The Corner

Politics & Policy

A Bad Disney Analogy

Guests attend the opening ceremony for Fantasyland at Walt Disney World in 2012. (Scott Audette/Reuters)

Michael makes the case in favor of what the State of Florida did to Disney last year by pretending that it did something else:

One of the reasons Disney got such a favorable set of bespoke regulations is that the company brought certain pro-social, pro-family values to the state. If Sea World decided to reinvent itself as a strip club, the Florida State legislature would have every right to revisit whether Sea World’s special-district privileges were up to date.

This is a terrible analogy, and it seems to have been explicitly designed to avoid the problem with Florida’s decision. Walt Disney World did not “reinvent itself as a strip club” — or as anything else for that matter. Walt Disney World is exactly what it was when it opened in 1971, and exactly what it promised to be when it was granted its special district back in 1968: It is a gigantic amusement park with some hotels attached. What Disney did was speak. That I happen to disagree with what Disney said is immaterial, as is that I happen to favor the law to which Disney took exception. The chain of events is clear: Disney spoke out against the incumbent government, and, in response, the incumbent government took action against Disney. I know this. Michael knows this. We all know this. It has scarcely been hidden. Given the complexity of this area, I do not know if Florida acted illegally when it retaliated against Disney. I do know that Florida retaliated against Disney.

Michael insists that Disney’s “district is a bespoke creation of the legislature itself and therefore has no real connection to pure free-market principles.” That is correct. But that does not get us away from the core problem, which is that Florida has punished Disney for speaking. Had Florida decided that the special district program was problematic per se (there are around 1,800 of them in Florida) — or if there had been a longstanding and well-documented objection to Disney’s particular arrangement (which is extensive) — the favor could have been rescinded without issue. But that’s not what happened, and I grow tired of people pretending that it was simply because they like the governor who did it.

Exit mobile version