A truly honest editorial
Marty Trillhaase at the Post Register in Idaho Falls is a former co-worker — and one of my favorite colleagues in the editorial page field. Does his homework. Holds powerful people to account. Treats all sides fairly. Makes us all think.
And in an editorial in his paper Thursday, he had the guts to be unflinchingly candid.
Trillhaase was confronted with a tough issue: the question of giving the French company Areva lucrative tax breaks if it builds a $2 billion uranium enrichment plant near Idaho Falls.
Trillhaase noted (as did we, in our Thursday editorial on the Areva incentives) that one of the breaks is nearly a carbon copy of the law Micron Technology secured from the 2005 Legislature. The state would cap the taxable value of the Areva plant, thus cutting its overall property tax bill.
The Post Register opposed the Micron breaks (and we did as well). Agonizing over the Areva breaks, Trillhaase chose to be refreshingly upfront.
"What's different this time?
"Because (the Areva bill) benefits our economy. If a couple of tax breaks lure billions in capital investment, hundreds of construction jobs and a permanent work force of 250 good-paying jobs to Bonneville County, we're going to embrace them.
"And if we're wrong, we'll pay the price. This is a local tax break. It affects only Bonneville County. Nobody in Boise, Twin Falls, Lewiston or Pocatello will spend one dime in tax money to benefit Areva."
(Read Trillhaase's full editorial here.)
I don't agree with Trillhaase on the bill (we were editorially lukewarm to the breaks and decried the Legislature's apparent rush to hand out another round of tax breaks). And I know some readers will say Trillhaase resorted to boosterism, serving up Areva a nice plate of opinion page home cooking.
Not me. The easy thing would have been to try to razzle-dazzle up some convoluted (and ultimately unconvincing) spin about why the Areva bill was somehow different. Instead, Trillhaase played it straight. I respect that.
Editorial pages strive to be consistent — and sometimes that is difficult. As I wrote our Areva editorial this week, I noted that I was the only member of the editorial board who participated in our decision to oppose the '05 Micron breaks. Publisher Mi-Ai Parrish and Editor Vicki Gowler weren't even here; Assistant Editorial Page Editor Jennifer Swindell was editing our legislative coverage; and, as a state senator, community representative Hal Bunderson voted for the Micron bill. Ultimately, we were deeply split on the merits of the Areva bill.
I think the editorial reflected that division, as it should have. But I never really explained to readers how the change in our editorial board makeup affected our deliberations. I should have been as upfront as Trillhaase was with his readers.
Delicious
Digg
Yahoo- Kevin Richert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
I don't buy this Areva...
This is a bankrupt financial philosophy we used to call "trickle-down economics". It claims that if you bring the big fish in all the other fish will benefit along the way.
Who knew Ronald Reagan was a socialist? Who guessed Gov. Otter was a Democrat? Who believes that giving 250 people jobs by importing them and the company "good drugs/candy" to come here will ever change the FACT that they work for the SHAREHOLDERS/private holders of the company FIRST and how well do you think we'll fare convincing them to "Show us the love" all the time?
Shareholders and boards work for the COMPANY'S INTEREST or they don't work and maybe don't HAVE a company.
Find those who actually want to work here and fund themselves for the most part. They will work hard and contribute beacause they have the most to gain as well as the most to lose and they WANT to be a part of Idaho. It isn't the best OPTION. It's their job.
I'm not a "Luddite" but I live on $650 a month and think like my late grandfather I hope. You don't run a dairy farm like that.
If you respect Trillhasse
why don't you try to emulate him?
Would you emulate Oprah?
NO! Because you would be so phony and apparent to everyone who knew you.
You can't please everyone so you got to please yourself.
You, mein comrade, are simply semi-insatiable.
Journalist are not economists
KR, at first I was going to stick to your post but then after reading his editorial I see the two of you are equally bad in your assessments of business and economics, so I'll include his comments.
First, to think that a major company, a new employer, and big growth for an Idaho industry affects only Bonneville County and not Idaho in general is simply wrong.
Less property tax for a corporation means more income on the bottom line and that means more income tax paid to Idaho for the general fund. More sales tax from the employees means more tax revenue for revenue sharing for all cities and counties. More employment in Eastern Idaho means less people moving to SW Idaho seeking employment. More growth in E Idaho helps spread it out to the whole state. In short, what is good for any part of Idaho is good for all of Idaho. Perhaps to a lesser degree the farther away from that positive growth but without a doubt it will be good for Idaho. Is Micron good for Idaho Falls? Absolutely! How many Micron employees travel through I.F and spend money on a yearly basis? How much income tax and sales tax do Micron and it's employees pay? It's all beneficial for the whole state. I really can't believe an 'educated' journalist at his level (and apparently at yours) doesn't see the correlation.
Guts to be candid?? Hardly! He simply says they opposed the Micron benefits because they didn't believe a Boise company tax break would benefit those in Bonneville county. Now that the benefit is in their back yard he is all for the tax break. So? Is he admitting they were wrong on their position regarding the Micron bill? No. that would be gutsy, to publish "we've changed our opinion on corporate tax breaks- for everyone".
Rising tides raise all boats. As the whole state rises, all the cities and counties benefit. His editorial just shows he is selfish for his community. So be it.
****
Editorial pages strive to be consistent.
Really? Like when you flipped on your opinion about the state cabin leases after a friendly visit from their HOA president?
*****
As for his editorial, it's pretty bad when an editor is openly stating the local work force is "under-skilled" and the highway system is crumbling. Geez, I feel sorry for those underskilled workers at the National Labratory, Ricks College professors, BYU-Idaho profs, the Budweiser processing managers, E.ID medical center, Simplot minerals plant, etc. Maybe the editor is under-skilled and just feels he is like everyone else in his city. ???
Although, he did write a more informative editorial than yours, KR. He at least mentioned the other proposed bill regarding sales tax.
******
Your editorial was weak and so is your above blog entry.
And the coffee tasted burnt with a strange aftertaste.
There is no such thing ever.
The only problem with the
"Give them a few tax breaks and they'll create new jobs!!" meme is that it's false.
I recently read a study that showed that the average increase in jobs these companies bring in in the long run is TWO, in trade for hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not more)in tax breaks.
Google Time magazine for an eye-opener about this particular form of corporate welfare.