Masking the failed attempt at Bombardier with good intentions

It is OK for our Missouri legislature to go down new paths to fix the sinkhole of economic floundering and suburban sprawl, but the attempt at luring Bombardier to Kansas City can be a lesson well-learned.

The idea of giving tax credits to wealthy business men so that they can start a colossal factory, leading to thousands of jobs doesn’t sound so bad in theory. However, history has shown that although tax credits do and will help solve some state issues, in the long run, the health of Missouri and especially large cities like St. Louis and Kansas City will depend on the lowering of income and earnings taxes that are cutting through small businesses and driving city dwellers elsewhere. Lowering taxes, thus giving businesses the chance to start and compete in the big cities will create more of a balanced job source, and boost the economy.

A need for tax relief

Missourians have been hurt by crime, hurt by failing schools, and hurt by gas prices…relief needs to come from somewhere.
Studies have shown that Missouri is one of the top states that is affected the most by gas price trends, meaning that when gas prices rise, Missourians are more affected fiscally by the percentage of gas taxes taken away, then other states are.

Then, if one is a resident of St. Louis, the earnings tax and income tax are added on to the plate. No wonder people in Missouri are driving less and not sending their children to better, more expensive schools; they don’t have any money.

Local politicians are painting the economy as one of the main issues in the upcoming year. What better way to help the economy fix itself than by taking away those earning and income taxes, and getting revenue elsewhere?

Contribution Critics

Just as a baseball player may blame a loss on a call from the umpire, politicians often fault government officials for their failure to succeed. Sports critics will explain how there are a number of reasons that can lead to a loss, and that trying to the shift the weight of the problem behind an umpire is only shielding players from recognizing their own weaknesses they must develop to win. Politicians finding themselves behind in fundraising, losing races, and unhappy with their success are now turning to contribution limits as a crutch rather than making an effort to their own money. Every candidate starts out with the same score in their account, but those who raise more money are simply working harder and developing the relationships they will need to be an effective legislator for their district. Rex Sinquefield is constantly being criticized for his efforts and contributions in the political arena. Looking at the facts, it would be hard to find anyone as generous and giving as he has been in terms of sharing his money for a good cause. How can critics spend their time knocking Rex Sinquefield when he has used his money to help special needs children, poor and disadvantaged urban children, and doing whatever is in his power to develop the St. Louis community? It would be one thing if Rex was spending his days with financial advisers and do whatever he could to make himself even wealthier, but he is reaching out and trying to make positive change with the resources he has been fortunate enough to acquire. Because Rex Sinquefield has passion in these areas, he has found legislators who share his interest and donate towards their campaign in an effort to help people, not hurt opposing politicians. Every campaign focuses their fundraising around finding donors who will support their interests, but those who cannot find people to support their views and back up their campaign need to focus on their personal appeal to their constituents rather than trying to blame the laws for their opponent’s success. Our world needs more citizens like Rex Sinquefield who want to put back into their community rather than be money hungry towards their personal interests, and those who are criticizing his donations are ultimately criticizing the effort to help disadvantaged children. Baseball players striking out are encouraged hit the batting cage and start swinging at pitches rather than getting upset at an umpire calling a third strike; critics on contribution limits need to stop searching the web for loopholes and pointing fingers and get out in their community to find their own support.

Columbia Daily Trib Campaign Finance op-ed misses the mark

After reading through the article “Wealthy get their money’s worth from Missouri politicians” in the Columbia Post, it is striking to once again notice that critics of Rex Sinquefield’s spending methods fail to report the good reasons behind this spending, skipping instead to point out that Missouri should not be given over to only the opinions of the wealthy. This article in particular has a very negative connotation when reviewing Sinquefield’s ‘sincere’ motivations for donating money to politicians—alluding to that idea that his personal opinions are shaping laws at the drop of a hat. For one thing, politicians must be given some credit here, as each individual has his/her own ideals as well, and one would hope that we would elect people that would not be swayed by the views of constituents throwing money in their face, and not go against their personal views. Also, the article fails to review some of the areas that Sinquefield promotes through contributions, and to point out the outstanding results, especially in our failing education system, that can come about. By attaching negative words, the readers are led to believe that Sinquefield is not only shaping the state government singlehandedly, but also shaping it in a scandalous way. Shouldn’t well-informed, educated people who have lived in Missouri and who have seen the effects of its internal problems be the very people helping to make decisions? Sinquefield is not throwing money out at random, trying to get politicians to pass legislation making him benefit—one of his major goals is to reshape the struggling school system, that needs a budge in the right direction(like implementing school choice), and this is a selfless goal. The idea of fixing the school system, which will in turn fix other areas—crime and poverty—is not a new concept, as cities like Milwaukee have implanted things like school choice. If indeed, there is a direct correlation between the wealth’s donations and passing of legislation, then we must examine what exactly the interests of those donors are. And, it is usually not too difficult what these interests are. For Sinquefield, much of the interest he takes is in helping the poor and helpless in St. Louis get that funding or opportunity they need to succeed in life. If people are going to criticize the way in which donors “affect” passing legislation, they need to also to into account where exactly this money is going.