What this basically means is that there are enough people in Alaska that are
still greedy! First they looked for gold, then oil, and now cruise ships.
Seems like they keep looking for the free money.
Jim
"Thomas Smith" wrote in message
news:Sq9Hg.294979$mF2.49151@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Dennis P. Harris" wrote in message
> news:l12qe215qq900bl4hukmo3hqqgl1elt497@4ax.com...
>> In spite of the industry's million and a half dollar advertising
>> blitz, the voters of Alaska didn't buy the cruise industry's
>> lies! They voted 52% to 47% to levy a $50 per passenger fee,
>> make cruise lines once again subject to Alaska corporate income
>> taxes, put state ocean rangers on every cruise ship to change the
>> industry's record of pollution violations, force the industry to
>> disclose fees paid for mentioning shops in "port lectures" and
>> the commissions on shore excursions, and to tax the cruise
>> industry's gambling take at the same 1/3 of gross receipts paid
>> by Alaska's charitable gaming licensees.
>>
>> In other words, Alaskans are sick and tired of paying for all the
>> negative impacts of the cruise industry, believe that the
>> industry should pay taxes and fees like every other industry in
>> Alaska, and voted to make it happen.
>>
>> I only pray that it will cost them enough that there are fewer
>> passengers coming to Alaska each year. If the numbers continue
>> to increase, I'm sure we'll vote to raise the gambling tax rate
>> even higher. The industry might be able to buy enough lobbyists
>> and legislators to keep legislation like this passing the
>> legislature, but they can't keep us off the ballot! The industry
>> spent at least $1.5 million, the proponents of the initiative
>> spent less than $5,000 --- and the voters knew who was telling
>> the truth and who was lying!
>>
>> =============================================================
>> If you want to see the real Alaska, don't come on a
>> cruise ship! See the cruise industry rogue's gallery
>> at http://www.cruisejunkie.com/#Environmental_Issues
>>
>> Dennis P. Harris NO_SPAM_TO_dpharris@gci.net
>>
>
> I wonder how long it will be until someone files suit in Federal Court
> saying that this statute violates Article 1, Section 10, Clause 2 of the
> U.S. Constitution, which says, "No state shall, without the consent of the
> Congress, lay any imposts or duties on imports or exports, except what may
> be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection laws: and the net
> produce of all duties and imposts, laid by any state on imports or
> exports, shall be for the use of the treasury of the United States; and
> all such laws shall be subject to the revision and control of the
> Congress." Since the cruise ships invariably are foreign flagged, and
> almost always enter Alaska from Vancouver, BC or another Canadian port, it
> could be argued that any tariff imposed on passengers is in fact an import
> tariff.
>
> --
> I'm Tom Smith, and I approved this message.
>
>
|