Pros and Cons on November Ballot Measures

Members of the Los Angeles County Commission on Alcoholism have read with concern your editorial (“What Could Be Wrong With Alcohol Taxes?” Oct. 10) regarding alcohol taxes. Local officials such as the Board of Supervisors, Los Angeles City Council and all of the Health Department commissions have gone on record to support Prop. 134 because of the important local needs not covered by the state budgets for a number of years.

As your editorial indicates, the money raised would be spent on many important needs and it earmarks the money raised for those important needs. You indicate concern that the state would be locked into spending millions of dollars on them into the foreseeable future whether our needs change or not. We would like to point out that Prop. 134 can be amended with the approval of four-fifths of the state Legislature. However, Prop. 126 does not have such a provision.

Officials in Sacramento have had 20 years in which to raise alcohol taxes, but lobbying by the liquor industry has prevented such action. Private citizens have taken the only recourse left--the initiative process.

GEORGE F. OWENS, Chairperson, Commission on Alcoholism, Los Angeles County