Perception wrong - Stadium proposal works for Missouri

Springfield (Mo.) News-Leader

The intense, emotional opposition to state Sen. Peter Kinder's stadium bill is easy to understand. In a year when education is being cut, when state workers are going a second year without a pay increase, when mental-health services are on the block, how can the state justify spending money on stadiums?

Unfortunately for honest debate, that's an oversimplification. But there's an adage in politics that as soon as you have to start explaining a bill or position, you've already lost.

Kinder and other supporters of the bill are having to do a lot of explaining when the state should help projects in St. Louis, Kansas City, Springfield and Branson.

When they explain it, their bill makes a lot of sense -- but still they labor against the perception this is a handout for overpaid athletes and fat-cat team owners.

It isn't. It is an investment in the future. ... No state money is at stake until 2005, so a yes vote this year takes no money away from education, pay raises and mental health. If anything, it promises to add money for those needs.

But a vote in favor of the bill will require leadership. It will require looking beyond public sentiment. For an elected official, that isn't easy.

Kinder's approach ... flatly states that new tax revenue must at least match the state appropriation, or else the local city is on the hook for the difference. ...

This is a good bill.

But if the explanations aren't enough, perhaps the other side of the argument will be persuasive. What happens if the state doesn't participate?

Cardinals president Mark Lamping says he won't come back to the legislature next year. Illinois has shown an interest in getting the team to move across the river.

If that were to happen, Missouri would lose the tax revenue it currently gets from Cardinals' games, not to mention income tax from those multimillion-dollar players. ...

It's not an either-or. It's a means of helping Missouri stop the bleeding in its budget. It deserves the Senate's support.