$5 strippers
Well, not exactly. The strippers aren't $5, but it might cost you that to see some boobies:
Strip clubs seek to block state's $5 surcharge
AUSTIN — A coalition of strip clubs has filed a lawsuit seeking to block a state law that would add a $5 surcharge for every strip club visitor.
The new fee, which was approved this year by the Texas Legislature, is set to take effect on Jan. 1. It's expected to raise about $40 million to be dispersed for sexual assault prevention programs and health care for the uninsured.
Huzzah, I guess. I don't remember hearing of this latest sneaky attempt by our state Legislature to increase sin taxes (again), but, much like per pack cigarette taxes, I don't care too much since I don't go to strip clubs and thus am not affected by it. And, frankly, anything that might help prevent taxes I actually do pay from rising is fine with me.
The problem is that, of course, the government will win the suit, collect this tax, completely waste the money, and then find a new way to tax everyone anyway. So, uh, go strip clubs! Stick it to the man!
My favorite part of the article is this:
The lawsuit argues that the fee would amount to an unconstitutional tax on nude dancing, a form of expression protected by the First Amendment. It also says the measure unfairly targets strip clubs, while not including modeling studios and adult video arcades. Strip club owners have said that the fee unfairly links their customers to rape.
"Exotic nude dancing is protected speech under the First Amendment," the lawsuit says. "It (the fee) singles out income derived from protected speech for a burden the state places on no other income."
One of my favorites (behind "seperation of church and state" and "RAYCISM~!"): the "FREE SPEECH VIOLATION" card.
I know some commie judge will agree with this and overturn the law, but how much of a restriction of free speech is this? The government is not banning strip clubs or imposing more "5 feet away" rules--it's just requiring a $5 cover charge to get in the club. Debate all you want on whether it's fair to levy the fee or not, but I don't get how it's a free speech infringement.
1 Comment
Recommended Comments