The so-called "rain" tax was a practical approach to reducing pollution in the Chesapeake Bay, but it got twisted around to be seen as another liberal agenda tax ("End 'rain tax' ridicule rap, repeal and replace law," Feb. 28).
The government would serve itself well if it could learn to analytically and effectively show how tax dollars are spent for their intended use. Many people felt the stormwater fee was just another excuse to raise taxes.
I think taxes based on usage are the most beneficial because they generate revenue from the source of the problem and also make property owners and businesses think about whether a tax or fee is worth the use of a particular product or service.
The Chesapeake Bay is in desperate need of improvement; we have pillaged it to the max for our financial benefit, and we need to pay it back. I will pay $5 for a pound of chicken if that's what it takes to raise them in an environmentally sound manner on the Eastern Shore.
The smaller growers may not be able to afford it, but the large companies certainly can, and they know it. They should just pay the growers more and stop worrying about the value of their stock shares.
Jay Simonds, Reisterstown