Since the federal government's $700 billion bailout of the banking industry, many taxpayers have demanded that the New York Mets new stadium, Citi Field, be renamed Taxpayer Field. However, low and behold, it's not just the Mets that are enjoying free taxpayer money. Many teams, including the Florida Marlins, are actually getting huge stadium subsidies directly from local governments.For those interested in the public funding of private baseball stadiums, check out my newest article in the Rutgers Journal of Law and Public Policy, entitled Sports and the City: How to Curb Professional Sports Teams' Demands for Free Public Stadiums (PDF).
I recommend you then contact Miami-Dade County officials about subsidizing a new computer to house your 2009 fantasy baseball team.
Posts
1 comments:
The article makes very, very good points. Without congressional action on stadium financing, professional teams will continue to extort money from cities. Public partnerships with pro rata revenue sharing is perfectly fine. Taxpayers get a return on their investment.
Unless more owners start following in the footsteps of Robert Kraft and finance their own stadiums (Kraft did however appear to try to blackmail Massachusetts into financing the stadium by agreeing in principle to a deal to move the Pats to Hartford before coming to his senses), something needs to be done (check out this article: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_173094.html).
Congress has the power to do something about this. The courts' have always put the antitrust ball in Congress' court, I think it's about time for Congress at least threaten to use their legislative power on antitrust exemptions in a stadium financing bill. They can have just as much leverage against pro teams as the teams do against cities. It's clear to me that a bill on stadium financing is the way to go, especially if it includes threats of an end to antitrust exemptions/Sports Broadcast Act.
In short, I agree entirely with this article.
Post a Comment