By FITSNews || The S.C. Policy Council is privately claiming responsibility for a new television advertisement blasting a S.C. Attorney General candidate for his role in the “Boeing Bailout,” sources close to the organization tell FITS.
The advertisement – which began running yesterday on TV stations in the South Carolina Upstate – targets Columbia attorney Leighton Lord, who negotiated the deal that brought Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner facility to North Charleston, S.C. To its supporters, the deal is a transformative economic development project that will bring thousands of jobs to the state.
To its opponents – chief among them the Policy Council – the deal is “corporate welfare” and a “bailout for Boeing.”
Ostensibly paid for by The American Future Fund (AFF) – which has a long history of serving as a third-party “laundromat” for these types of political ads – the “Boeing Bailout” spot against Lord appears to be part of a broader campaign to discredit the incentives packages associated with the deal, which has indeed mushroomed well beyond what lawmakers originally told taxpayers it was going to cost.
Clearly, such an ad benefits the Policy Council, which has staked a significant amount of its organizational credibility on its opposition to the deal.
Because of the way AFF is structured under Internal Revenue Service guidelines for nonprofit organizations, it does not have to disclose its donors and is not governed by Federal Election Commission laws. That means anybody – including the Policy Council its affiliated donors – could have paid for the ads.
“American Future Fund is a laundry operation – it takes money from people who want certain projects done but don’t want their names on it,” a source familiar with the organization’s history told FITS.
Landess was traveling with S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford on Tuesday and unavailable for comment. Phone calls to The American Future Fund were not immediately returned.
Ironically, Sanford was a leading proponent of the Boeing deal – although unlike Lord he has escaped significant criticism from Landess’ organization.
Hmmm …
We originally supported the Boeing deal – with reticence – outlining our thoughts on it in this post. Of course, with the taxpayer tab for the incentives offered to the company now approaching a whopping $900 million – more than twice what Sanford and state lawmakers told us it was going to cost – our enthusiasm for the project has diminished considerably.
Boeing may indeed end up being a “transformative” economic deal for the state, but the governor and state lawmakers were clearly dishonest about its true cost to S.C. taxpayers.
By Shakin' April 6, 2010 at 11:34 am
SCPC is ideologically “right” on this issue, but needs to present the economic and policy expertise to make a more empirical argument. What is the actual quantifiable track record of economic incentives in terms of employment, tax, and economic outcomes in South Carolina? In other Southern states? Why does that track record indicate the Boeing Deal is a misstep? If there was systemic foul play who are the players and where is the paper trail?
Few are likely to be convinced on a pure sound-bite argument and hitching its wagon to a disgraced and inconsistent governor is a distraction.
By beetrave April 6, 2010 at 12:03 pm
Well, the fur is gonna start flying. The ballooning costs of the Boeing deal give us a perfect example of how most Republicans and “moderates” govern: drain state coffers with overspending and handouts to powerful constituencies, and then claim that you need more of the same (like big breaks for Boeing) to keep the cycle sustainable.
I have no love for big unions, and don’t mind living in a strong right to work state. But blowing SC taxpayer dollars to subsidize Boeing’s union battles in Seattle and Everett, WA? I just don’t have a dog in that fight.
By Jeremy Walker April 6, 2010 at 12:17 pm
Not really sure what to think. I’m a big Leighton Lord supporter and I think it’s disingenuous for the Policy Council to lead people on to the idea that SC can bring huge companies like Boeing without making it advantageous to them. We could do nothing and offer no incentives, and we’d get nothing. This is how free markets work and South Carolina is going to be a lot better off with Boeing coming here, it’ll just take some patience on our part to wait and see. The only BMW factory in the US is right here in SC (and every X5 and X6 in the world is manufactured right here in Spartanburg) and they got huge incentives to come here, would the SC Policy Council still have a problem with that? I just can’t believe that the huge success of Boeing coming here is being made out to be a bad thing. But that’s politics.
By Rylyn April 6, 2010 at 12:42 pm
Do you really think you can get large corporations to come to SC and create jobs without some incentive? Come on people get real. I mean we have really great golf courses and sunny weather but we also have humidity and pollen. You have to have more than a pretty face to create business in any economy. SC needs the jobs and if it takes giving a tax break to bring business to our state so be it.
By Fred April 6, 2010 at 1:02 pm
“Landess was traveling with S.C. Gov. Mark Sanford on Tuesday and unavailable for comment.”
Sounds like someone was taking a trip up the Appalachian Trail!
Don’t worry, Ashley, this is an anonymous dig at you from an anonymous source.
Nothing to be upset about.
Fred
By Joseph Reynolds April 6, 2010 at 2:15 pm
When you throw out the fake numbers thrown in to balloon the cost (like waiving taxes that arent currently being paid and wont ever be paid if they didnt come here)you end up with a figure equal to the amount we were told it was going to actually “cost” us…and that is in the $400,000,000 range.
So..getting a minimum of 3,800 jobs making $50,000 a year equals an ANNUAL payroll of $190,000,000.
So, if we are to spend $450,000,000 over 30 years to get a return of $190,000,000 every single year….then why WOULDNT we support the deal?
After all…shouldnt SCPC be ecstatic about taxes being eliminated or reduced? I thought that was the key to industrial growth…
right? Yet here it is happening, and the very proponents are attacking the deal
WHY????
because taxes are being eliminated or reduced.
By Jack April 6, 2010 at 3:14 pm
The SCPC opposes the deal on sound economic principals. Check out the research reviewed and compiled in “Rich States, Poor States” bu Arthur Laffler and Stephen Moore and “Unleashing Capitalism” by Dr. Russell Sobel. These books document the results of independent studies by economists from all over the country that study economic growth rates of the various US states and try to find corelations between growth rates and policy variances between the states. Their results show that lowering or eliminating corporate and personal income tax rates results in higher economic growth rates. These tax policy changes for ALL CITIZENS, coupled with lower regulatory restrictions and better tort laws lead to the highest growth rates. Conversely, states that legislate economic winners and losers through targeted tax cuts and incentive deals lag the growth rates of most states, just as SC has done for so many years. If you want to know why we have 12.5% unemployment and lagging economic development, turn to the legislature. Those are the people responsible for the highest effective state personal income tax rates in the US.
By giving tax breaks to Boeing, and not reducing spending by an equal amount, the legislature just shifted the burden of paying those taxes from Boeing to the rest of the citizens and businesses in SC. Why not reward all existing businesses and citizens with a tax cut rather than creating headlines for stories that reporters are too economically illiterate to accurately report?
The proposed Palmetto State Income Tax Repeal Act will do just that , and make SC a destination state for businesses small and large looking for a place to establish and grow their operations with the minimum interference from the state government. More on this development shortly.
By GoCocks69 April 6, 2010 at 4:02 pm
SCPC=Laffer zealots
By CNSYD April 6, 2010 at 4:10 pm
Get real people. If Boeing had said they were going to locate in Columbia or, God help us, Greenville, you guys would be tripping all over yourselves saying how great a deal it was. Because it is Charleston is why you are really against it.
By Mallory April 6, 2010 at 6:24 pm
Crosby, Nash, Stills, Young and Dumbass — you’ve done it again. Congrats!
By PBR Man April 6, 2010 at 9:23 pm
I would not have been surprised to find out that Leighton’s team had put out that ad themselves. Most people in SC are thrilled to have Boeing here (right or wrong) and to most people, Lord being the lead negotiator on that deal is a positive.
By Ynotfirst April 7, 2010 at 7:23 am
we should never have to ” pay” businesses to set up shop here in SC.
Boeing is here because the GOP has fought unions tooth and nail.
Forget the workers, only the CEO is important.
By R April 7, 2010 at 9:59 am
Let’s not forget the its not just Boeing that’s coming here with their 4,000 jobs. You’re talking about numerous supporting companies locating here and an estimated additional 8,000 jobs. And since the SCPC doesn’t report who gave them what we can assume it was one of the other AG candidates (probably Son of Joe). Boeing coming here is one of the best things to happen to this state.
By w April 7, 2010 at 12:03 pm
is it not illegal for the Policy Council to engage in political activity?
I would think an ad targeting a candidate for public office would constitute political activity.
By Bob April 7, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Leighton Lord should pay them to mention his name and “Boeing” next to each other as often as possible. This is suicidal; Boeing is as popular in this state as barbecue. The Upstate is getting plenty of the business boost from the deal.
I’d worry about Howie Rich if he and his followers weren’t so inept and full of their own koolaid.
By Sick of Sanford April 8, 2010 at 3:48 pm
“but the governor and state lawmakers were clearly dishonest about its true cost to S.C. taxpayers.” Ya think? If they were ever honest they wouldn’t be South Carolina politicians.