Last month, Florida’s economic development agency disclosed that Florida taxpayers have coughed up $1.7 billion in tax credits and incentives for businesses since 1995, but have gotten few jobs to show for it. In fact, “the lion’s share of the awards — 971 — have yet to report any jobs.”

But Florida is far from the only state with this problem. As New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP) noted, the Garden State offered food company Goya $80 million in tax incentives last month, for which the state will receive precisely nine jobs in return:

Imagine you are a New Jersey job seeker (one of 418,000 unemployed in the state as of September, 2011, according to the state Department of Labor and Workforce Development) and you read in the news that a firm will be getting a state subsidy to hire 175 new workers. You would be thrilled to see those new job opportunities in the state, right?

But, in the case of Goya Foods, Inc., only nine truly new jobs are being created.

Nine.

Of the other 166 “new” workers, 66 would be moved from Goya’s location in Bethpage, New York and 100 already work for Goya as contractors based in Secaucus, according to documents from the state Economic Development Authority (EDA). So these “new” workers are actually existing employees.

“There are a lot of ways to create nine jobs that don’t involve spending $80 million or more dollars,” said NJPP president Deborah Howlett. “At its essence the state policy is choosing corporations over people.” In addition to $80 million from the state, Goya could receive a property tax break from Jersey City.

Several studies have shown that trying to entice corporations to bring jobs to a state via tax credits is a fool’s errand. As the Economic Policy Institute and the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center found, “a growing body of research suggests that state and local tax cuts and incentives cannot create jobs in a cost-effective manner.” Citizens for Tax Justice calls corporate tax incentives and business exemptions “deeply flawed as policy,” noting that tax revenue “won’t just be flushed down the toilet — the money raised will help to fund the social and physical infrastructure that businesses need to thrive, including police, fire protection, and education.”

Even a top aide to Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) admitted that corporate tax breaks won’t lead companies to hire. And there’s no reason to think it will work any better in New Jersey.

Forty House Republicans joined 60 Democrats today in a letter calling on the congressional super committee to consider “all options” in crafting a deficit reduction package, including increasing revenues. As the AP notes, the “letter puts about one-sixth of House GOP lawmakers on record as saying the supercommittee should consider collecting more taxes.” From the letter:

We write to you as a bipartisan group of representatives from across the political spectrum in the belief that the success of your committee is vital to our country’s future. We know that many in Washington and around the country do not believe we in the Congress and those within your committee can successfully meet this challenge. We believe that we can and we must.

To succeed, all options for mandatory and discretionary spending and revenues must be on the table. In addition, we know from other bipartisan frameworks that a target of some $4 trillion in deficit reduction is necessary to stabilize our debt as a share of the economy and assure America’s fiscal well-being.

Republican Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) organized the letter, which included conservative signatories like Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) and some freshmen Tea Party lawmakers like Rep. Michael Grimm (R-NY).

So far, the Republican leadership has shown little interest in even discussing the revenue side of the balance sheet, let alone raising the necessary tax revenue, even though experts agree that reducing the deficit will require both spending cuts and more money coming in.

Chicago Federal Reserve President Charles Evans

The Federal Reserve today released its latest policy statement, announcing that it is taking no new moves to boost the economy’s sluggish growth. However, for the first time since 2007, one of the voting members of the central bank — Chicago Fed President Charles Evans — dissented from the Fed’s decision from the left:

Voting for the FOMC monetary policy action were: Ben S. Bernanke, Chairman; William C. Dudley, Vice Chairman; Elizabeth A. Duke; Richard W. Fisher; Narayana Kocherlakota; Charles I. Plosser; Sarah Bloom Raskin; Daniel K. Tarullo; and Janet L. Yellen. Voting against the action was Charles L. Evans, who supported additional policy accommodation at this time.

Evans has been a consistent voice on the Fed for doing more to stimulate the economy. He laid out his reasoning in a speech last month:

With unemployment having lingered for so long at rates around 9 percent, it is perhaps natural that some would begin to think that nothing more can be done to improve upon this situation. However, I don’t agree…[T]hese are not ordinary times — we are in the aftermath of a financial crisis with massive output gaps, with stubborn debt overhangs and high degrees of household and business caution that are weighing on economic activity. As Ken Rogoff wrote in a recent piece in the Financial Times, “Any inflation above 2 percent may seem anathema to those who still remember the anti-inflation wars of the 1970s and 1980s, but a once-in-75-year crisis calls for outside-the-box measures.” The Fed has done a good deal of thinking out of the box over the past four years. I think it is time to do some more.

The last dissent from the left on the Fed was from Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren, who has also said that “if the economy gets weaker and the inflation rate gets lower, we should be thinking about alternative policies.”

As Matt Yglesias has written, “the Federal Reserve system has an obligation to not sit idly by and let the country endure years of mass unemployment.” However, several of the right-leaning members of the central bank have consistently said the Fed shouldn’t do more out of fears of sparking inflation.

But that bias on may be shifting. As the Wall Street Journal noted, “Vice Chairwoman Janet Yellen, New York Fed President William Dudley and Governor Daniel Tarullo all warned that the economy is at risk and that the Fed may need to purchase more securities-a step known to some as quantitative easing-to push down long-term rates.” Since congressional Republicans don’t seem inclined to let anything that might even moderately help the economy become law, hoping for the Fed’s doves to swing the central bank in their favor might be one of the few options left for boosting the economy.

Earlier this week, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) told a Kentucky audience that, in his view, “everybody believes” that the country should be doing more to upgrade its aging, crumbling infrastructure. The problem, he said, is that “nobody wants to pay for it”:

“Everybody believes we have infrastructure deficiencies and more needs to be spent to repair, replace and in some cases build new infrastructure,” Boehner said in a speech. “The problem is nobody wants to pay for it.”

Boehner did not specifically mention the region’s bridge problems, but spoke broadly about transportation needs in his speech as part of the McConnell Center’s fall lecture series at the university.

However, it’s simply not true that “nobody” has tried to craft a bill that both invests in infrastructure and is paid for. President Obama’s American Jobs Act included money for infrastructure and was paid for by higher income taxes for the wealthiest Americans. Senate Democrats, meanwhile, plan to hold a vote this week on a bill that combines $50 billion in direct infrastructure spending with another $10 billion to start a national infrastructure bank.

The Senate Democrats’ bill is paid for by a surtax on the very wealthiest Americans that, as Citizens for Tax Justice has found, will affect no more than 0.1 percent of the residents of most states. Far from jumping on board with this plan, Senate Republicans are gearing up to derail it:

A senior Senate Democratic aide predicted Tuesday that not a single Republican would vote for the latest jobs package of $50 billion in infrastructure spending combined with a $10 billion national infrastructure bank.

Senate Democratic leaders hope to vote Thursday on the jobs bill, but they expect the outcome to follow the same lines as the previous two jobs measures Republicans voted unanimously to block.

As the Washington Post’s Greg Sargent noted yesterday, “a number of GOP Senators in the past have explicitly endorsed infrastructure spending — in different contexts — as a good way to spur economic growth or maintain economic competitiveness.” For instance, Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has said that “if you’re a Republican and you want to create jobs, then you need to invest in infrastructure that will allow us to create jobs.” But now that Obama is proposing just that, the GOP is lining up against him.

Boehner is trying to deflect attention from the GOP’s constant obstruction of infrastructure bills. But tomorrow will provide the perfect test case as to whether “everybody” agrees that infrastructure is a priority, or whether the GOP thinks it’s more important to protect super-low tax rates for the very wealthy.

Goldline International, the precious metal retailer that has capitalized on conservatives’ anxiety about the economy by forging synergistic relationships with right wing TV and radio hosts, is facing a new series of legal challenges after authorities filed criminal charges against the company and its executives yesterday. Several major conservative talkers — including two former GOP presidential candidates — have endorsed and recommended Goldine, which critics have long contended is little more than a scam.

After more than a year of investigating, the city attorney in Santa Monica, California, where the company is based, has filed 19 criminal charges of fraud and theft against the company, in addition to charges against top executives and salesmen, ABC News reports:

The complaint alleges that Goldline “runs a bait and switch operation in which customers, seeking to invest in gold bullion, are switched to highly overpriced coins by using false and misleading claims,” according to a statement released by the consumer affairs division of the Santa Monica City Attorney’s office.

The company has been charged in the court filing with misdemeanors that include theft by false pretenses, false advertising, and conspiracy, the City Attorney’s office said. In addition to the charges against the company, the complaint accuses former CEO Mark Albarian, executives Robert Fazio and Luis Beeli, and salespeople Charles Boratgis and Stephanie Howard of defrauding customers. Current CEO Scott Carter is accused of making false or misleading statements.

Each of the charges carries a maximum penalty of one year in jail and maximum fines of between $1,000 and $10,000 per offense.

While former Fox News conspiracy-theorist Glenn Beck is most closely associated with Goldline, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Mark Levin, former GOP presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson, and several Fox News hosts, among others, have all endorsed the company.

Indeed, conservative talk radio is central to the company’s success, as Goldline employs a business model based not on mere advertising, but full integration with the content of conservative talk show hosts’ messages. The company’s website prominently features these endorsers, suggesting the talkers’ backing gives Goldline “credibility.” The company has said it will vigorously contest the charges.