Wealth Best Shared In Amidst Candor

Gol, if the chickens would just clear off this dad-blamed keyboard, mebbe I could peck out a response to Erik Lacitis’ little caffeine fit.

BLAMBLAMBLAM.

There. And they wonder why we East Siders (no, Erik, that doesn’t mean Bellevue residents) need gun racks in our pickup trucks. Those chickens do get in the way sometimes. Now, where were we? Ah, yes. The gentleman from latte-land seems to be perturbed that Eastern Washington voters were less than enthused about Paul Allen’s proposal to build a new stadium for the Seahawks, mostly at public expense.

Hey, it appears that Allen won anyway. Bought that election, lock, stock and ballot, unlike any election in this state’s history. Bought himself a nice majority in the Legislature, too. What’s the problem, Erik?

I have a theory. It just isn’t possible that the gentleman from the Times is bigoted toward Eastern Washington. Like all Seattle residents, he probably has to attend lots of corporate seminars on multicultural sensitivity and is extremely concerned about avoiding stereotypes. At least toward fellow urban liberals. Hahaha. Just kidding, Erik. Liberals can be so intolerant when provoked.

No, I fear that Mr. Lacitis suffers from fact deprivation. Allen’s propaganda blitz simply flattened the awkward truths about the stadium scheme and Erik is a victim.

The soon-to-be Seahawks owner and computer industry billionaire spent nearly $2 million lobbying a reluctant Legislature to place the stadium plan on a rare June election ballot. Then, Allen shelled out $4.2 million for the election’s cost. Next, he spent a whopping $5 million on his campaign. Toward the end, as mail-in ballots began arriving at county auditor offices, representatives of the Allen machine were visiting those offices daily, to find out who hadn’t voted yet. According to the Seattle Times, the names of the foot-draggers went to Allen’s get-out-the-vote telephone banks.

Wow. With an effort like that, how could Allen lose? With an effort like that, Mike Lowry could still be governor.

Yet the outcome was close. Although Allen is expected to win, the final count won’t be known until Tuesday. In many areas of Western as well as Eastern Washington, the proposal fared rather badly. Early returns from Clark County, for example, gave the stadium only a 32 percent “yes” vote. Even in some Seattle precincts, the proposal went down. Look out, Erik, there might be hick farmers skulking under the rhododendrons in Queen Anne and Magnolia.

There were, in fact, some good reasons for Allen’s close shave, and the dishonesty of his campaign is one.

All propaganda aside, Allen requested $327 million in public funds, plus interest, to build a facility for a private business he wants to purchase.

It’s not true that this is cost-free to taxpayers statewide. New lottery games will supply $127 million of the total, but the new games likely will divert money from current lottery games that otherwise would have fed the state general fund to pay for schools and the like. Another $101 million will be diverted to the stadium from King County sales tax revenue that also would have gone to the general fund.

Supposedly, that $101 million loss is balanced by tax revenue the state would receive if the Seahawks stay. But the Seahawks’ purported value to the treasury is questionable. That’s because taxable spending on Seahawks games comes from discretionary income that people would spend on other tax-generating transactions if the Seahawks weren’t around.

Bottom line? The stadium will take millions of dollars that would have been available for other needs from schools to prisons.

Plenty of Washington residents were savvy enough to notice these things. Many felt that subsidizing another pro sports stadium is not the highest priority of state government.

At this point, I should note that The Spokesman-Review’s editorial board, believing that the stadium and the Seahawks will be good for Washington, supported Allen’s proposal. I dissented.

I do agree that some subsidies are worthwhile. Subsidies have kept our nation’s agriculture industry afloat in a heavily subsidized global market so that people like Lacitis can buy fresh asparagus in downtown Seattle. Tax money built hydroelectric dams that supply cheap power for Seattle’s computers and espresso stands, as well as Eastern Washington’s aluminum smelters and irrigation pumps.

Subsidies improve our lives. We simply ought to be above-board in debating them and in weighing the many good projects on which we can spend the money state government extracts from our economy.

But why be a sore loser? The money Allen spent to get our tax dollars shows he goes whole hog once he’s committed. Maybe he’ll invest whatever it takes to make the Seahawks into a winning football team. Shoot, if he buys enough top athletes like those that grow out here in farm country (John Friesz, Drew Bledsoe, Mark Rypien, Jason Hanson and Steve Emtman, to name a few) we boondocks dwellers might get excited enough to stop cleaning our chicken coops, flip on the television and root for our friends on the soggy side of the state.

, DataTimes MEMO: John Webster is editor of the Spokesman-Review’s opinion pages.