro sporting and entertainment events. A sin tax, in other words, singles out and places an unjust burden on the few, often those with less means, to generate benefits for the many.The sin tax is an easy but unimaginative and grossly unfair way of generating necessary funds to sustain Cleveland’s amenities. I'm all for taking care of our stadiums and our exceptional arts programs, but why not do it through a fairer and more sophisticated, multilayered approach which spreads out the tax burden of stadium ownership while nudging up rental fees. Or, at the very least, why not extend a small fractional sales tax levied on all citizens? After all, if we all benefit, and I think we do, then we should all contribute. Let’s love the sin and hate the tax!R. Mark Giuliano is the senior pastor of the Old Stone Church on Public Square and the former president of the Downtown Cleveland Residents Association.
Vote No on Issue 7
Stop the Sin Tax!
