Posted on 10/01/2005 9:59:21 PM PDT by akdonn
Alaska can help finance the recovery from recent hurricanes. It also can secure an energy supply and generate future revenue, thus avoiding tax increases.
But first, Americans have to get the facts straight about Alaska. The misinformation is atrocious. For example, Steve Doocy of Fox and Friends reported Tuesday that the 2005 highway legislation appropriated $223 million for a bridge (at Ketchikan) to serve 50 people, or about $4.5 million per person. That is ridiculous and exhibits the sloppy reporting costing major media their viewers and readers.
The bridge would replace an expensive and inadequate shuttle ferry to a regional airport used by civilian and military aircraft. Ketchikan lies at the south end of the 500-mile-long Alaska Panhandle. The only roads into the Panhandle are at the extreme north end. Ketchikan's closest access to the continental highway system entails a six-hour ferry ride to Prince Rupert, British Columbia, plus a two-day drive to the nearest state.
(Excerpt) Read more at adn.com ...
Do any of the other states have less than 1% owned by individuals and the majority of the State's land held by the Federal Government? If you want Alaska to stand on its own, maybe it should be allowed to develop its resouces and own its land.
Do you have a source for this claim? The US census data shows continued growth.
The National Transportation Safety Board investigated the accident and determined that the probable causes of the grounding were:
The failure of the third mate to properly maneuver the vessel, possibly due to fatigue and excessive workload;
The failure of the master to provide a proper navigation watch, possibly due to impairment from alcohol;
The failure of Exxon Shipping Company to supervise the master and provide a rested and sufficient crew for the Exxon Valdez;
The failure of the U.S. Coast Guard to provide an effective vessel traffic system
The lack of effective pilot and escort services.
----------------
The US Federal Government provides vessel traffic systems in coastal areas of navigable waterways.
Thanks you made my point. If the State was so concerned about the environment, they would of used the resources at hand to make sure the system was up to snuff, even if they had to pay for it themselves.
I am sure if they invested the seed money the Feds would of came through with what it took, it's the old squeaky wheel gets the grease thing.
The people of Alaska partied with oil royalty money, and deserve scorn for their actions.
What a load of BS. If that bridge is so important for Alaska, let Alaska use local funds to pay for it. If the state can afford to write checks to their residents each year, they can afford to pay for their own bridge.
Alaska has been The Fleece State for years when it comes to pork. Not really any different than when someone buys beer with a welfare check and then climbs into their Cadillac.
I 100% agree with this statement.
The bridge in question would serve Ketchikan and Ketchikan is on an isolated island in southern Southeast AK.
The bridge in question would serve Ketchikan and Ketchikan is on an isolated island in southern Southeast AK.
Alaska is a horrible place of glaciers and long winters and mosquitoes. Don't come. Stay away.
Sure thing just pony up the cash to buy the land from the lower 48. Market value will do.
Is the brige being built to allow cruise ships to pass?
Maybe you can provide a list of all the Federal Programs Michigan pays for from its funds.
Be happy to, right after Michigan and all the other states pay for their property to the federal funds and interest due.
The PFD goes to anybody who has lived in the state for at least one year. Each year you have to apply and declare that you have been in state for a specific amount of time. I don't remember exactly how long because every time I go anyplace else I'm anxious to get back...so I have qualified every year since it started (1978).
Excellent post, akdonn! As an Alaskan, I have been dismayed at the lack of truth being reported in the MSM regarding this topic. Every time I read someone referring to the so-called "bridge to nowhere", I am infuriated. I realize it isn't "their" fault that they are so clueless, but that doesn't make ignorant comments any less irritating. :)
During the late 1970's I was on an assignment that required me to go out on Prince William Sound Pilot boats, climb the 40-ft ladder to the deck of the oil tankers, and ride them into port. Then I would ride back out on another one and return with the pilot. It is a very controlled process with plenty of very professional people involved. When Capt. Hazelwood hit Bly Reef in 1989 he was DRUNK, and his first mate incompetent. It is a marked reef on every chart and this was a huge embarassment for many who are very committed to Alaska's best interests.
What you seem to imply is that the State of Alaska has some kind of obligation to do more than the Federal Government is required to do regarding navigation on national waterways. That is rediculas at its face.
And yes, I have gotten a PFD every single year and I haven't paid state taxes since they were eliminated by the Alaska Legislature soon after the oil started flowing in 1977. I was a newspaper reporter for the Anchorage Daily News during construction of the pipeline and we have done more to accommodate environmentalist obstructionists than they deserve. I'm not running from anything either, sweetheart, but I can spot a misinformed busy body a mile away.
No, if not spent, it goes to pay for other highway projects benefiting more than 50 people.
Yes, but the other states have many more people and pay more taxes, so it's only fair that they get the bulk of pork. Whether or not its Alaska's turn to get a boondoggle, that's what this project clearly is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.