When will it end?

Say what you will about the tax structure in this country, but I have just about had it. I know all the arguments about who will pay for the roads and the schools and the rich are the only ones who get off, blah, blah, blah. How about this? Leave alcohol alone!!!! Aside from marijuana (and mind you, I don't smoke), it may be the only natural gift that exists in this world. That's right, it's a gift. Somebody, God, Allah, Yahweh, Haile Bop, Mickey Mouse, I don't know who, but somebody figured out that this thing called life can be a pretty hard slog and therefore offered us a reprieve from it all. Is it not enough to tax everything else?

Apparently not. Enter this genius.

"re-elected Sen. Marian Walsh has moved to refile a bill to increase the excise tax on alcohol for the first time since 1979. Walsh first filed the bill more than three years ago, when it was defeated handily."

Defeated?!? I can't believe it. So why flog a dead horse?

"Walsh appears to have more hope in the bill being passed next year, after a recent favorable report by the Senate Committee on Taxation moved the bill up to the Senate Ways and Means Committee"

What's that about a politician never meeting a tax they didn't like?

"Though for Walsh the bill is not about taking money from taxpayers' pockets, it's about treating alcoholics and drug addicts."

So it's not about that for Walsh. What's it about for everybody else? They left out 'the children'. What about them? The trail of poo continues on...

Walsh wants to use as much as $80 million annually from the tax to pay for a Substance Abuse Health Protection Fund, which would treat state residents with addictions. Education and prevention services would also be provided by the tax.

$80 million is a fair chunk of change. What does it cost to get somebody sober? And what is this about 'education'? Is that like 'Don't Drink and Drive' or is this like buying paper clips for the local elementary?

'But we've done research! The public is all for it!

"Walsh cited a 2000 Journal of Public Health survey that said 80 percent of adults support increasing alcohol taxes if the funds collected are used for alcohol treatment and prevention programs."

That was 4 years ago, and I'm guessing the questionnaire went something like this: 'Would you (living in Kansas) support an increase in alcohol tax for the state of Massachusetts?' What do you think? And how many people actually believe that the monies collected will be appropriated solely to alcohol awareness? I've got 2 words for those who do: Social Security. And now for the one/two:

One:

"But, for the most part, Walsh expects wholesalers and importers to feel the brunt of the excise tax increases, with only pennies coming from your average Joe."

Are you kidding me?!? Why would they absorb the cost any more than they have to? And if this is a statewide taxation, all distros will be burdened equally. So guess what? This is coming straight out of the drinkers' pocket. And speaking of which, how many of those are there?

Two:

"The state senator added that 43 percent of the public doesn't drink, and those who do, 5 percent drink about half of what is sold statewide."

So lets run the numbers: As of 2000, there were 6.43 million chowder heads. According to the senator, that makes 321,500 'alcoholics'. At $80 million to 'fix' these wayward souls, that comes out to $248.83. If that's all it takes to get treatment, the drunkards could make this recycling the bottles from the nearby frat house on Sunday morning.

Maybe I am not picking up what they're putting down. Or maybe this is total B.S.