With my feet firmly in place, courtesy of the soda-coated floor, the lights in the Movie Theater dimmed and I began my struggle with the chewy candy in my mouth that had, like Super-Glue, latched firmly on to my teeth. I began to wonder what would make an otherwise sane man spend upwards of $3 for a small box of candy that would only result in a lecture series from my unforgiving dental hygienist and dentist. Luckily, an almost endless number of movie previews saved the day and diverted my attention from trying to answer my own difficult question. Finally, the orchestral fanfare erupted from the theater’s speakers and Leo the Lion, the symbol of Metro Goldwyn Mayer or MGM, announced with a powerful roar the beginning of the long-awaited film. It was time to sit back and enjoy the great American film experience.

Despite the triumphant roar of MGM’s Leo the Lion and the happy go-lucky attitude of Disney’s Mickey Mouse, not all is right in Tinseltown. More and more people in Hollywood, particularly those who represent workers in the movie industry, are ordering a triple shot of espresso in their Café Latte. The concern is about the growing problem of “runaway production,” which refers to films that are conceptually developed here but produced outside California, in Canada, and in other foreign countries.

But before panic sets in – terms like “runaway production” will do that sort of thing- we should make it clear that the motion picture industry in California, the 18th largest industry in the state, has experienced and continues to experience rapid growth. However, an increasing percentage of films are being produced in other states and countries. According to the recent report “Motion Picture Production in California,” by Martha Jones, Ph.D., for the State Library, Hollywood is losing it’s once impregnable dominance in film production because the market for films has become global, production costs are higher in California than in other states and countries, a strong dollar makes production in other counties less expensive, and other states and countries offer tax and other incentives.

What should California do about this problem? I wasn’t surprised, when last week, AB 2747 (Wesson), which would provide an annual $100 million wage-tax credit to motion picture companies that produce films in this state, flew off the Assembly floor by a vote of 68-1. When viewed in isolation, it makes sense to try to keep and attract these types of high-paying jobs to California. I wouldn’t criticize anyone’s “aye” vote on this particular bill. However, when viewed in a broader perspective in a year in which the state is struggling to close a $23.6 billion budget deficit and when the state is actively creating an increasingly hostile climate for small businesses, a different picture emerges. The ugly picture that emerges is one in which the Legislature appears to cater to the wishes of the rich and famous at the expense of the average, hard-working Californian and his or her family.

Why just give a tax credit to the motion picture industry? Is the motion picture industry financially worse off than other businesses in the state? This does not appear to be the case. According to Dr. Jones’ report, while total non-farm employment grew 21% from 1992 to 2001, motion picture employment grew 52% during this same time period. Average salaries in the motion picture industry are 70% higher than salaries in other businesses statewide.

So while certain members of the Legislature complain about film production jobs in Colorado and British Columbia, the Assembly and Senate pass bills every week that result in higher workers’ compensation and health insurance premiums, higher taxes for unemployment insurance, more paperwork burdens, more expensive housing, increased exposure to lawsuits, and increased fees and energy costs. All of these added costs are killing not only film production jobs but many other “less glamorous jobs” as well.

And while the Legislature passes a $100 million tax credit for movie moguls, some of the most generous campaign contributors in the State Capitol, it prepares to pass a state budget with $4 billion in tax increases and cuts in dental care for children and treatment for adults and children with mental illnesses. The politically-connected “Haves” seem to be getting first class treatment. On the other side of the equation, hardworking Californians, who don’t have front-row tickets to the Academy Awards ceremony in their hip pockets that they could give to a powerful legislator, ultimately have to pay the price for the state’s mixed-up priorities.

Abraham Lincoln once said that the purpose of government is “to elevate the condition of men – to lift artificial weights from all shoulders – to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all – to afford all, an unfettered start, and a fair chance, in the race of life.” The Legislature needs to stop using the machinery of government to reward the rich and famous and campaign contributors and, instead, begin to pass reforms that will “clear the path of laudable pursuit” for every hard-working and conscientious Californian.

Copyright 2002 The Auburn Sentinel