Critics Think Palin Knew in 2008 That She'd Star in a 2010 Reality Show

This is yet another reason why I think a Sarah Palin candidacy would be problematic - no matter what she does she's subjected to all kinds of criticism, even if totally unwarranted (from the Daily Caller):

The company that produced Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s TLC reality show, “Sarah Palin’s Alaska,” received $1.2 million in state tax credits for filming in Alaska through a government program Palin signed into law as governor in 2008.

The Anchorage Daily News first reported the story in February, but after an analyst at the Tax Foundation posted a blurb on the group’s blog linking to the piece Tuesday, Palin faced a fresh heap of criticism from Washington conservative pundits who may have been a bit late to the fight, but were not shy to throw punches.

The state legislature passed the subsidy program in 2008 to encourage media companies to film their projects in Alaska and offers up to 30 percent of the money they spend in the state.

But in a political age where it’s controversial in many circles to defend public funding of National Public Radio, critics panned Palin for supporting a measure that forced taxpayers to foot the bill for a private media project after many statements from the former governor in support of a government that only plays a limited role in the economy.

“I’d bet, like many politicians, Palin’s views on the proper role of government becomes more flexible as it comes closer to her own interests,” wrote the Washington Examiner’s Tim Carney on Tuesday.

Jim Geraghty of National Review said that the reality show’s subsidy was “ridiculous” and that the policy was “problematic for a crusader for small government to end up collecting a seven-figure paycheck from an endeavor that received a seven-figure subsidy,” while Peter Suderman of the libertarian Reason Magazine cracked: “In 2008, Sarah Palin, then the Governor of Alaska, signed a special taxcredit for filmmakers into law. … Who’s benefiting from that tax subsidy now? … none other than Sarah Palin.”

Palin, however, stood by her decision to sign the bill into law in 2008, and the media company’s choice to take the tax credit.

In a statement to the Daily Caller, Palin called the criticism “ludicrous.”

“Any suggestion that I somehow did something wrong by signing this legislation is ludicrous. The accusation hinges on the notion that I signed the legislation into law knowing that it would personally benefit me. That’s absurd,” Palin said. “Obviously I had no intention of benefiting from it when I signed it into law in 2008 because I had no idea I would be involved in a documentary series years later.”

There are numerous states and localities that provide tax benefits to production companies to film in their areas. Why? Film production brings money to the area, and in the case of "Sarah Palin's Alaska", the series will more than pay for the tax break with the additional tourism that's already taking place. Bookings on cruises and land tours in Alaska picked up once the show began to air.

Some are comparing these tax breaks to the federal funding of NPR or PBS, but they couldn't be more different.  Tax breaks for film production are designed to provide a return on the dollar through jobs or tourism.  The money that goes in NPR or PBS is designed to put liberal views on the air that can't attract commercial sponsorship.

I have no problems with communities providing tax breaks for the purpose of generating business.  I'm opposed to providing tax money to promote ideas that are otherwise unmarketable.