The Cincinnati Beacon - Hey Todd Portune! Why A Regressive Sales Tax to Imprison More Blacks?

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Hey Todd Portune! Why A Regressive Sales Tax to Imprison More Blacks?

Todd Portune recently distributed a mass email (which we posted online here). In the message, Portune provided extensive rebuttals to common disagreements with the Jail Tax Proposal. There are some key issues, however, that seem to have been neglected in this discussion—so I would like to take this opportunity to outline those neglected, but significant, points.

In the article linked above, when Portune criticized Phil Heimlich’s jail plan, he called a sales tax increase “the most regressive kind of tax at that – a sales tax –paid by children and the poor alike.”

It is noteworthy that Portune is proposing a regressive sales tax, paid by children and the poor. Further, research shows that poor people actually spend a higher proportion of their income on products subjected to sales taxes. This brand new jail will be build on the backs of the most oppressed in our society—those most likely to be abused by the system they will pay to build.

Also consider the extreme discrepancies in how laws are enforced across racial lines. For example, under Cincinnati’s anti-marijuana ordinance last year, approximately 577 white people were arrested, while 3,644 black people were arrested (hat-tip to Michael Earl Patton). Yet, research shows that whites and blacks use marijuana in the same proportions.

Portune stated in an email circulated this week that if he doesn’t provide more jail beds, he can be sued or impeached, since he cannot control who the judges send to jail. He does not deny the jails are filled with those who do not need to be there.

Instead of pushing through a regressive sales tax that will disproportionately burden the poor and the black, building a new jail that will disproportionately imprison the poor and the black (all to avoid a career threat of impeachment), why isn’t Portune using his platform to put pressure on our elected judges to change their sentencing patterns before imposing this extra burden on us for the next several decades?

• Share This Article!
Listen to this article

Help The Cincinnati Beacon Grow! Participate in Social Networking!

Socializer!

Members

Tell us what you think!

Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.

If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.

anon2000 says:
23 May 2007 at 09:48 pm | #

The Dean and MEP bring up very valid points (nice to see you at the meeting tongiht MEP, though we were on different sides of the aisle)

Gentlemen, what ARE the legal alternatives to the sales tax?

And, other than out and out racism and an excuse to harass black males - any opinion on why the disparity between races?

It seems I can remember G-Whiz letting it slip that the new law wouldn’t be used in the suburbs. Disgusting.

Under the collaborative monitoring, aren’t police supposed to be keeping track of “stops” - the whys and what fors?

If data would show that the “probable cause” for searching blacks was wrong a significant number of times then the searches would be “arbitrary” when it comes to the “probable cause” search - this could very well be a huge class action based on racism against the police.

I.e. if the “searches” don’t yeild - then the probable cause is probably flawed and being based on something other than that evidence that would allow a reasonable mind to have probable cause - like race. And if they aren’t searching whites at the same rate as blacks, then ....

We all know what’s going on, like Cecil himself said at some point, this is just an excuse to search people ad hoc to see if they have weapons, not if they have pot.

I think a geographical breakdown of where these “searches” and subsequent charges are occurring may be sufficient to racism based on neighborhood composition.

Also, it would be real interesting to take ten people get five of them high and let a cop figure out which people are “high” based on visuals, etc. (Of course, those who are high would be a mixed batch. I wonder… is there any training materials for cops to assess whether someone is high or not? Any scientific models of behavior that would substantiate “probable cause” to believe someone is high or “holding” that could be charted?

funnelcake says:
24 May 2007 at 01:17 am | #

Murders, rapist, thieves, violent offenders here here let’s lock them up & throw away the keys.

But if all of this is to have extra room to lock up pot smokers, I think it’s kind of a waste. Yes, the WAR ON POT is going to directly hit our pocket books.

How much are we already paying in sales tax each year? Hard to say, but here is an on-line calculator that estimates your yearly cost already:
http://apps.irs.gov/app/stdc/stdc.html

GeorgeBushisagod says:
24 May 2007 at 05:22 am | #

Just a glance at your statistic seems to imply that poor blacks are more likely to commit a crime. If whitey is smoking weed in his mom’s basement, what are the chances you’ll get arrested?

Anon says:
24 May 2007 at 11:37 am | #

If all people arrested under the draconian ordinances designed to criminalize errent behavior were to demand a jury trial(guaranteed under the Constitution) the courts and ill-legal justice system would grind to a halt. The only reason this exists is because it can. Under our current system courts are a formality and Public Defenders, Police, Prosecutors, Judges, Clerks, Bailiffs, Court Reporters are all paid by the state. Many witnesses have made plea bargains to testify against the citizen. This is collusion and conspiracy of the highest order. How many people are in jail because it is more expedient to have people “directed” by the conspirators than have fair public trials?

People with resources hire lawyers to represent them and people without go to jail, regardless of color. We pretend to have equal justice under law, but, that is an illusion. Demand a jury trial by a well informed jury of your peers. It is your God given Right, under the Constitution, and needs to be protected through exercise.

says:
24 May 2007 at 03:33 pm | #

Under the collaborative monitoring, aren’t police supposed to be keeping track of “stops” - the whys and what fors?—from anon2000, #1

Actually, the parties to the Collaborative Agreement recently decided that no data need to be taken on pedestrian stops. See the March 2007 report to the Independent Monitor, page 40 (p. 40 as printed at the bottom of the report page, p. 41 as it opens up in Adobe). If memeory serves, one of the major reasons for the Collaborative Agreement was with concerns over discriminatory practices for traffic stops.

I, for the record, think that the subject of pedestrian stops needs to be investigated. The local ACLU has been far too quick to go along with the city. It has been more of a lapdog than a watchdog.

I have done some work on investigating the arrests by neighborhood and there will be an article in The Cincinnati Beacon. The neighborhood with the largest numbers of arrests for both whites and African-Americans is Over-the-Rhine. My guess is that the whites were arrested while trying to buy drugs there. But the average amount of pot confiscated per arrest under this ordinance is just 7 grams. That shows that the large majority of those arrested were not dealing. So the question as to why so many blacks were stopped and searched is a legitimate one. Arrest patterns in other neighborhoods, such as Hyde Park or Clifton, also show a discrepancy between whites and blacks.

says:
24 May 2007 at 07:15 pm | #

A very sizable segment of the population is secretly pleased to use the War on Drugs for plausable deniability to conceal their vicarious genocide on young, black males who they see as terrorists resisting gentrification. This segment, therefore, sees a sales tax as a “users’ fee.”
Users’ fees are a fairer method of taxation, if there must be taxation at all, but users need to be voluntary users. Voluntary.
In Communist China, they bill the family for the cost of executing “enemies of the state.”
That practice is based on a slightly skewed concept of the proper application of a “users’ fee.” ... Slightly.

morehead says:
24 May 2007 at 08:53 pm | #

Because the blacks are committing the majority of the crime, that’s why. Not passing judgement, just stating the facts…

says:
25 May 2007 at 11:56 am | #

morehead,
Which came first, the chicken or the egg question remains a conundrum, but the War on Drugs or a rise in crime by young, black males ought to be a no-brainer.
When government creates “crime” out of the thin air inside a politician’s head by making selected drugs illegal, then it follows that the resulting “criminals” will be of a certain segment of society plus relatively easy to apprehend. This is why the War on Drugs is fundamentally a war on young, black males, or genocide.
Do you get it now?

anon2000 says:
25 May 2007 at 06:25 pm | #

There is absolutely no doubt that elected officials are and have been targeting blacks with their laws - but what do we do?

A vicious cycle has been started - how do we stop it?

says:
26 May 2007 at 09:39 am | #

David, to be honest I enjoy as much as the next guy your ability to weave elaborate social theories (like genocide against young blacks) out of mundane data. But I remember reading credible articles about the War on Drugs that said that the black political leadership were in with the fight to increase drug sentences because they felt drugs were ruining quality of life in their neighborhoods. So are they in on this genocide too?

Dre says:
26 May 2007 at 12:10 pm | #

Trey, yes they are. They may have good intentions but they are in effect pushing the same policy that was designed to take peoples property and control the population.

says:
26 May 2007 at 12:38 pm | #

Trey and Dre,
I can see (by the zero comments) that no one has read my guest editorial (elsewhere here), but you might find my response there.

anonymous says:
31 May 2007 at 03:20 am | #

The entire reason why most drugs in this country are illegal anyway is because of prejudices against minorities. Most laws are set up to demoralize and trap minorities in the legal system so that they would not be able to be successful in life. This new jail is just another way to suppress blacks and minorities. As many unsolved homicides as there are I don’t understand why so much effort is made chasing weed tickets. I wish they would do some real police work and stop harassing blacks.

Hot News!

Contact Us

Events

Wednesday, May 23, 2007