Here we go again

I couldn't help but notice this polished turd in today's Indianapolis Star.

Once again, our local leaders (who plead poverty when it comes to such luxuries as police, schools, and street lights) are lining up to throw bags full of cash at well-heeled corporate leaders. This time, it is Amazon that Mayor Joe Hogsett of Indianapolis (he of the "insiders who rig our system and steal our tax dollars" ads) and Mayor Scott Fadness (fiscal conservative, right?) of Fishers are tripping over themselves to "lure" with our tax dollars.

An excerpt or two from the Star:

The two cities that have been the most successful at luring technology companies to Indiana are making a combined pitch to win Amazon.com Inc.'s prized second headquarters.

Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett and Fishers Mayor Scott Fadness on Monday announced they are collaborating with other state and regional economic development officials to submit a proposal to Amazon. The mayors said they will emphasize Central Indiana's existing tech ecosystem, its growing business climate and a plethora of available real estate sites in a proposal that is due Oct. 19.

It is nice that the local Gannett franchise Indianapolis Star at least buries the lede in order to spare us "little people" from the ugly truth of what our government is doing in this "combined pitch." Alas, the lede can't be buried forever:

Hogsett and Fadness said they would look to Gov. Eric Holcomb and the Indiana Economic Development Corp. for leadership, including discussions about tax incentives, while hoping those officials would agree that metropolitan Indianapolis would make the best home for Amazon.

Nice euphamism: "tax incentives." I suppose when I went to keggers in college, the host was providing "beverage incentives" for people to show up, right?

More from the story:

Hogsett and Fadness declined to discuss their own appetites for tax breaks. 

So, the Star buries the lede and only mentions in passing that this is all about a big tax giveaway. Then, it credulously reports that our leaders "declined to discuss their own appetites for tax breaks" and leaves it at that. Where is the outrage from our local paper, demanding that Hogsett and Fadness explain themselves and their willingness to give our tax dollars away to a corporate entity that doesn't need them?

A small modicum of actual "reporting" would probably have revealed this element of Amazon's "search" for a new headquarters' site:

Among the criteria Amazon will use to determine where its second headquarters will go is everything you'd expect: a large-enough population, good schools, solid public transportation.
And, inevitably, tax breaks. Loads and loads of tax breaks.

"Incentives offered by the state/province and local communities to offset initial capital outlay and ongoing operational costs will be significant factors in the decision-making process," said Amazon's request for proposals. "The initial cost and ongoing cost of doing business are critical decision drivers." 

 I couldn't say it any better than U.S. News & World Report already did:

In a perfect world, every state and city would just agree not to throw any money at Amazon, and make the company choose the home of its next headquarters on the merits of place alone. But of course that's not going to happen; too few lawmakers are willing to take a stand for fiscal sanity, and too many are willing to undercut everyone else for the chance to be at a ribbon-cutting. So no matter which city Amazon ends up choosing, the internet giant itself is going to be the real winner, and the taxpaying public is going to lose.

 Can someone, just once in my lifetime, say NO to the well-heeled interests? Just once?