| |||||||
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | HOUSE RESOLUTION
| ||||||
2 | WHEREAS, The State of Illinois has a strategic interest in | ||||||
3 | developing the best possible strategy to create the most jobs | ||||||
4 | for the least amount of taxpayer money; and
| ||||||
5 | WHEREAS, State of Illinois and City of Chicago officials | ||||||
6 | have responded to Amazon.com, Inc.'s "Request For Proposal" for | ||||||
7 | their new facility with a package that likely includes | ||||||
8 | subsidies and other taxpayer-funded incentives to entice them | ||||||
9 | to choose Illinois; and
| ||||||
10 | WHEREAS, Amazon.com, Inc. has a market value of nearly $400 | ||||||
11 | billion and the necessary capital to construct a new facility | ||||||
12 | without taxpayer assistance; and
| ||||||
13 | WHEREAS, The State of Illinois has a bill backlog of nearly | ||||||
14 | $16 billion, which includes social service agencies, | ||||||
15 | small-business medical providers and many others who are | ||||||
16 | struggling to continue operating without the funds they are | ||||||
17 | duly owed; and | ||||||
18 | WHEREAS, The State of Illinois has already awarded more | ||||||
19 | than $112 million in subsidies to Amazon.com, Inc. for | ||||||
20 | constructing distribution facilities that its business model | ||||||
21 | requires, with little credible evidence of benefit to the |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | State's economy; and | ||||||
2 | WHEREAS, The average wages at Amazon.com, Inc. warehouses | ||||||
3 | are significantly lower than the prevailing wage for comparable | ||||||
4 | work within the same areas; and | ||||||
5 | WHEREAS, In 2015, Amazon.com, Inc. generated approximately | ||||||
6 | $1.5 million in sales in Illinois for every full-time warehouse | ||||||
7 | worker it employed, while the State's brick-and-mortar retail | ||||||
8 | stores employ about seven people to accomplish the same sales; | ||||||
9 | and | ||||||
10 | WHEREAS, The actual economic impact of trading large | ||||||
11 | taxpayer subsidies to corporations for promised jobs is poorly | ||||||
12 | understood, and the supposed benefits are disputed by many | ||||||
13 | academics and experts in the field; and
| ||||||
14 | WHEREAS, Foxconn Technology Group was recently awarded | ||||||
15 | more than $3 billion in taxpayer subsidies to locate a plant in | ||||||
16 | Wisconsin, at a cost of more than $230,000 per job created, | ||||||
17 | representing a massive transfer of wealth from Wisconsin | ||||||
18 | taxpayers to corporate shareholders; and
| ||||||
19 | WHEREAS, It is of crucial importance for policymakers to | ||||||
20 | understand whether the cost of potential future subsidies to | ||||||
21 | Amazon.com, Inc. is justified based on the job creation and |
| |||||||
| |||||||
1 | retention benefits generated by an agreement; therefore, be it
| ||||||
2 | RESOLVED, BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ONE | ||||||
3 | HUNDREDTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, that we | ||||||
4 | urge extreme caution in the pursuit of Amazon.com, Inc.'s new | ||||||
5 | facility, as an offer of subsidies approximating the Foxconn | ||||||
6 | Technology Group deal in Wisconsin is almost certain to be a | ||||||
7 | net negative for Illinois taxpayers; and be it further | ||||||
8 | RESOLVED, That we believe job growth and retention is | ||||||
9 | crucial, but fighting with taxpayer money to win a bid from a | ||||||
10 | corporation that has absolutely no financial need for | ||||||
11 | subsidization is a dangerous path to tread; and be it further | ||||||
12 | RESOLVED, That it violates both free-market principles and | ||||||
13 | good common sense to subsidize Amazon.com, Inc.'s facility with | ||||||
14 | more public money per new job than is likely to be repaid in | ||||||
15 | state and local taxes; and be it further
| ||||||
16 | RESOLVED, That we urge policymakers to hold public hearings | ||||||
17 | before any final deal is agreed to, complete with expert | ||||||
18 | testimony in order to fully demonstrate to the public the | ||||||
19 | potential economic merits and drawbacks.
|