(Chicago) -- An Illinois appellate court has tossed the state's video poker law and a tax hike on liquor and candy.
Judges ruled Wednesday the law violated the single-subject rule of the Illinois Constitution because the law covered a "wide range of topics" The suit was filed in 2009 by Chicago Blackhawks owner Rocky Wirtz, who opposed the liquor tax hikes.
The money was being used on the state's 31-billion-dollar public works program.
I think that this law makes sense but is a bit ridiculous. I under stand why it was thrown out and the thought behind its creation in the first place.
ReplyDeleteEmily Carton
I understand why it was rejected but I think that having a tax hike on liquor isn't the worst thing in the world to do to try help pay off the public works program.
ReplyDeleteMichele DiNella
The rejection is legal because it is in violation of the Illinois Constitution, but the problem is that it was being used to fund the public works program. The rejection should be upheld but the legislature will have to find another way to fund the public works prgram.
ReplyDelete-Michael Patrone
I think the tax should continue on this products but the money should go towards the major amounts of debt that Illinois is in. Once Illinois becomes stable again the lax should be taken away. I also don't really have an opinion on the video poker, I don't really understand what is wrong with it.
ReplyDeleteEd Banderowicz
I think they should keep the tax hike. The world could use less gambling and alcohol and more public works programs.
ReplyDeleteI have no problem with the taxes on candy and liquor staying the same. It costs enough without the hiked taxes. People will just buy less of the products if they start to cost more.
ReplyDelete- Jack Doyle
I agree with tossing the proposal of a tax hike of liquor and candy because it would make them more expensive than they already are. Liquor prices at Hawks games are already ridiculous and a tax hike would harm sales.
ReplyDeleteTyler $ Sullivan
Well if they keep hiking up the taxes then no one will by it any more cause it will be to much money. but it is tax law and you can not mees with the law. but i do disagree with raising the tax.
ReplyDeletesam gallagher
I think they should have had separated suit for each tax to make sure that some taxes would be passed.
ReplyDeletePhil Gross
If it violates our constitution then we can't go along with it, even if we don't agree. How are candy and liquor grouped together?
ReplyDelete- Alex Kramer
Why does liquor and candy relate in one law? I think the money was going towards a good cause but it violates our consititution so it cannot be passed.
ReplyDelete-Brigitte Hartnett
I am happy that there isn't a higher tax on candy and ligquor. If there was a higher tax on liquor than not as many people would go out to the bars. This could hurt the economy because were looking for cash flow and alochol seems to be a big part.
ReplyDelete-Andrew Stolzer
i think they should have separated the suits to make sure some of the taxes would have been passed.
ReplyDeletePhil Gross
It angers me that some politicians like to apply the phrase "a wide range of topics" to almost anything when deciding certain state taxes. When the Constitution was drafted, it normally does not imply as many powers as the General Assembly hopes, including the power to excessively tax liquor and candy. It's nice to see that people are starting to wake up about the unconstitutionality of our laws.
ReplyDelete-Matt Porter
I think that Rocky Wirtz is just being selfish and opposes the tax hikes because he is greedy. He just wants more people to buy BOOZE at the BHAWKS games and he also had a BOOZE company and doesn't want more taxes. Even when our government is billions of dollars in debt Rocky over here wants to lower taxes for his own rich greedy bootay. I am gonna play some video poker now ;)
ReplyDeletei feel that people do eat too much candy and drink too much liquor, so in order to cut the amount being consumed they raised the tax. Its not a law thats supposed to make ppl happy, its to help the health of the community. i think it should have stayed in place.
ReplyDeletejsirotiak
I believe that the tax on liquor and video poker are a necessary tax. This tax could help the state to lower the enormous debt the State is in.
ReplyDeleteShawn Wolf-Lewis
I understand the need for them money but the way they are trying to get the money could cause more problems. Candy is cheap anyways so no one would care but alcohol is a big part of the economy and sells very well. If there is a higher tax people might boycott it and refuse to buy it. But we do need money so it might be worth the risk.
ReplyDeleteLuke Zizzo
I believe that the tax was needed to help the state. In order to create a better law they should have made a law on each topic. Also, the money was being used for a good cause.
ReplyDeletePatrick Mulroy
I am glad they threw out the tax hike. However, the reason it was thrown out is crazy. It sounds like classic politics that a law can be overturned becausae there is too many topics all in one. Laura Herchenbach
ReplyDeleteI think that they should have specified each law individually to keep them organized.
ReplyDelete-Matt Clancy
I think that it wouldn't hurt if less liquor around but it brings in money for the government so I'm sure they like it. Now more people will buy liquor now that there is less tax if even any. I don't agree with it because i feel that there should be plenty of tax on liquor but hey it is what it is. Knee High Football rules!
ReplyDeleteI think that it is a good idea to tax liquor. As long as the money is going to something good that helps the community, I don't think it is a problem. The government has the right to impose this law and I think that it should not have been taken to the appellate court in the first place.
ReplyDeleteAmy Drangines
I think that it was fine that the tax on video poker and liquor was necessary. It's not like there'll be a big affect on it. It was okay and the money that was being used on the state's 31-billion-dollar public work programs won't really have a huge affect.
ReplyDeleteForever Ferrera <3
I think that it was fine that the tax on video poker and liquor was necessary. It's not like there'll be a big affect on it. It was okay and the money that was being used on the state's 31-billion-dollar public work programs won't really have a huge affect.
ReplyDeleteForever Ferrera <3
I think that it is okay. They should tax liquor or we will have drunk people everywhere and we should all listen to Rocky Wirtz because the blackhawks are still cup champs.
ReplyDeletelove jc pawlak
I am very happy they did not raise taxes on candy. If candy is more money, less people will buy it and the government will get less money. (People may get inspired by the commercials and take their money to Jersey.) Speaking on the behalf of all candy lovers, thank you for not making our habit more expensive =)
ReplyDeleteRachel lee
ReplyDeleteI don't think candy and liquor go hand and hand but both should not have been taxed higher. I think it is stupid to tax little things like that and it's a good thing it didn't go through
i understand why it was rejected but I think that having a tax hike on liquor isn't the worst thing in the world to do to try help pay off the public works program.
ReplyDeleteBrigitte Hartnett