Published: February 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM
Any company that can keep a local government from spending tax money to build a pro sports stadium gets a brownie point from me.
I don't live in Cincinnati, so I don't have a dog in this fight. In general, I don't think that the amounts discussed were that burdensome, but at the same time I think that local governments should build broad, diverse tax bases, rather than hitting any single source too hard.
What got me in the news story about the vote were the people who laughed at the claim from the council member that he was a conservative.
Pet peeve time: I consider myself very conservative financially. And I consider it a conservative value to pay up front for what you need. I don't see it as very conservative to borrow the money, or to wait for someone else to pick up the tab. Nor do I consider it conservative to defer maintenance to the point where something falls apart and you have to pay for an even more expensive rebuild.
Kicking the can down the road to future generations isn't conservative. It's selfish.
Now maybe these numbers worked, maybe they didn't. But saying a guy's not conservative just because he supported raising taxes to pay for something he considered a community need is just wrong, in my book. This just drives me nuts about the teabaggers and Club for Growth wackos who have hijacked the conservative name on financial issues.