Poll: Overwhelming number oppose tax support for Saints
 

Poll: Overwhelming number oppose tax support for Saints


By The Associated Press
NEW ORLEANS -- Nearly three out of every four Louisiana voters oppose giving tax dollars to keep the NFL's Saints in New Orleans, according to a poll compiled for a state lawmaker.
Gov. Kathleen Blanco has been attempting to get Saints owner Tom Benson to renegotiate a deal giving the team $186 million over 10 years, saying the state cannot afford it. The contract was negotiated by then-Gov. Mike Foster and approved by the Legislature.

Benson recently canceled additional negotiations until after the 2005 season when the Saints have their first opportunity to negate the current deal and move by repaying the $81 million the team received during the first five years of the contract. The state can opt out of the deal after the 2007 season.

Pollster Verne Kennedy's Florida-based Market Research Insight conducted the statewide telephone poll of 350 voters April 22-25 for Sen. James David Cain, R-Dry Creek. The poll asked: "Do you favor or oppose the use of tax dollars to keep the New Orleans Saints in Louisiana?"

Of those who responded, 62 percent were strongly opposed to using tax dollars, 7 percent were somewhat opposed, 8 percent were undecided, 9 percent were somewhat in favor and 14 percent strongly were in favor.

When the undecided voters were taken out, 67 percent strongly opposed using tax dollars to keep the team, 8 percent were somewhat opposed, 10 percent were somewhat in favor and 15 percent were strongly in favor.

The poll had a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points, Market Research Insight said.

In a statement, Cain said he was "only the messenger," but added: "It's just not right for us to give corporate welfare to one business, just because it is a football team, while we are taxing other businesses so much they are leaving the state."

"Clearly, Louisiana's image is enhanced if the Saints stay in Louisiana, but the voters are opposed to having any more state tax dollars spent on a football team," Cain said.

The Saints did not respond immediately to a call for comment on the poll. The Blanco administration did not immediately comment.

Benson called off negotiations after reviewing a state proposal focused on a $174 million renovation of the Louisiana Superdome with the Saints contributing $40 million. The Blanco administration said that deal would increase the team's ability to make money, but also reduce the amount of guaranteed income from the state after the renovation is complete.

The state proposal includes $267 million in guaranteed money for the team, $134 million toward the stadium renovation and an estimated $336 million in additional revenue the Saints could earn after the renovation is complete.

Last week, Stanley Rosenberg, Benson's attorney and a member of the team's board of directors, said Benson was interested in moving the team, perhaps to his second home in San Antonio. Rosenberg also said the Saints had discussed the possibility of moving to Albuquerque, N.M., and that Benson had received several offers to sell the team, including one for more than $1 billion.

State officials said they considered the report a bargaining ploy by the Saints.

On Monday, the Senate Finance Committee voted 7-2 to kill a bill that would bar giving the Saints any more state money to stay in Louisiana.

Sen. Rob Marionneaux, D-Livonia, and the bill's sponsor, said the money would be better spent elsewhere on health care and other state needs. But other lawmakers said that the bill would break the existing contract, costing the state millions of dollars in penalties and could reflect badly on the state when it tries to enter into other economic development deals.

RE: Poll: Overwhelming number oppose tax support for Saints
 

Well there you have it. Like Blanco or hate her, she has a responsibility to the people of the State of Louisiana. It's rare to see voters to clearly or strongly in agreement about an issue. At this point, what else could Blanco possibly do? I'm not sure what Benson expects to get in addition, but he'd be wise to step back up to the bargaining table and try to end this thing. Maybe he expects the team to have a good season and thinks he'll get more good will after a winning season.

RE: Poll: Overwhelming number oppose tax support for Saints
 

I don't know how a poll of only 350 people across the state (and I'm assuming it was across the state and not just in this guy's own district alone) can mean very much. On top of that, did you notice the date of the poll? It was conducted right over the top of the Draft. A notoriously negative time for the team.

On top of all that, it's a very difficult question to answer in its form. I'm not really in favor of paying the money, but I'd rather do it than let the team leave. However, I think Benson should have to show how much he needs by opening his books. At least then we could erase all this suspicion.

GIVING money to the Saints? Ha! OK, thats what you call designing a poll question to get an answer you want. Its so transparent its laugable. WhoDat? Did you word the poll for them?

How about if they worded it like this? I'll bet the results would be different....

Should the State INVEST tax dollars into the Saints, bringing more money into the State?
OR-
Should the State divert a portion of their excessive non-necessary pork spending to INVEST in the Saints?
OR-
Should the State lose money and jobs by not INVESTING in the Saints?
OR-
If the State will actually make more money INVESTING tax dollars in the Saints, should they?

POLL WORDING- A technique used to convince the uninformed your opinion is in the majority.

MY favorite CNN/USA Poll was this little gem...

How do you think Mr. X is doing?
40% said Excellent
20% said good
20% said OK
20% said bad

Reported POLL Results:
80% of the people polled don't think Mr.X is doing a good job!

Let me word a poll and I'll get ANY result you want.

How could you possibly ask that question in a more neutral way?

Danno - your example is off.

Saints spin: Do you favor or oppose the investment of state funds to ensure the Saints future in New Orleans?

State spin: Do you favor or oppose using tax dollars to pay the Saints a subsidy to stay in New Orleans?

Neutral: Do you favor or oppose the use of tax dollars to keep the New Orleans Saints in Louisiana?


I'm open. Show me a more neutral question.

OK...
Neutral: Do you favor or oppose the use of tax dollars to keep businesses in Louisiana?

Or maybe

Do you favor or oppose the use of tax dollars to keep businesses like the New Orleans Saints in Louisiana?

But the issue at hand isn't about giving businesses money. How many businesses in LA have any incentive at all? A handful I would bet, but I honestly don't know. Furthermore, most of those incentives most likely come in the form of tax breaks, not direct payments. Can you tell me how many other businesses receive direct payments from the state in LA? Is the issue about providing subsidies for businesses, or for the Saints?

that is not a neutral question, because business in general are not run like an NFL franchise, nor they get the kind of considerations the Saints are getting...

... you don't see companies asking governments to build them office space for free...
... you don't see companies getting profits from concessions operating off a building that isn't theirs...
... and you do not see companies flat out asking for cash to "compensate for profits not realized"...

All good points TR.

To me, there is a big difference between a direct payment and a tax break. States normally give businesses tax breaks. There's good reason for that. The more income that your company can make in the state - the larger the tax break and greater your profits. But it requires the business to do something to ensure it makes money. There's benefits for both the State and business.

With a direct payment, Benson's state contribution is guaranteed. It doesn't matter if he makes $100 million or zero - he's getting $15 million this year.

I don't think that the State of LA give Entergy money just to stay in the state. Tax breaks, I'm sure. But Entergy doesn't get guaranteed dollars from the State for doing nothing.

Many businesses get tax breaks and such which I would consider a type of subsidy. I don't know of any getting direct payments from the state, but I also don't know of many that bring as much outside money into the state or outside money into New Orleans as do the Saints.

NOTE: I am against the way Benson is handling things and I don't particularly care for the amount we are paying especially in light of his unwillingness to oopen his books. I do believe that even after these payments are made the state is making some money or New Orleans is making some money. I just don't want my statements criticizing this poll to undermine my original premise on the subject.

So let me get this straight. You think there's really a difference in tax credits and incentive payments?

Payments-I give you 100 dollars, but forcibly take 200 dollars from you.
Tax credits- I forcibly take 100 dollars from you, instead of 200.

Yeah, thats a huge difference. LOL.

Direct Payment v. Tax Break (Normal tax rate: 40%, Incentive: 20%, break: 20%)


High Income Year ($100 Million)
Tax Break: $20 Million. Saints save $20 million, state makes $20 million. Win win.
Direct Payment: $15

Zero Income
Tax Break: Saints save zero, state makes zero. Both are not impacted by the other.
Direct Payment: $15 million. Saints win big, state loses big.

Get the difference?



The total economic impact of the Convention Center in 2003 was $2.56 billion.

The total economic impact of the Convention Center in 2003 was $2.56 billion.

The Saints claim to be worth $400 million in economic impact on the State in a year, according to an impact study which I, personally, don't believe. But if you take that as true, then does it stand to reason that if $737 million is not enough for the Saints over the next 20 years, then the State should also be willing to spend nearly $5 BILLION on the convention center in the next 20 years????

I mean, it generates FAR more money than the Saints.


The Saints claimed to have $7.8 million in Operating Income in 2004. You're telling me that there are few businesses in the State that don't have a greater economic impact?

Every national retailer in the State of LA generates more taxable revenue than the Saints. The Saints generated $33 million in total gate receipts last season. Think Walmart generates $33 million in revenue in LA? Think that they employ more people? Where's there $15 million per year subsidy?


There were over 2.1 million night stays booked in hotels in New Orleans last year. I'd be shocked if in the 8 games that the Saints play they generated 100,000 of those nights. What's a stay at a hotel in NO cost? $100 a night? $200? That's $400 million in economic impact right there and the Hotels are taxed MORE than average. Where's their subsidy?

Bottom line - the Saints are a big business, but more importantly they are a status symbol. It is important for the State to try to keep them, but to suggest that they are truly one of the most important economic contributors to the State is just unrealistic. I bet the River Boat Pilots generate more revenue in a year than the Saints.

If there are 1 million people in NO (there are roughly 1.33 in the metro area according to the 2000 census), then the tourism industry in New Orleans alone generates $8.9 BILLION in annual economic impact. That's more than 22 times the $400 million that the Saints claim to generate (which is a questionable figure to begin with).

So, if your argument is that the Saints generate important and necessary money for the State, and as a result they are worth paying to keep amongst the most profitable in the industry, why shouldn't the state agree to spend $16 BILLION over the next 20 years ($737 million x 22) on improving and supporting the tourism industry in New Orleans alone?

After all, tourism is FAR more important to the State than the Saints. Tourism in New Orleans has declined in recent years. Hotels, restuarants, and other tourism-related businesses have lost money - shouldn't the State be concerned and willing to pay them to keep their profits up and keep tourists coming to NO? After all, tourism is the largest industry in the State. :)

Yes, I know it's apples and oranges. The point is that saying that the Saints generate money and therefore they deserve to gets some back for free is bad logic... unless you're willing to apply that to every industry - which, of course, as this demonstrates, is assinine.

And if they said NOT ONE SINGLE businesses in LA will get a dime of my money I'd be all for NOT giving any to the Saints. But they don't. They pick and choose who they want to give my money to.

When tax and spend democrats starts spouting fiscal responsibility, I call BS on that.

agree wit Scotty, depends on who was polled. put it to a vote and the fans might not win, but it wont be a 3:1 margin!

This is getting dangerously close to a political debate, so I'll proceed carefully. Let me ask two questions:

1. Can you name any other business in the State of Louisiana that gets its subsidies through direct payments from the State, as compared to through tax breaks?

2. I can name lots of businesses with greater "economic impact" than the Saints that operate in Louisiana. Can you name any business that has a larger subsidy relative to its economic impact than the Saints?

Those two issues, in my mind, make this a different question than with any other business in the State.