• Publications and Model Policy
    • Blueprint for Missouri
    • Model Policy
    • MOGE
    • Report
      • Case Study
      • Policy Study
      • Essay
    • The Missouri School Rankings Project
    • Testimony
    • Newsletter
  • Blog
    • Daily Blog
    • Podcasts and Radio
    • Video
    • Infographics
    • Commentary / Op-Eds
    • Events
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
    • Our Team
    • Show-Me Institute Board of Directors
    • Fellows and Scholars
    • Our Authors
    • Jobs
  • Contact
  • Explore Topics
    • Education
      • Accountability
      • Education Finance
      • Performance
      • School Choice
      • The Missouri School Rankings Project
    • Health Care
      • Free-Market Reform
      • Medicaid
    • Corporate Welfare
      • Special Taxing Districts
      • Subsidies
      • Tax Credits
    • Labor
      • Government Unions
      • Public Pensions
    • State and Local Government
      • Budget and Spending
      • Courts
      • Criminal Justice
      • Municipal Policy
      • Property Rights
      • Transparency
      • Transportation
    • Economy
      • Business Climate
      • Energy
      • Minimum Wage
      • Privatization
      • Regulation
      • Taxes
      • Welfare
      • Workforce
Show Me InstituteShow Me Institute
Show Me InstituteShow Me Institute
Support the Show-Me Institute
  • Publications and Model Policy
    • Blueprint for Missouri
    • Model Policy
    • MOGE
    • Report
      • Case Study
      • Policy Study
      • Essay
    • The Missouri School Rankings Project
    • Testimony
    • Newsletter
  • Blog
    • Daily Blog
    • Podcasts and Radio
    • Video
    • Infographics
    • Commentary / Op-Eds
    • Events
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
    • Our Team
    • Show-Me Institute Board of Directors
    • Fellows and Scholars
    • Our Authors
    • Jobs
  • Contact
  • Explore Topics
    • Education
      • Accountability
      • Education Finance
      • Performance
      • School Choice
      • The Missouri School Rankings Project
    • Health Care
      • Free-Market Reform
      • Medicaid
    • Corporate Welfare
      • Special Taxing Districts
      • Subsidies
      • Tax Credits
    • Labor
      • Government Unions
      • Public Pensions
    • State and Local Government
      • Budget and Spending
      • Courts
      • Criminal Justice
      • Municipal Policy
      • Property Rights
      • Transparency
      • Transportation
    • Economy
      • Business Climate
      • Energy
      • Minimum Wage
      • Privatization
      • Regulation
      • Taxes
      • Welfare
      • Workforce
×

Uncategorized

Quality Jobs, Questionable TIFS, and Cameras, Cameras, Cameras

By Steven Bernstetter on May 4, 2007

Over at the Columbia Daily Tribune they have a depressing article about the corruption of a bill to expand the otherwise top-notch "Quality jobs" program blogged about here back in February. The bill was initially intended to expand the program by increasing the available funds. Unfortunately, a host of other pet projects, TIF proposals, and other fun political handouts were added, creating another bloated piece of political hackery likely to have a difficult time making it through the legislature.

Particularly troublesome are the TIF provisions. This alleged tool for economic growth has been used quite often in STL, most notably in the construction of the new Busch Stadium and the promised Ballpark Village development. This means of spurring growth in struggling parts of the city has been touted as the most important tool cities have for this purpose. However, the policy is not without its critics, and one particular study about the practice in Chicago has called into question the cost-effectiveness of the measure.

I would argue that the best means for a city to spur growth lies not in its ability to hand out tax abatements to specific developers, but rather in its ability to provide an overall fertile business climate. Providing good infrastructure, secure property rights, and strong returns on investment (i.e. lowering the costs of doing business for everyone) encourages balanced and fair competition, whereas TIF projects only serve to spur the further erosion of the barrier between public officials and private interests by encouraging the latter to cozy up to the former in hopes of securing the TIF privelege.

There are two things MO legislators need to do: first, they need to untangle the "Quality Jobs" legislation from everything else, and make sure this program is as strong and effective as it can possibly be. Second, they need to seriously think about the real costs and benefits of TIF spending as relates to MO, the political convenience of such projects aside (I’m not holding my breath on that last point).

On an otherwise unrelated note, big props to my colleague Mr. Stokes on his post regarding gov’t surveillance, particularly those cameras atop every intersection. I’m pretty sure the standard of justice is "innocent until proven guilty." Putting cameras at every intersection undermines this principle and replaces it with the Orwellian maxim that we’re all guilty, and that justice is only a matter of who gets caught. Big Brother is watching…

  • Share
  • Tweet
  • Share
  • Email
  • Print
About the author

Steven Bernstetter

More about this author >
Footer Logo
Support the Show-Me-Institute
Showmeinstitute.org is brought to you by Show-Me Institute and Show-Me Opportunity.
  • Publications
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
  • Contact

Reprint permission for Show-Me Institute publications and commentaries is hereby granted, provided that proper credit is given to the author. We request, but do not require, that those who reprint our material notify us of publication for our records: [email protected].

Mission Statement
Advancing liberty with responsibility by promoting market solutions for Missouri public policy.

© Copyright 2025 All Rights Reserved