Pres. Obama Calls For Ending Taxpayer-Funded Sports Stadiums

[KamaAina]

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/pres-obama-calls-for-ending-taxpayer-funded-sports-stadiums/

In a historic move, President Obama’s new budget proposes eliminating the longstanding practice by governments of forcing taxpayers to foot the bill for wealthy sports franchises to build, renovate, and maintain costly stadiums. For far too long, this shameless giveaway has left city budgets in ruins while showering the franchise owners with hundreds of millions in corporate welfare.

Sports franchises and their stadiums are a very emotional subject for many Americans. Love of the game and pride in their cities, the trophies in the box and the envy of the nation bind them close to our hearts. Unfortunately, a loophole in laws regulating government bonds for public works has allowed the billionaire franchise owners to hold city governments hostage unless their taxpayers and fans shell out millions to build or renovate the stadiums on top of the exorbitant prices one must pay for tickets, jerseys, and eight dollar Bud lights. In a recent example, the Atlanta Braves just moved to Cobb County after prodding a bidding war with Atlanta for renovations; they finally got $397 million from Cobb, most of which will come from taxpayers.

President Obama’s not having it any more. In a small article placed in his 2016 budget proposal, he called for ending tax-free government bonds for sports facilities, which have cost taxpayers $4 billion over the past thirty years. Republicans, of course, have immediately refused to pass it because it would mean the franchises would have to pay taxes on it like the rest of us, which they see as just more “big government” restricting businesses. In reality, they just protecting a significant source of campaign donations- over a quarter million dollars to Republican candidates in the last year alone- and it’s common sense to lift such a burden off the taxpayers; as sports economist John Vrooman puts it, “Pres. Obama ends up being the fiscally conservative responsible adult.”

It’s about time the taxpayer-funded ride for franchise owners ends. It’s not like they show any particular loyalty or gratitude towards their fans, as the people of Baltimore learned the hard way on March 30th, 1984. They awoke that morning find that their beloved Colts had up and moved to Indianapolis in the night, to a new $95 million stadium built with public funds. Countless studies have shown that stadiums do not usually bring the promised economic growth and jobs that are advertised. The new stadium in Miami for the Florida Marlins is going to cost the taxpayer a mind-boggling two billion dollars over the next fifty years! As cities across the country struggle with budget deficits, cuts and layoffs are leveled on schools and libraries while multimillion dollar corporations enjoy undeserved tax cuts, all for the fear that their beloved teams might leave for a city willing to shell out more.

[Wellstone ruled]

1. Not only Stadiums,

how about using tax dollars for Private Schools,so damn much abuse of this hear in the West. Nevada just passed a law to in a round about way to let people take School funding dollars up to five thousand a year and use it to go to a Charter or Private School. And if you live any were in the West,you know what Religious Groups run these Schools.

[oberliner]

40. What religious groups run these schools?

I live in the East so I don't get your reference. Can you clarify?

[Wellstone ruled]

57. Three for the most part,

Catholic,Lutheran and LDS(Mormon). There are a few Private for Profit run by Hedge Funds.

[AwakeAtLast]

61. Thats already a law here in IN.

I agree with you, it stinks!

[postulater]

2. Milwaukee is right in the midst of this.

The NBA mandated a new arena for the Bucks or they would move the team out of town. The new owners don't want to pay for all of it and are expecting the public to pay. They advertise that if we don't pay we will lose the Bucks and will be stuck with the bill for upkeep of the Bucks current home - the Bradley Center (yes, that Bradley, as in one of Walker's biggest funders).

It is pure blackmail. And all this while the state crumbles.

[Archae]

4. One of the owners of the Bucks is being asked to help out in housing...

Since he also is a partner in a foreclosure service.

[postulater]

52. The least he could do.

The owners should pay for the land, pay for the arena and pay taxes to support their capitalist venture like the rest of us. Unless they want to share the ownership of the team and the profit from it when they ultimately sell it.

And if we do pay for the arena they should buy out our ownership in it when they move the team.

What a scam.

[Archae]

55. That's why I prefer the Green Bay Packers.

The fans are the majority owners of the team, and have a say in what goes on with the team.

Lambeau field has been upgraded, but not replaced.

[MineralMan]

3. Too late for Minnesota. The Vikings stadium

is well into the construction phase, and taxpayers are paying for half of the cost.

[Angry Dragon]

12. and smokers are paying for most of that

[geardaddy]

44. My thoughts exactly.

Maybe it'll help with the new soccer stadium they're going to build for Minnesota United.

[NCTraveler]

5. "which have cost taxpayers $4 billion over the past thirty years."

Doesn't Exxon get around 700 million in tax breaks from the US annually? $21,000,000,000 if averaged over the next thirty years.

[LuvNewcastle]

53. Good point.

If we're going to talk about government waste, let's talk about oil subsidies. While I think a lot of these sports arenas are a waste of money, there are other stupid things that we spend more on.

[Politicalboi]

6. There are probably more people like me

Who don't give a shit about sports and find it silly to watch men chase a ball and get rich for doing so. Tear them all down and build affordable housing.

[truedelphi]

14. I have come to love MLBaseball, but it is embarrassing to read that the

World Class San Francisco Giants organization does not even pay its food vendors or other employees fairly. Each year, there are another few sets of lawsuits to get the Giants to pay their stadium employees fairly.

[Cleita]

7. Yes. That money should be used to fund libraries and hospitals instead.

Sports is entertainment and you don't see movie studios being funded by tax payers for the enrichment of producers of those films.

[truedelphi]

18. Actually some of us believe that if youare willing to agree to

Certain terms, you can get your movies funded by the government.

Why else did Zero Dark Thirty get funding, while many other far more truthful films got sidelined by a bad economy. (The movie was made at a time when the banks were NOT loaning to Hollywood.)

Even in very bad times, if you wanna have a TV series that helps out the government's propaganda lines, you will see some funding.

[Cleita]

58. Do you mean with tax money? If it's a matter of banks being picky

who they lend to that's to be expected, but no film should be funded with tax money unless it's one of those government educational films we got in school telling us hygiene etc..

[truedelphi]

70. In the film I mentioned, it was probably black ops money.

Attitude being: Nothing to see here, go away!

[Mopar151]

22. Yeah, you do - through tax incentives

Looka at the blooming film/TV business in Boston.

[Cleita]

59. Don't know about Boston cause I live on the West Coast.

However I don't think any movie got its sets, costumes and other services funded by tax money.

[bluestateguy]

8. I have a very close friend in Baltimore

And 31 years later he is still angry about the Colts leaving. He tells me about how he was 8 years old and was in tears when the Colts packed up and left.

When Bob Irsay died, he openly celebrated.

[KamaAina]

9. I am a Bawlmer native

and while I didn't go as far as dancing on Irsay's grave , I continue to hate the Indian-no-place Dolts with every fiber of my being.

[RufusTFirefly]

24. In 1983 I was at one of the greatest Orioles games ever...

With utility infielder Lenn Sakata playing catcher for the first time since Little League, reliever Tippy Martinez picked off the side and Sakata won the game with a walk off home run. As they marched down the runaway to the parking lot following this sublime moment of Orioles Magic, the chant among the ebullient Bawlmer fans was "Irsay sucks! Irsay sucks!"

[Exilednight]

29. Just remind him that the Ravens have won twice as men Super Bowls then the Colts have sine they left

[phantom power]

10. Good, he's right.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. It's kind of like forcing taxpayers to pay for Warner Bros or MGM. Showbiz.

[Travis_0004]

33. You dont think movie studios and TV gets tax breaks?

Breaking bad was supposed to be in southern California.

New mexico offered better tax incentives, so they rewrote the script and went to new mexico.

[Buns_of_Fire]

13. Good for him. Let the rich so-and-sos fund their OWN monuments to their own greatness.

If it wasn't for the fact that they've gotten to the point of extortion ("If you don't build us a new stadium, we'll leave town" they pout), I'd be willing to chip in to help. But no more.

If they want to leave, I'd offer to help them pack. And that goes for basketball teams, too. Screw 'em.

[seveneyes]

15. Just sports or other arts and entertainment too?

Splitting hairs has its own resolution.

[Orrex]

17. That's a worthy question, but it's not the primary question

How much money from those publicly-subsidized stadiums goes back to the public, and how much goes into the pockets of the owners whose teams play there?

If we're paying to build stadiums so that sickeningly wealthy men and women can get sickeningly richer, that's very different from funding a city symphony or a public art museum.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

23. Except that the patrons of Opera Houses, Symphony Halls, & Galleries

...are often the wealthier members of the community.

Why isn't the community building coffee houses for folk singers, or honky tonks for aspiring country artists?

[Orrex]

51. I'm all for that.

But broadly speaking, there would seem to be a general impression that artistic establishments such as museums and playhouses are a better use of public funds (certainly a smaller dollar amount) than a stadium built for a rich guy's further enrichment. YMMV.

[Travis_0004]

31. I disagree

I go to sports games, after the game maybe get some food. Its about the only time I go downtown.

Why is a symphony diferent? I dont go to it, and their attendance is far lower than any stadium.

I think that stadium taxes should be on the ballot and people should be allowed to vote. If the citizens want it, then fund it. If they vote it down then move on.

[Lars39]

35. Because musicians are full-time employees.

Stadium employees are usually part-time and seasonal. Getting cities to pay for stadiums is a scam.

[Travis_0004]

36. If people care about music hall they can pay more for tickets to fund it.

Where I live our county was going to raise sales taxes to fund music hall. There was so much backlash they pulled the measure.

The stadium tax passed. Shouldnt the voters get a say in how to run their government.

[Lars39]

42. How many of those that voted for that scam can actually afford to go to a game?

The arts enrich our lives with free concerts and much cheaper entrance fees.
Subsidizing the arts is a mark of civilization.

[Travis_0004]

46. who cares?

The measure passed, so the city did what its citizens wanted. Also, tickets are available for 10 bucks or less, so people can afford to go. Tickets to a baseball game a much cheaper than music hall tickets where I live.

And attendance would suggest that baseball is more popular anyway.

[Lars39]

47. And happy to be taxed into perpetuity to make owners and players even richer.

Gah

[pangaia]

54. All musicians are not full time employees.

In fact, if you are speaking here of symphony and opera instrumentalists, most of them in America are not employed full time be the organization in which you hear them playing.

[LanternWaste]

43. Hopefully, only sports... as the price tags have an avg. of x37 disparity

Hopefully, only sports... as the price tags between a new stadium and a new museum have an avg. of x37 disparity. I would support a new stadium built should 37 additional museums and galleries be built concurrently. Not to split hairs or anything...

[jeff47]

16. Yeah, that money should fund trade deals instead! (nt)

[SammyWinstonJack]

19. heh

[onecaliberal]

20. How about an end to taxpayer funded bailouts for banks... Another crash is on the way.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

21. I basically agree, however -- what about these situations:

1) Stadiums principally or partly used by a college team, or for a college event (like the TD Ameritrade center in Omaha for the College World Series)
2) Stadiums for professional teams owned fully or partly by the community (like the Packers)
3) Stadiums, arenas, or other venues for the Olympics -- often these are justified by the sales pitch that the local pro sports franchise will use the stadium/arena afterward.

[hibbing]

25. socialize the costs, privatize the profits

It's American "capitalism" at its best, it happens all over in this country.

Peace

[BlancheSplanchnik]

41. ^ n/t

[geardaddy]

45. Bingo. n/t

[aggiesal]

26. I completely agree with this ...

I honest don't mind floating the bonds to loan to these teams, but
now they've acquired a mortgage to pay those bonds back.
I think the city would make money on this deal.

No it can't be a 30 year mortgage, it has to be either a 10 or 15 year mortgage.

San Diego Chargers are trying to extort money for a new stadium from the public.
They're talking about putting a measure on the ballot for Dec, 2015.
Unless they end up paying for the stadium, I think they're days in San Diego
are numbered.

[Travis_0004]

34. Im sure the chargers wont mind.

A football team in LA would be nice.

[calimary]

38. A football team in L.A. I can do without.

I've thoroughly enjoyed being NFL-FREE in this city. Too bad it's coming to an end.

[rufus dog]

63. It will end at some point

But I doubt it will be the Chargers. San Diego will likely give in. As a football fan I am a bit torn, would like to see a team, but get joy out of owners not being able to bend over cities in the LA area.

I think the St Louis Rams will be the ones moving into the Hollywood Park facility.

[calimary]

66. As all good things do.

I really don't know and couldn't possibly venture a guess. What I know about football can fit on the head of a pin. What I appreciate about football can fit inside your average hydrogen atom.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

27. I'm all for that!

We taxpayers keep getting stuck with the bill for these hugely expensive sport stadiums for teams owned by ridiculously wealthy people. Why can't they buy their own facilities, just like any other business? Isn't that the free enterprise system?

[valerief]

28. Yay! nt

[alboe]

30. The San Francisco Giants privately funded theirs

And got huge backlash from people who thought the city should pay for it, if I remember the story correctly. But they did the right thing, and this is the right thing!

[calimary]

39. Welcome to DU, alboe!

Glad you're here! I'm glad the Giants did that. The city shouldn't have to pick up the tab for something like that, and neither should taxpayers - UNLESS they are in line for a direct benefit or financial windfall. The owners are damn near suffocating in money. Let THEM foot the bills for this stuff.

OR - how 'bout this? Taxpayers pay for it? Okay, then taxpayers get to go to all the games for free, in perpetuity. Because they ALREADY PAID - UP FRONT!!!!!!

[project_bluebook]

32. its about time

just more corporate welfare

[calimary]

37. About time! END another one of those dubya advantages.

He and other owners got the taxpayers to pay for a stadium for the privately-owned Texas Rangers, so he got the goodies while somebody else paid the bills. BASTARD. Hey, these owners are LOADED with money. DROWNING in money. LET THEM PAY FOR IT THEMSELVES!!!!

ESPECIALLY when THEY are the ones who pocket all the profits and benefits. The taxpayers don't get to cash in.

[HereSince1628]

48. Is Obama just having an opinion or is there something that makes this a federal issue?

Is this type of support going to create a problem under TPP?

[KamaAina]

49. Great Scott! I hadn't thought of that!

[HereSince1628]

50. MAybe unfair competition for domestic sports-casting??

Governments providing preference over soccer, Cricket, etc? Who knows without knowing what's in TPP????????

Any American can have an opinion so Obama is free to opine on this, but I don't see a federal issue here.

[99Forever]

56. Typical Obama.

Too little, too late.

How fucking convenient.

[malaise]

60. About time

This madness must stop

[Cha]

62. Thanks Obama

[MADem]

64. YES!!!!!!!! nt

[former9thward]

65. How come he did not say this when he was a IL state senator?

And the state was providing subsidies for the White Sox new stadium. It is nice to say these things when you know you will not be on the ballot.

[Snobblevitch]

67. WTF???!!!???

What's the matter with President Obama? If he really thinks public subsidies of sports venues is a bad thing, why the f**k did he wait almost 6-1/2 years to come to this policy decision? Besides that, this new policy has zero impact anyway since these facilities are not federally funded.

[pampango]

68. Not the biggest issue but the public funding of stadiums for private sports teams is terrible.

If a billionaire wants to own a professional sports team in a city, he can damn well pay to build the stadium that the team needs in order for him to make money off the enterprise.

I understand that medium-sized cities (e.g. Cincinnati, Tampa, Pittsburgh, etc.) want to be known as 'major league' cities, so they set themselves up to be extorted for the cost of building stadiums for billionaires and their professional teams.

It is equally stupid when states compete with each other to attract a new manufacturing facility by offering tax breaks and other benefits. Who benefits? The company that was going to locate somewhere and pay standard tax rates to whatever state and locality the new facility was located in. By playing one state off against another they get to pay much less in taxes - and probably end up locating wherever they would have without all the tax giveaways.

[Paladin]

69. Enough public welfare for billionaires. Thank you, Mr. President. (nt)