No.  A 20% wholesale price increase will, on average, result in a $0.25 increase in a 12 oz. cold beer and a $0.31 increase in a glass of chardonnay.  Few moderate drinking consumers will notice the difference.  It will, however, result in an 8.6% decrease in cheap liquor sales amongst binge drinkers and underage drinkers.  Hence, international conglomerates like Anheuser Busch, as well as Oregon’s 73 alcohol distributors/dealers, will see a marginal reduction in profits.  Both have profited tremendously during the global health pandemic.

Studies forecast that an alcohol price increase will actually increase the overall number of jobs, while the number of jobs in alcohol-related fields would decline by an amount too small to measure (0.05%). Reduced alcohol consumption from increasing alcohol prices will generate substantial savings in healthcare and human services that result in a multiplier effect.

Yes, overwhelmingly. According to a DHM Research poll in September 2020, 76% of Oregonians support increasing alcohol taxes to fund expanded access to addiction treatment services.  35% of respondents said that one or more family members have a problem with alcohol.

This is not a beer tax campaign—it’s a public health effort to reduce harmful alcohol consumption and end Oregon’s addiction crisis.  The funds generated by reducing harmful alcohol consumption will be used to implement a strategic plan--devised by over 150 stakeholders--to build an addiction recovery continuum-of-care for the first time in Oregon.

Alcohol is a toxic, addictive substance.  Hence, there is now a much greater appetite within the current legislature to force the highly profitable alcohol industry to pay its fair share for the long-term harm caused by alcohol. Most legislators have experienced first-hand the profoundly fractured nature of the current system of care. Additionally, due to the organizing efforts of Oregon Recovers and its coalition partners over the last three years, legislators now have a better understanding of the social and economic impacts of harmful alcohol consumption on Oregon’s families.  A recent analysis by the ADPC demonstrated that untreated addiction costs the state $6.7 billion per year, far outspending the $2 billion total economic benefit provided by the local alcohol industry.

All funds generated will be placed under the direction of the Alcohol and Drug Policy Commission (ADPC) instead of the Oregon Health Authority (OHA).  Additionally, the Executive Director of the ADPC who is appointed by the Governor will now be required to be approved by the Senate. This will allow the Executive Director to effectively serve as the “Recovery Czar” of the state, creating a level of accountability, authority and dexterity that currently does not exist.

They will probably try—but will fail.  Eight local governments have declared addiction a public health crisis in their communities and more than 150 healthcare organizations have participated in designing ACRA.  Oregon Recovers has engaged over 5,000 Oregonians in the organizing and coalition building efforts around the state leading to more public support for addressing the addiction crisis now than ever before. Additionally, the earliest that Big Alcohol could refer this to the ballot is November 2022, which allows for over a year of positive public health impacts and for the voters to acclimate to the minimal price increases on alcoholic beverages.

It’s a rip-off for taxpayers.  Factoring in the lack of a sales tax, Oregon has the lowest beer tax in the country and the second lowest wine tax.  This is despite sky-high addiction rates and solely because “big alcohol” lobbyists have falsely claimed for years that a price increase would damage Oregon’s local alcohol industry, despite charging more for their products nearly every year.  These low tax rates result in a net cost to Oregon taxpayers of $1-2 BILLION annually.

Yes, dramatically. Other states that have increased the price of alcohol to reduce consumption have witnessed substantial decreases in underage drinking, binge drinking, DUI's and alcohol mortality. A recent systematic review of alcohol price increase data from various states concluded that increasing the price of alcohol by 10% leads to a cut in the alcohol-related death rate by 9-25%.

No, nor was it intended to.  The purpose of Measure 110 is to end the criminalization of drug use and fund 15 centers that provide those found with drugs a health assessment if they chose.  Excess funds can be distributed to support existing harm reduction and peer support services.  Harmful alcohol consumption is not impacted by Measure 110, nor was the measure it intended to build a recovery-oriented system of care rooted in prevention and access to treatment.