SOLDIER FIELD

by Jack VanNoord

Question:  If a restaurant and a theater set up shop next to each other, who should be making payments to whom?  Should the theater demand payments from the restaurant because it draws people to the restaurant?  Or maybe the restaurant owner should insist the theater give him money because his eatery provides a place for theater-goers to fill their bellies before settling in for a show? 

Answer:  neither one owes the other.  Undoubtedly, the survival of the two are closely connected.  But neither owes the other any money.  Gratitude?  Yes.  Money?  No.  

So explain to me why Chicago hotels are being forced to pay for a new stadium for the Chicago Bears?  Earlier this month, the Illinois State legislature approved the use of the 2% Chicago hotel tax to fund a $587 million renovation of Soldier Field.  Admittedly, the success of the Chicago Bears and area hotels are intertwined.  But that doesn’t mean that one owes the other any money.   

In fact, I could just as easily argue that the Bears should be making payments to area hotels.  Chicago hotels are providing an invaluable service for the Bears franchise.  Without the existence of the hotels, where would all those out-of-town guests stay --not to mention the visiting teams?  Just because two business are mutually dependent upon each other for success does not mean that either one should be taxed for the benefit of the other.  That’s just bad economics.  But apparently, it makes for pretty good politics. 

There are two kinds of entrepreneurs in the world.  Market entrepreneurs get people to voluntarily hand over their money by offering  a product at a price customers are willing to pay.  On the other hand, political entrepreneurs --realizing that they are NOT offering a product for which people will VOLUNTARILY surrender their money-- use the political and legislative process to secure for themselves a share of other people’s money.  Political entrepreneurs are those who have mastered the art of greasing the political machine, smooth-talking our elected officials and sealing sweetheart deals in order to get their hands on our tax dollars.    

A tax-payer funded renovation of Soldier Field is corporate welfare at it’s worst.  Wean the rich fat-cats from the government teat.  If the McCaskey family wants a shiny new stadium for their Bears, let THEM pay for it.  Despite what the Bear franchise might like us to think when it comes time to pay for a new stadium, the Chicago Bears are not a public utility.  They are a for-profit business and last time I checked, the McCaskeys hadn’t promised you or I a cut of the profits.   

A tax to subsidize a stadium so that football enthusiasts don’t have to bear the full cost of their football is unconscionable.  None-the-less, it was pushed through the Illinois legislature in a last minute deal behind closed doors.  So much for the Republicans being the party of small government.  

This election year, much ado was made of campaign finance reform.  But, as long as we continue to grant our government the authority to give away millions of our dollars to the benefactors of their choice, the McCaskeys of the world will continue to oil the political machine in hopes of gaining next years windfall.  Want to get Big Money out of politics?  Take away the incentive.  Shrink government.  Quit empowering politicians to make these million-dollar decisions.  Demand that you and I retain control of our money.  Get government out of the business of declaring the marketplace’s winners and losers.  Campaign finance reform will naturally follow. 

Here’s a radical thought:  let those people who enjoy football pay the actual, full cost of watching a game.  Quit asking the rest of us to subsidize their pastime.  Allow each of us to keep our entertainment dollars to spend as we see fit.

12-20-2000

Written by Jack VanNoord - West Dundee.