Tax alcoholic beverages as much as you want - just don't use any of the general fund for your alcohol enforcement / rehab programs. If the boozers can afford to get drunk, then they can and should equitably have to pay for the enforcement and/or rehab programs that arise from such problems on their own.

As you already know, Hoffa does not drink because it's not a logical activity!

As the sister of an alcoholic, I can speak from experience....they never think they have a problem so they will never go to rehab and never stop driving. My alcoholic sibling has his wife offering to pay for rehab and he won't go. It is a condition of the visitation of his kids and he still won't go. Unless it is ordered by a judge and he is hand delivered there, it will never happen. Alcoholism is a sad disease that people think is nothing but it is a real problem that they can't control without real help.

►It would help if we would increase the tax on alcohol ◄

Marxism knows no bounds. We already tax it, a lot. Get your stupid education money somewhere else, or GFY.

I disagree with the "soft" approach to fund rehab and education programs.
Step 1: Enforce the law that is already on the books.
Step 2: Eliminate occupational licenses for OWI offenders.
FYI: Do you know that under Wisconsin law a 10th offender for OWI can apply for an occupational license after 45 days? Now how stupid is that????

@Steve...I don't know where you got the idea that we tax alcohol a lot. Wisconsin has one of the lowest tax rates on alcohol in the nation. State tax on beer is equal to Missouri @ $.06/gallon (lowest in the nation); state tax on wine is second lowest, with California the lowest @ $.20/per gallon, Wisconsin @ $.25/gallon; and Wisconsin ranks ninth lowest on spirits @ $3.25/gallon.

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention just released a new study that shows how much society loses because of excessive drinking, and the numbers aren’t pretty. Of the $224 billion, almost three quarters of it (72%) is due to lost productivity in the workplace. Health issues (11%), increased law enforcement (9%) and drunk driving accidents (6%) make up the remainder. The researchers break the numbers down in a lot of different useful ways. $224 billion represents an additional social cost of $1.90 for every alcoholic drink, or $746 for every person in the country. (As with most economic studies, the data lags, so it is from the year 2006.)"

Read more: http://www.care2.com/causes/the-hidden-costs-of-alcohol-abuse-in-america.html#ixzz20EXLzBn7

It's time to wake and drink some coffee for this very sobering subject.

Why did you overlook the federal tax on alcohol?
http://www.ttb.gov/tax_audit/atftaxes.shtml

Taxing it more does nothing but gives the already bolted government more money to waste and go into debt with limiting the income of the private consumer of a legal product.

Like I said earlier, Marxism knows no bounds. Your ideas are biased on an emotional side that may sell as good and noble but do nothing in the real world. The cancer that eats away at America comes from those that want to limit or control behavior using government. Drink your big gulp while you can.

@Steve...I didn't overlook the federal tax on alcohol. That has nothing to do with alcohol consumption in the State of Wisconsin. Even if we raise the tax to dedicate it to the education and treatment of alcohol related social problems, it is not going to kill the consumption of alcohol in the state, but we we would have funds to address the social costs. Now whose hiding their heads in the sand. You as an employer have to be concerned about the loss of productivity and should support efforts to control the irresponsible behavior.

@Lyle... Since each of our 50 states has its own alcohol tax schedule, do you know of any studies that indicate a high correlation between worker productivity rates and the alcohol tax rate?

OR, I could just pay my employees less and start this class making attendance mandatory. Then we'll see how many employees I have left at the end of the year.

new tax and fees
Instead of
Hey lets cut this silly program and reallocate the funds to this new social boondoggle liberal experiment.

Let's also relate it to food stamps. Giving it away for free reduces crime and is better for all of us. It also increases economic spending and lowers unemployment. Booze pantries and EBT cards for everyone, thanks Obama! mmm mm mmm

@GearHead...You're making light of a very serious problem, why?

Why can't frickin people just take personal responsibility for their own damn actions! Up the fines on OWI offense to $25k minimum, survivable in bankruptcy. And make sure that the state aggressively pursues collection until death of the convicted.

Anyone of any age should be able to drink. Sounds great. So when momma is not available for breastfeeding, I suggest cracking open a Punch-Top from Miller and giving it to Junior.

I wish Muskego bars had taxi services.

@'lake time' - everyone has a phone or can ask someone to call a cab for them. They do drive out to Muskego to take you home. I don't think bars should have a waiting cab.

@J.B. Schmidt...I agree that we need to get much tougher on alcohol abuse in this state. Drunk driving from first offense onward should be more harshly dealt with. The culture of binge drinking must be changed. The primary reason for increasing the state tax on alcohol would be to fund more rigorous enforcement, education and treatment. Alcohol taxes should be like gas taxes, dedicated to specific needs. We know that high tobacco taxes has had an impact on cutting the smoking problem. People who chose to smoke are paying a high price to exercise that privilege. Why should alcohol be any different?

@JB -

Great points. But if it is true that "the Department of Transportation estimated that alcohol-related crashes cost the state more than $500 million in 2000," then why shouldn't purchasers of alcoholic beverages have to foot the bill for this? Why should this money be coming from the general fund? Wouldn't that act to punish those of us that refrain from consuming alcoholic beverages?

I don't know about you, but I'm getting sick of paying for other's stupidity!

@Lyle
Taxing behavior solves nothing. It only punishes the lawful and strips freedom. The tax on cigarettes has unfairly punished the lower to middle class of smoker, hurting families and costing tax payers more as more are taking advantage of the welfare systems while still funding their habits. If it is harmful we should ban it, but then what about the revenue it generates? The tax on smoking is more about greedy government officials then about helping people.

Binge drinking is done at an age were taxation will only create a black market for alcohol. There by punishing the law abiding adult. The number of people who don't drink and drive far out numbers the amount that do; therefore you are again punishing the law abiding more severely. The punishment must happen on the drunk driving itself.

As for smoking, their punishment should be the demand they cover they own health care cost (yes, even if that means that people will suffer harshly because they can't pay for medical attention). It is only a cost to society as a whole because we have allowed it. Which is worse, allowing a person to destroy their life because of the medical safety net or exposing the consequences of their actions and having them adjust their behavior accordingly.

As I stated, expose their failure and the cost and the behavior will correct itself.

@Hoffa
Why aren't the drunk drivers footing the bill? Why does my law abiding purchase of Miller Lite need to cost more because of another's actions?

How do they factor in the cost of this $500 million #?

@JB -

You're right - the drunks should be the ones that pay. But why does the alcoholic beverage industry and tavern league in this state, through their respective lobbies, constantly push for legislation that protects drunks?

Like I said, up the OWI fines to $25k minimum for first offense, survivable in bankruptcy, and force the state to aggressively pursue collection of such fines until the death of the convicted.

The righteous shouldn't have to pay for the idiots - I'm getting fed up with that crap!

@J.B. Schmidt...C'mon, you can't be serious. The only reason you don't want to increase the tax is that you like to put down a few brews. The current tax on a six pack of your Miller Lite, federal and state is only $.16 plus sales tax. At least smokers are already paying for their addiction and the future healthcare costs at the rate of about $1300 per year for a pack a day smoker. You're clearly showing hypocrisy at this point.

How are smokers paying for their 'future healthcare expenses' through higher taxes when the money is spent before they light up? Come on Rube, think before you type!

Lyle, every solution you propose involves taxing - preferably (and I'm guessing pretty much exclusively) someone other than yourself. Every problem that plagues society can not be fixed by increasing taxes - nor should they be exploited for those purposes simply because it sounds like a good idea.

You're not going to be able to tax away alcoholism. When you're talking about people who have 3 or mored DWIs, for the most part that's the subset you're dealing with. Alcoholics, in general, bottom out before they give in. That's more likely to happen via harsher penalties and making it impossible to plead to some other offense. You're not going to be able to nickel and dime them into submission.

@Jim Brittain...The rational for the high tax on tobacco is for the purpose I stated. Now, whether it is spent before hand or not, I don't have any control of that. If we don't keep the funds isolated, then it will be paid from general funds, which no one wants.

@Bob McBride...All I'm trying to do in proposing the increased tax on alcohol is to provide the funding necessary for education, enforcement and treatment. The general fund is already stretched and setting up a dedicated fund only makes sense to me.

Lyle you are certainly a Pollyanna with your blind faith in the government to cure all of the ills of society. Is it blind ignorance? Is it naiveté? as i mentioned on another tract, i beleive it is a combination of those two plus the fact that your family unit PROFITS from the down trodden, the poor, the elderly. Without them and their suffering you do not PROFIT. Get away the PROFIT your family takes from the poor and truly help the sick and poor.

@Lyle
We wouldn't need a tax for that. For instance, MA just allowed their EBT cards to be used for nail salons and jewelry stores. My guess is that we here in Wisconsin have enough people swapping food stamps for alcohol. We have enough waste and fraud within our current system of taxation and redistribution that additional taxation will only increase the fraud and greed within government.

Yes, I do like my Miller Lite. However, I hate cigs after trying one; yet, I am against their taxation. Hence, my own personal desires are irrelevant. When the government decides what products are good and bad via taxation, there is no end and the choice of products falls to the whims of the electorate. An easy example is the banning of the big gulp in NY. Are they preventing anything? NO. Are they removing freedoms? YES.

Admit it, you want to punish the alcohol industry. It isn't the fault of the drinker, it is the fault industry showing attractive women in commercials. We must punish the industry in equals parts for making a product that could be used for harm.

Lyle, you're assuming education and enforcement (and frankly we've got about as much of both those as you can expect to be effective as is) are going to prevent this from happening. They won't. Unless you back up the enforcement with stiffer penalties and stick to them, no amount of enforcement is going to have any effect. Education has been done to death and it does nothing. Treatment only works on those willing to accept it.

Simply throwing more money at it by taxing and giving more to the government isn't a solution. Locking people up, taking away their driving privileges and their cars and fining the crap out of them will discourage the casual drinker who gets caught some night driving at or slightly over .08% and extending all those conditions to the point where it essentially wreaks havoc with the lives of those who are into their multiples (thus producing for most, an inescapable "bottom") will produce the most viable and effective solution - until society places the kind of stigma on such behavior as they have on cigarette smoking.

@Jim Brittain...Let me pose this question; would you expect your healthcare professional not to be paid for his or her services? Also, my wife and I have spent most of our adult lives volunteering not only helping the poor, but in a variety of other projects. I don't know what your profession or job is, but I highly doubt that you work for free. Why are you suggesting that others work for free?

My health care professional(my doctor) is paid by me for services to either cure what is bothering me or for consultative advice. No, he should not work for free. No, he also does not claim to be virtuous or claim to be working for a higher cause by helping me, like you poverty pimps who PROFIT from the poor do daily. If you feel so strongly about helping the poor, do it without the PROFIT motive and you will become more sincere in seeing an end to poverty. Until that time you and your spouse are nothing but poverty pimps who want to continue to see folks suffer only to line your own pockets.

@Jim Brittain...We didn't create the poverty or do we maintain it like people like you. My wife has to go in and clean up the messes created by society and attempt to heal families. It requires someone who is an educated and dedicated professional. Equally, even if your physician doesn't cure you, they still expect to get paid. By continuing your current tract, you certainly are not arguing in good faith and just proves you're not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

As I expected from you Mr Ruble, you continue to rationalize that your family union PROFITS from the pain and suffering of the poor thus you have no incentive to end poverty since it lines your pockets. You sir are a sick individual and I am glad the rest of the folks now see proof of it.

@Jim Brittian
Do poverty pimps where crushed velvet suits, big gold chains and the fuzzy 70's cowboy hats with a feather in it? If so, I really need to see a picture of Lyle in his poverty pimp attire.

http://www.costumesinc.com/p8133/Pimp-Costume-Adult.html

Those don't work very well SH00TY... Most of the time when someone leaves a bar their blood alcohol level continues to rise for quite some time...

Mike in OC - there may be a few that get cigarettes elsewhere but there are many that quit, My wife and I smoked 3 packs a day between us and the new prices in 2007-08 just did not make sense, we quit. We are very happy that we did, it has improved our financial positions considerably and elimated having cravings every day.

joey, quite a few companies already offer cash awards to employees for successfully completing smoking cessation or diet programs. I don't believe that a national health care system would control people's bodies to the degree that the right-wing fringe does.

Red Meat causes heart disease and cancer if that's all you eat. How about a luxury tax on fast food, alcohol, cigarettes?

@ Bren
Why stop there? Obesity causes major health problems. Paying for those health problems is a financial burden on the non-obese. How about we tax people by the pound? We can create a government office where people must report to be weighed twice a year. The government minders will determine if you are overweight or not. If they determine you're overweight, they tax you by the pound. If you have no income, they take away your food stamps until you drop to a normal weight. I challenge you to come up with a plan that is more fair.

Gestapo checkpoints are indeed a bad idea and Hoffa does not support them. However, harsher penalties would only act to punish those who over-indulge, and would not represent the prosecuting of "a person for having a beer," as you suggest.

Do you really think that there's there's enough cabs for 30-40% of the people at the show to all take one?

I don't understand what you mean by "education". You mean teaching people that drinking lots of alcohol at one time can be bad for you, and that OWI is a crime? How many people are currently unaware of these things, how many repeat offenders are unaware? Maybe we should focus education efforts on getting our society above an effective 5th-grade reading and math level, since we're supposedly already paying teachers quite a lot just to fail at that goal.

Or is it more of a propaganda/brainwash operation where you pound an anti-alcohol (or anti-whatever) message into people's heads all day every day to co-opt their own thoughts? I used to see enough of that constant PSA garbage when I still had a TV to make me physically ill. Couple it with our non-stop political ads and you can't go for a minute without someone else telling you what to think. It does waste (or rather divert) a lot of money, but I certainly wouldn't call it education.

I never drink at all myself, never have, though I've been told making your own at home has never been more popular than it is today. How would that trend intersect with the high luxury tax idea? Just a typical loophole, I guess.

@$$andSense -

Congratulations - you finally made a post that actually makes sense! Hoffa is so proud of you!

$$andNonsense -

Lighten up and lose the edge already - it's making you look like a grumpy old man!

I realized that most of your post was pure sarcasm. I'll rhetorically ask you again, do you think that Hoffa is stupid?

However, I thought that you were being serious wherein you stated "PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO DIE FROM STUPIDITY! You cannot fix stupid through legislation." And I wholly agree with such a sentiment.

So drop the bs already!

Even when I agree with the man, he attacks me - incredible!

Neither old or grumpy. Just smarter, wiser and more experienced. Do you argue with your father about these same issues? Age and wisdom has it's advantage. No denial on the Genny X I see. Check out my post on your egomania. Rather fitting.

Are you stupid? Never met you or know your life's history (except for info you tendered so far) so no comment. But stupid causes lots of problems and kills people every day. Politicians, drunk drivers and idiots in general, etc. abound.

Again,,,,sigh...$$and NonSense. Just don't care for Ben Franklin do you? Again...sigh...using the name of a union thug and passing yourself off as against unions.
No shame with you Genny Xer's.

$$andNonsense -

The great Hoffa doesn't associate with any particular generation, as he was never conceived in the traditional sense - instead, Hoffa is like the universe and just exists to exude greatness. Call it immaculate if you must, although Hoffa won't because he's a truly humble guy at heart!

When did Hoffa ever say that he was against private sector unions?