New Mexicans’ tax dollars at work: subsidizing “The Bachelor”

As if the fact that they are getting 30 cents on the dollar as part of New Mexico’s film subsidy program were not bad enough (TV shows receive 30 cents on the dollar as opposed to 25 cents for movies), now New Mexico taxpayers are subsidizing The Bachelor, a television show that can only be described as insipid. The “plot” of the show involves one man choosing from a stable of 25 or so women.

The City of Santa Fe is putting up $100,000 to attract the show while New Mexico’s Tourism Department is putting up $50,000 according to KRQE TV.

I’ve never watched the show and I have no idea whether it is good exposure for the city in which it films, but state taxpayers are already losing more than 50 cents on the dollar for film subsidies. Additional taxpayer subsidies for The Bachelor adds insult to injury regardless of the show’s quality or lack thereof.

Notably, this is not Santa Fe’s first go-round when it comes to doubling up on film subsidies. Santa Fe studios also “doubled-up” its taxpayer subsidies by using $23 million to finance construction in addition to the 25 or 30 cents on the dollar thrown in by the state. In Santa Fe apparently, there is no limit on what taxpayers should pay for films and tv.

For an amusing but slightly off-color take on The Bachelor, check out the following clip from Chelsea Handler:

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 Replies to “New Mexicans’ tax dollars at work: subsidizing “The Bachelor””

  1. I was absolutely serious last week when I asked the question; why do our politicians support the film subsidies. My “in the tank for the subsidy” politician is State Senator Sue Beffort. Can she believe that this kind of vulgar drivel justifies stiffing the tax payers for their own good and that it will somehow enhance our quality of life? Is there some kind of benefits that I am not seeing? Politicians often times do things for “our own good” that we are not smart enough to understand.

    In any case, she does not respond to my correspondence on any subject so I will not be getting an answer from her.

    1. Unfortunately, just because someone has an “R” by their name does not make them economically literate. Also, it is the classic case of concentrated benefits versus dispersed costs. Beffort is likely responding to that dynamic and the successful lobbying/storytelling of the film lobby.

      Too bad that she won’t at least engage with you as a constituent on all issues.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.