• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maryland decides to tax residents when it rains

Lot of big commercial farms on the Western Shore? Lot of big animal farms in Baltimore City, Howard County, Baltimore County? Ther are on the Eastern shore, in fact their economy is based on them.

"Why is agriculture important?
Agricultural land covers nearly one-quarter of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. There are more than 87,000 farm operations and 6.5 million acres of cropland here. Farms in the Bay watershed produce more than 50 commodities, including corn, wheat, soybeans, fruits and vegetables. Agriculture is essential; farms supply us with meat, milk, grains, eggs and vegetables

How does agriculture affect the Chesapeake Bay?
Agriculture is the largest single source of nutrient and sediment pollution to the Bay and its rivers. Common farming practices such as applying fertilizer and tilling soil can contribute harmful pollution to the Bay and its local waterways."

Agriculture - Chesapeake Bay Program

I meant where does it say that the Eastern Shore is being excluded.
 

Good study, I would suppose whats missing is the impact of "nutrient pollution".
Also missing are possible solutions beyond tax it and hope it goes away.

I could be for a temporary tax that established infrastructure that would eliminate or ameliorate the problem, but we both know that isnt whats going to happen.
 
I meant where does it say that the Eastern Shore is being excluded.

No counties on the Eastern shore will be subject to the tax. It's being applied to the 10 largest counties by POPULATION, as if the number of people had anything to do with how much harmful run off is generated.

"The 10 areas affected by the “rain tax” include Montgomery, Prince George’s, Howard, Anne Arundel, Carroll, Hartford, Charles, Frederick, Baltimore counties, and Baltimore city."

Here’s What’s Included in Maryland’s Controversial ‘Rain Tax’ (It’s Exactly What It Sounds Like) | TheBlaze.com
 
Good study, I would suppose whats missing is the impact of "nutrient pollution".
Also missing are possible solutions beyond tax it and hope it goes away.

I could be for a temporary tax that established infrastructure that would eliminate or ameliorate the problem, but we both know that isnt whats going to happen.

Basically the two primary pollutants are nitrogen and phosphorus. Although both nitrogen and phosphorus are primary plant nutrients, an overabundance of them contributes to algae blooms, which upset the balance in the ecosystem. An overabundance of algae makes it difficult for flora and fauna that reside underneath the surface of the water to get oxygen.
 
Basically the two primary pollutants are nitrogen and phosphorus. Although both nitrogen and phosphorus are primary plant nutrients, an overabundance of them contributes to algae blooms, which upset the balance in the ecosystem. An overabundance of algae makes it difficult for flora and fauna that reside underneath the surface of the water to get oxygen.

~60% of the water flowing into the Bay comes from the Susquehanna River, the majority of which runs through Pa and NY. Unless those other States do something about their run off, taxing people who contribute a tiny fraction of the harmful run off will absolutely no effect on the Bay. It will give Annapolis a lot more money to spread around to their friends though.
 
~60% of the water flowing into the Bay comes from the Susquehanna River, the majority of which runs through Pa and NY. Unless those other States do something about their run off, taxing people who contribute a tiny fraction of the harmful run off will absolutely no effect on the Bay. It will give Annapolis a lot more money to spread around to their friends though.

Okay, but Annapolis can't very well asses taxes on PA Delaware WV and NY, now can it? If your criticism is that the tax burden is being unevenly distributed, I can totally agree with that, but it's one thing to sit on your ass and criticize and another to come up with a real solution.
 
Okay, but Annapolis can't very well asses taxes on PA Delaware WV and NY, now can it? If your criticism is that the tax burden is being unevenly distributed, I can totally agree with that, but it's one thing to sit on your ass and criticize and another to come up with a real solution.

My critism is that the tax will not do anything it is suppose to be being enacted for and the money will be wasted on other things more important to getting the politicians re-relected, just like the billions of dollars wasted on Saving the Bay have been over the past 40 years have been.

Are you sying that we can't criticize an obviously failure of an idea unless we have the 'real' solution? Doing nothing will end up with the same result as paying this tax, how about saving money as the real solution then?
 
Could we possibly make the tax revenue contingent on Maryland canning those god awful uniforms they keep slapping onto the Terps football team the past few years?
 
The tax isn't based on the amount of rain, it is based on the size of buildings and pavement on a property. I believe the idea is that buildings and pavements prevent water from seeping underground where natural processes can filter out many toxics. Rain water that runs off into storm drains that do not not connect to a sewage treatment facilities end up washing toxics into the bay. Presumably the tax will be used to treat the storm water before it enters the bay.
Again, the less it rains, the higher the concentration of pollutants. A major effort has been made across the country to separate storm drain run off from sewage to avoid treatment of storm water. I'll be anxious to see exactly how they intend to achieve this "treatment". If one is intent on lowering pollution, then the obvious solution involves reducing pollutants. Period.
 
I just don't understand how taking money from people is going to all of a sudden stop the pollutants? Am I missing something?
 
What about the air we breath?

Certainly that deserves a tax of some sort.

Let's call it the "respiratory usage fee."

Didn't they already do that with Obamacare?If you exist inthe US, you have to pay a tax. Isn't that the same thing?
 
From what I can tell its every time it rains? I don't really know.

Sounds more like mandatory flood insurance. Which is one of those things that is somewhat acceptable to me, because in case of a major flood the government has to end up paying for those who do not have insurance anyways.
 
Sounds more like mandatory flood insurance. Which is one of those things that is somewhat acceptable to me, because in case of a major flood the government has to end up paying for those who do not have insurance anyways.

Has nothing to do with flood insurance. It goes towards cleaning up a lake from pollutants. If your house gets flooded you get nothing from this.

And really? Mandatory flood insurance? And people scoffed at the idea that people would start suggesting other things be mandatory besides health insurance. :roll:
 
Has nothing to do with flood insurance. It goes towards cleaning up a lake from pollutants. If your house gets flooded you get nothing from this.

And really? Mandatory flood insurance? And people scoffed at the idea that people would start suggesting other things be mandatory besides health insurance. :roll:

Well, I'm not in favor of mandatory health insurance. But the government usually ends up picking this bill up anyways, so I don't know.
 
From what I can tell its every time it rains? I don't really know.

What on earth gave you that idea?

Look. Doing things costs money. You can implement specific taxes for specific tasks, or lump it all into income taxes, whatever. But you either do it or you don't do it.

I'm no expert on the subject, but it seems to me that protecting the coastline for a community very economically dependent on its coastline is... a good plan!
 
I guess they will have to add an umbrella tax too, since that will create concentrated rainwater runoff.

Colorado does something like that - rain is considered "state property" and you are charged if you try to collect. #can'tmakethisstuffup.
 
What on earth gave you that idea?

Look. Doing things costs money. You can implement specific taxes for specific tasks, or lump it all into income taxes, whatever. But you either do it or you don't do it.

I'm no expert on the subject, but it seems to me that protecting the coastline for a community very economically dependent on its coastline is... a good plan!

Are they getting rid of the pollutants? If not, then no it is not a good plan, it is a horrible plan and only meant to steal money, not fix the problem.
 
What on earth gave you that idea?

Look. Doing things costs money. You can implement specific taxes for specific tasks, or lump it all into income taxes, whatever. But you either do it or you don't do it.

I'm no expert on the subject, but it seems to me that protecting the coastline for a community very economically dependent on its coastline is... a good plan!

And I much prefer the latter to being nickled and dimed in every single way. Gives a more accurate picture of how much you're paying. I'd like it all much simpler, especially gas taxes :thumbdown
 
Why is it that the only remedy that liberals can ever come up with is more taxes, more spending? Knee jerk? I don't think so, I lived there for 20 years.

I grew up on the Severn River. Learned to sail before I got a driver's license. Swam, water skied, fished, crabbed the Severn and Round Bay for years. Got our bait, snails, off the 3 square reeds that grew in the coves. As I left for the Army the reeds were gone, so were the snails. There was a swimming advisory because of bacteria- couldn't eat the clams, fish or oysters in the Severn. The crab, and oyster populations were crashing in the Bay as the beds of celery grass were dying.

Sewage, lawn care products, oil and asphalt run-off from roads, poor motor boat maintenance....

The Chesapeake drainage basin is one of the most remarkable places on earth that has the extreme misfortune to be surrounded by so much development. I never would have bet on the remarkable come back so far, but it is only so far.

A few years ago my wife and I made a series of trips to see where I grew-up, see Annapolis, go to the Waterfowl Festival in Easton. The huge crabs of my youth were no more but at least there were crabs. Oystering is limited to certain days and certain ways but at least there are still oysters. As a kid I remember duck and goose hunting, pickings were slim at best, now even the once endangered swan are back.

Now some wags are having a grand ol' time calling it a 'rain tax'. After all the droughts we have been having hear in Oklahoma it is one tax I'd gladly pay out here!

But it isn't a rain tax but a run-off contamination tax. You know better, that oily sheen you see as a summer rain starts to hit hot black topped roads- it goes somewhere, in Maryland that means the Bay. Those weed killers and fertilizers the suburban lawn of the month winners use creates run-off that goes somewhere, again that means the Bay, for that matter alot of the fertilizer and broadleaf weed killer used in the Eastern Shore corn to feed Tyson Chicken seeps down into the water table and out into the feeder creeks where the immature stages of fish, crab, oysters and waterfowl live.

I watched the Bay and it's tributaries almost die, the tax isn't on rain but what the rain washes into the Bay.... :peace
 
I'm sorry I'm just a simple man, altho I did go to kollig. In California it's illegal in most areas to "collect rainwater" for watering lawns, gardens, etc., now in Maryland you have to pay a tax because rain falls off your roof, driveway etc??? I'm wondering, if a California resident rents in Maryland, and attempts to collect rainwater, will they be fined or taxed??
 
I just don't understand how taking money from people is going to all of a sudden stop the pollutants? Am I missing something?

Gee, I thought that the rightwingers believed that when you tax something, it decreases.

They are taxing the covering of permeable land with unpermeable materials. Obviously, tax this will reduce it, thereby reducing runoff
 
Back
Top Bottom