Daily Herald opinion: An untimely distraction: Anti-billionaires stadium bill has emotional appeal; what’s needed now is action

As if the yearslong political and financial sideshow involving a potential stadium deal for the Chicago Bears hasn’t become tiresome enough, federal lawmakers from as far away as Texas and Vermont have jumped into the picture.

Greg Casar, a Democratic congressman from Texas, sponsored legislation that would discourage, if not completely deter, NFL franchises from leaving their home quarters for potentially more welcoming pastures elsewhere. Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders hosted a press conference last week to declare his support for the idea.

If adopted, as seems highly unlikely, the plan wouldn’t affect a Bears move to Arlington Heights, but would apply to a potential move to Hammond, Indiana.

Casar said the bill is intended to stymie the political competition that billionaire franchise owners create when they pit units of government against each other in the interest of getting public money for their private business. And, he openly declared his legislation was inspired by the Bears situation.

“If you’re a fan watching at home, yes, this is a keep-the-Bears-in-Chicago bill,” he said.

It is of course much more than that. The text of the bill would require teams to give a year’s notice before deciding to move across state lines or to another metropolitan region. During that time, local leaders could try to find another buyer for the team or push for their communities to take over the ownership as fans in Green Bay have done with the Packers.

As an opportunity for not-undeserved billionaire bashing, it’s an appealing proposition. But as a practical matter, it is fraught with complications.

Among the most troubling is the notion of how deeply local governments should control the decision making of private companies.

Sanders dismissed the comparison to manufacturers and other businesses that often upend communities when they pull up stakes for more appealing public contributions or tax situations. He said sports teams hold a special place in the heart of a community.

“Anytime an economic enterprise leaves a city and jobs are lost, that’s a tragedy,” he said. “But when a major professional team leaves a community, it is a double tragedy. It’s not just the jobs that are lost, it’s the fact that emotionally … people suffer a deep, deep loss.”

True enough, although presumably people living where a team relocates enjoy an opportunity for deep, deep joy that they wouldn’t otherwise have. In that context, Sanders’ distinction is rooted more in emotion than practical logic.

The idea certainly has merit in pushing people to examine the changing nature of the big-time sports financial structure, and it does appeal to the justified resentment many people feel about the way franchises maneuver to lure public resources for their profit-making ventures.

But ultimately, it’s just more of a distraction than a serious proposal at a time when more distraction is the last thing the Bears and the state of Illinois need.

Illinois lawmakers left Springfield last Friday without settling on the details of a proposal that would allow the Bears and local taxing bodies to reach agreements that team executives say would give them more certainty about their tax liabilities.

State Rep. Kam Buckner, a Chicago Democrat leading negotiations on the so-called PILOT legislation, said that shouldn’t be a worry. He told Capitol News Illinois he doesn’t expect this to be the “May 31st thing” Springfield is famous for, and he also indicated that progress has been made that could finally bring closure within weeks to this long argument.

“This conversation started off as a mess,” Buckner said. “We moved from a mess to movement. We moved from movement to momentum, and now we’re right between momentum and maturity. Maturity means we’re there, right? So we’re almost there. We’ll get it done.”

That, it must be said, is closer to the pragmatic productive thinking that will produce a “keep-the-Bears-in-Chicago bill,” than complex emotional tinkering with not much more value than to heat up simmering animosities.