VIKINGS STADIUM
No shortage of smart arguments against
Contrary to what Jim Souhan alleges in his April 18 column ("No point in dumbing down stadium issue"), it's not opponents of a publicly funded Vikings stadium who are dumbing down the debate -- it's Souhan himself.
He ignores the big body of research showing that public funding of privately owned sports venues is a losing proposition for taxpayers. He doesn't say that stadium-related jobs are generally low-wage or short-term. Yes, construction jobs would help in this rotten economy, but the net financial impact of putting public money into a private facility enriches owners and players at taxpayer expense.
But let's say, for the sake of argument, that Souhan is right in predicting that a new stadium would revitalize the Metrodome area -- wouldn't that revitalization take place if Zygi Wilf paid for his own stadium? Why shouldn't the bedrock principle of capitalism -- the purportedly perfect, self-correcting organism that is the free market -- apply in this situation?
Finally, why is it OK to impose a tax without voter approval when certain segments of society -- including the Republicans who blame DFLers for the stadium bill dying -- would be outraged if we imposed, without voter approval, taxes to pay back what we owe to public schools or to provide health care for the poor?
STEVE SCHILD, WINONA, MINN.
• • •
Legislators, please stop hiding behind committee procedure when it comes to controversial bills. I am talking about the stadium bill, but the problem applies to other bills as well. Get the issue out of committee and vote on it in both houses, instead of thinking that ducking the issue will help you come election time.
PAUL BAKER, MOORHEAD, MINN.