"Cory Booker, D-N.J., and James Lankford, R-Okla., are sponsoring a bill that would prohibit teams from using municipal bonds, whose interest is exempt from federal taxes, to help finance stadium construction." "A report in September by the Brookings Institution revealed that $3.2 billion in federal taxpayer money, through municipal bonds, has been used to fund 36 newly built or renovated sports stadiums since 2000. The largest federal subsidies, according to the report, include the New York Yankees ($431 million), the Chicago Bears ($205 million), the New York Mets ($185 million), the Cincinnati Bengals ($164 million) and the Indianapolis Colts ($163 million)."http://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id...bit-teams-using-municipal-bonds-fund-stadiums I think I actually support this. I'm a sports fan and all, but the typical "it benefits the surrounding area" argument never sounded reasonable to me as a justification for why private stadiums had to be built with public money. Lots of things benefit the surrounding area - grocery stores and pizza shops and furniture stores also benefit the surrounding area, but I don't see whose being subsidized to the tune of billions of dollars. It would be one thing if it was a truly public venue which was leased by a professional sports team from time to time, but which was also open to the public during off hours and which allowed the public to use for their minor purposes. But these private stadiums are never like that. They're privately operated, closed to the public nearly all the time, and using them for something else is usually prohibitively expensive. Also, glad Booker is working with a Republican on this.