screen-shot-2019-02-13-at-3-57-57-pm-150x150-7517032State Sen. Julia Salazar, a democratic socialist from Brooklyn, is backing an idea that could appeal to limited-government conservatives across New York.

The 28-year-old first-term legislator has introduced legislation (S.3061) establishing a multi-state compact that would bar member states from offering any “company-specific subsidy,” further defined as:

… including any change in the general tax rate or valuation offered or presented by the state to a specific company that is not available to other similarly situated companies and company-specific grants including any disbursement of funds, property, cash or deferred tax liability offered by the state to a specific company. The term “company-specific  subsidy” shall not include workforce development grants that provide funds for the purpose of training employees.

The sponsor’s memorandum for the “End of Corporate Welfare Act of 2019” breathlessly promises that banning company-specific subsidies “will eliminate secretive, opaque negotiations between government officials and corporate executives, which have  time and again transferred billions to corporations with little to show in return.”

Hype aside, Salazar’s bill language echoes one of the oldest provisions of the New York State Constitution—Article VII, Section 8.1, which bars the gift or loan of state money to “any private corporation or association or private undertaking.” As explained here, the gifts-and-loans provision was adopted in 1846 a few years after a wave of bankruptcies among New York railroads whose over-expansion had been financed by state debt. Over the years, however, the provision increasingly was bypassed by the spread of public authorities and economic development corporations.

Article VII, Section 8.1 all but officially became a dead letter in 2011, when the Court of Appeals upheld massive Pataki-era economic development subsidies benefiting, among others, two of the world’s leading computer corporations.

Salazar’s measure would, among other things, knock out a portion of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s pending deal to lure Amazon to Long Island City in Queens. While the bulk of the Amazon package involves state and city tax breaks that are “as of right”—i.e., not company specific but available to any private firm committing to a similar investment—it also includes a $500 million state capital grant that would qualify as “company-specific.”

There are two shortcomings in Salazar’s bill, co-sponsored by Assemblyman Ronald T. Kim, D-Queens.

First, it doesn’t explicitly ban company-specific or company-tailored financing (i.e., loans not available to firms on as-of-right basis) as well as tax breaks and grants.

A second flaw is the requirement for a multi-state effort, overseen by a “board of compact administrators” appointed by governors, which would make the subsidy ban effective once two or more states pass substantially similar legislation joining the compact. The bill actually devotes more language to the workings of this board, an incipient new regulatory bureaucracy, than it does to its simple prohibition on subsidies.

The multistate feature seems designed to address the likely complaint that, by abandoning company-specific subsidies, New York couldn’t compete for corporate investments. But why compete at all in what Salazar’s bill memo describes as a subsidy-waving “race to the bottom”?  She could improve her bill by scrapping the “compact” clauses and simply banning company-subsidies by the State of New York, period. In the process, she’d be going beyond the “database of deals” and other well-meaning but ultimately insufficient transparency reforms proposed by most critics of state economic development programs.

Salazar is by no means a born-again conservative—or, for that matter, even a moderate. Her campaign platform was a standard hard-left wish list of policy goals and slogans that would go a long way toward destroying what’s left of New York’s economic competitiveness, including higher taxes on the rich, tax-funded single-payer health care, more rent control, more bargaining leverage for government unions, and a cap on new charter schools, among other things.

Still, you’ve got to hand it to her: the freshman legislator has brought a genuinely fresh approach to an issue area that badly needs it.

You may also like

New York’s Medicaid Spiral Is Worse Than Hochul Admitted

Although Governor Hochul said last week that the current trajectory of Medicaid spending is "not sustainable," the upward trend is even steeper than she and her budget director have acknowledged. Read More

NY’s Road To Electric School Buses Gets Bumpy

New York in 2022 told school districts they’d be barred from purchasing gasoline- or diesel-powered buses after 2027, and instead have to buy electric buses at more than double the upfront cost. “The purchase of new electric buses will help grow the market,” officials later pledged, “which will in turn help reduce prices.” Unfortunately for taxpayers, those reductions aren’t materializing—because state officials put the prices, and future increases, on cruise control. Read More

Hochul Shows a Jarring Lack of Direction on Health Care

Financing and regulating health care delivery is one of the biggest responsibilities of state government, yet Governor Hochul had remarkably little to say on that topic in her State of the State speech on Tuesday. Read More

Hochul’s Pushing Affordability. It Would Cost A Lot.

Governor Hochul is hammering an “affordability” theme in the leadup to Tuesday's 2025 State of the State address. But her campaign, dubbed "Money In Your Pockets," has so far featured little that would reduce the cost of providing, and therefore buying, goods or services in New York. Instead, the biggest announced and expected elements reflect Albany's waning interest in growing the state economy—and a greater appetite to redistribute what it produces. Read More

Unions Reprogram NYS To Do Less With More

Governor Hochul on Saturday signed an innocuous-sounding bill to “regulate the use of automated decision-making systems and artificial intelligence techniques by state agencies.” But the “Legislative Oversight of Automated Decision-making in Government,” or LOADinG Act, wasn’t about protecting New York from self-aware computers trying to wipe out humanity. Instead, it was an early Christmas present for the state's public employee unions—and a lump of coal for New Yorkers hoping for more efficient state government. Read More

Former Utility Regulator Warns State Lawmakers They’re On the Naughty List

A legislative hearing into spending by the state’s sprawling energy agency featured a surprise guest who offered sober warnings about Albany’s energy policy. Read More

New York’s Public Employee Shortage Is Over

Public employee unions complained loudly when New York's state government workforce shrank during the coronavirus pandemic, using that decrease as pretext to press Governor Hochul and state lawmakers for more hiring and costly giveaways to benefit their members. But the latest data show nearly every state agency has more employees than it did a year ago, and that by at least one key measure, the state workforce is larger than it was before COVID. Read More

Upstate Insurance Customers Pay the Price for Medicare’s Hospital Rate Hike

A billion-dollar Medicare windfall for upstate hospitals has turned into a crisis for upstate health insurers that's threatening to disrupt coverage for millions of New Yorkers. The Read More