The Kansas City Star today delivered a sledgehammer blow to the prospects for Jackson County’s proposed half-cent sales tax for “translational medical research.”
In an editorial that will appear in Sunday’s printed edition, The Star said that “local taxpayers in a single county” should not have to bear the cost of “the emerging niche” of translational medical research.
In the medical sense, “translational” means reducing the time frame, as much as possible, between discoveries and getting products and pharmaceuticals into the marketplace.
The editorial, probably written by chief political editorial writer Yael Abouhalkah, eloquently explores the many flaws in the proposal, which was the brainchild of Kansas City’s civic elite.
The Civic Council of Greater Kansas City, consisting of area business leaders, already has poured at least $600,000 into a TV-heavy campaign designed to win voter approval of the measure on Nov. 5.
The editorial said, in part:
“An extra half-cent sales tax, raising $40 million annually for the next 20 years, levied on the second poorest county in the area (after Wyandotte) puts an unfair, regressive burden on a limited slice of the region in search of national advances.”
The editorial noted that 10 Kansas City health-care institutions “already invest million of dollars in research annually and can claim 2,000 scientists among them.”
A separate institution, the Stowers Institute for Medical Research, “spends $70 million a year on basic research and has built an enviable reputation,” the newspaper said.
The editorial also made the following points:
— The Civic Council leaders “failed to reach out early to a broad swath of the community to reveal its effort” or rally public support for a drive to raise money privately, including from corporations.
— The three-week period between introduction and county legislative agreement to put the issue on the Nov. 5 ballot did not allow for public input.
Turning to “alternative scenarios,” The Star made these suggestions:
— “Build a larger private/philanthropic movement in advance of another, better-planned tax appeal.”
— “Encourage Stowers and the Kauffman Foundation, with its entrepreneurial interests, to help coordinate a push for added private funds and venture capital interest.”
— “Promote more spending on medical research by hospitals such as St. Luke’s and Children’s Mercy — which have raised hundreds of millions of dollars for building renovations in recent years — before they become recipients of large amounts of local tax dollars.”
The Star’s editorial board consists of Publisher Mi-Ai Parrish; Editorial Page Editor Miriam Pepper; Abouhalkah; and columnists Barbara Shelly and Lewis Diuguid.
Foreshadowing today’s editorial, Abouhalkah for weeks has been writing columns critical of the measure.
Shelly attempted to balance the scales on Friday, Oct. 4, when she wrote an Op-Ed column saying that the sales-tax measure “deserves at least to be judged on its merits and not on distractions.” The distractions she referred to included opposition contentions that the proposal was “a greedy cop-out,” in Shelly’s words.
In staking out its position, The Star joined several civic and political organizations in denouncing the measure.
Organizations opposing the tax are the east-side political club Freedom Inc.; the nonpartisan, city-oriented Citizens Association; and the local branches of the League of Women Voters and the NAACP.
Two registered campaign committees are working against the measure: Citizens for Responsible Research and the committee that I registered a day after the County Legislature approved the vote — Committee to Stop a Bad Cure.
**
You can read this same story on the stopabadcure.org.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
I’m very happy to see The Star take this stance. And it proves wrong for those who constantly whine about The Star never seeing a tax it didn’t like. There’s still a lot of work ahead, though. The proponents have money and paid political henchmen who know how to appeal to voters’ fears and sensibilities.
You’re absolutely correct, Mike…It’s a big step forward, but money and experienced consultants are always hard to beat in politics.
This is strong news to defeat this bad cure. My hat is tipped to the editor expressing this opinion. Thursday’s airing of “Ruckus” Mike Shanin, Yael and the others were again against this tax increase. The editorial is a nice weapon, but few under thirty-five, read anything other than the Sports and ads on Sundays. Money is king. It is long from over never underestimate the stupidity of the public and voters. The little girl and her poor vision is just the beginning. More people will see these sentimental ads (and I am sure there are many more to come) than read The Star. And with all of the money in place for the bad sure, corruption and the thieves will follow.
On the other hand, a relatively small percentage of those who don’t read the paper will bother to vote in a special, local election. That’s why social media isn’t going to be pivotal in this campaign; I don’t care how many thousands of tweets and facebook posts the proponents put out.
Yale deserves little if any credit. He waffled and waffled as always, blown by every wind, wet by every rain, he is the perfect example of an agenda driven “journalist” who seeks the highest temporary ground, the easiest way to kick the can down the road in favor of short term reward and the approval of his liberal overlords.
This fortuitous confluence of Yale’s editorial on the side of reason is a short term cause for celebration.
I guess we will take it.
Not true, Chuck. He never waffled on this. He was consistently critical…Just like he was consistently positive about Funkhouser…until it blew up in his and the public’s face.
Nevertheless, he’s much more often right than wrong about what’s good for KC and Jackson County.
Yale waffled, on film, on Ruckus in the last 30 to 45 days. He reserved opinion at that time. It is my contention, that he was, as usual, waiting for more tea leaves.
Look buddy, I am glad he is on the same side we all are on this issue.
You certainly predicted this, so kudos to your skills at prognostication. That said, I’m still a little cynical about Yael’s motives. If memory serves, there was a major construction project competing for sales tax and I can’t help but think that maybe Yael’s friends are involved with that competing project. Clearly there are multiple constituencies at play here, and The Star has been forced to make some choices as to which constituencies to serve.
I was a little worried about a Mi-Ai Parrish override, but Yael was so strong in his opinions that it just didn’t seem likely…
P.S. I might be substituting a new photo. A red, straw hat is on the way…
No thumbs this time — up or down.
Chuck — I should have said he was consistently critical on the Op-Ed and editorial page. (I think he wrote an editorial early on that raised significant questions.)
I don’t usually watch Ruckus, so you could well be right. Sorry I wasn’t completely clear…And, yes, you’re my buddy, too…Latter day pen pals, I guess you could call it.