National Pork Service (Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska "Bridge to Nowhere")

Washington Post ^ | Richard Cohen | Richard Cohen

[Former Military Chick]

Returning home after a brief, but historic, trip to the Middle East, I am relieved beyond words to find that Ted Stevens is still in the Senate. Before I left, the senator from Alaska had threatened -- on the floor of the Senate, no less -- to resign his seat if his colleagues passed a measure that would have eliminated some of Alaska's already approved transportation projects, including the now-famous "Bridge to Nowhere," and awarded the money to hard-pressed Louisiana. Stevens may be the first senator to equate pork with honor. A statue should be raised to him.

As the ever-humble Stevens would himself acknowledge, this statue -- appropriately funded with money taken from Louisiana relief -- would be not so much in his honor as the entire Senate's, and -- why stop there? -- all of Washington's. Indeed, the funding of ridiculous and unnecessary projects while the government is deeply in debt (and guided by an economic numskull) has become so much a part of contemporary Washington that -- the scolding John McCain notwithstanding -- it ought to be memorialized. A man feeding pigs is what I have in mind.

[Former Military Chick]

Not fond of Steven's one bit, some of our congress critter's are not doing the work of the people or standing up for the principles of the GOP.

[edcoil]

Hope it is a spam statue. Maybe a contest on the Food Network.

[Semper Paratus]

Isn't a bridge that will cross the Bering Sea in the advanced planning stage?

[commonasdirt]

I lived in Alaska for more than 30 years. 11 of them in SE Alaska. Even the locals think the bridge is a half-assed idea and a waste of money. Ted has turned into an embarressment to the state in his dotage. Its time for him to go.

[You Dirty Rats]

We currently spend millions of dollars to support a twice hour ferry that goes back and forth all day long.

Sure you do, Newbie.

[goodnesswins]

Have you ever been to Ketchikan, AK? Just wondering...

[You Dirty Rats]

There are ferries all over the country - Lake Champlain, Lewes - Cape May, Congressman Barney Frank -- that doesn't mean we need to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a bridge in lieu of each of these ferries. The only reason this bridge received funding is that Ted Stevens heads up Appropriations. Divide the total cost of the bridge -- including financing and maintenance -- by the numbers of users and you'll end up with a ridiculously high figure.

No, I haven't been to Alaska, but I plan to go next year with my wife on a cruise from Vancouver north to Alaska.

If in fact the proposed bridge will end up with traffic levels that justify the expense -- then I'll be glad to be corrected.

[skeptoid]

"This bridge will open up thousands of acres of develop able land."

Yes, but that land is hardrock and muskeg, just like the Ketchikan side, and it is quite expensive to develop.
And the entire area is isolated from the nearest "outside" road by a six-hour ferry ride to a Canadian city (Prince Rupert).
And it is a Golden Gate sized project that goes from an island to an island to another island.
And it would benefit a grand total of 13,300 residents.
And the area has been losing population for several years.
Anyone other than 13,300 local residents would have to use a boat or and airplane to get here in order to use the bridge.

[goodnesswins]

Maybe THIS would work....we'll give Ketchikan their ferry, IF Ketchikan, Stevens, et al....make sure we DRILL IN ANWR....!!!

[You Dirty Rats]

There are ferries all over the country - Lake Champlain, Lewes - Cape May, Congressman Barney Frank -- that doesn't mean we need to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build a bridge in lieu of each of these ferries. The only reason this bridge received funding is that Ted Stevens heads up Appropriations. Divide the total cost of the bridge -- including financing and maintenance -- by the numbers of users and you'll end up with a ridiculously high figure.

No, I haven't been to Alaska, but I plan to go next year with my wife on a cruise from Vancouver north to Alaska.

If in fact the proposed bridge will end up with traffic levels that justify the expense -- then I'll be glad to be corrected.

[skeptoid]

......"boat or and airplane to get here in order to use the bridge.".....

boat or AN airplane to get THERE in order to use the bridge.

[Species8472]

It seem everyone here is falling for this line. It is so easy to lie with statistics. Any statistic about Alaska can be made to look very bad if you divide by population. Try looking at spending per mile of coastline and reality is put into perspective (Alaska has 6 times the coastline of the lower 48 states) we come out dead last when it come to federal spending on ports, bridges, and harbors. This trick has been used by the liberals for years to make a good conservatives like Senator Stevens look like a pork monger.

Another frequently used trick is to compare federal spending with " income tax revenue", where it is easy to show that the feds spend a lot more than comes in from "taxes" due to the tiny population here. It is easy to conveniently ignore the millions upon millions of dollars in natural resource revenues (technically not taxes in libspeak) from the oil, mining and fishing industries. (Federal leasing fees from ANWR alone are projected to be 2.6 BILLION dollars from the 90% federal share).

Most Alaskans are used to this. We have our own "Hate Stevens" crowd of liberals here, kind of a subset of the hate Bush/Hate America type that would love nothing better than to see Stevens replaced with a liberal like Tony Knowles.

Even if you don,t believe me take heart, the envirowackos and their New York lawyers will be on this project like flies on feces and the likely-hood is that it will be shut down for "environmental" reasons (we might have the audacity to develop some of the "pristine wilderness" on Gravinia island). and we will spend millions (of state money) to fight it. and as in most cases where we try to develop things here, loose.

Let the Alaskans develop their land and resources (and keep the revenue) and there would no need for any federal spending here.

[oldfart]

Back when Alaska chose to become a state, the Federal Government promised to turn over all the land not in use for such things as military bases and National Parks to the new State. They lied. Even the Native Corporations had to sue to get the land they now own--- with Federal strings attached. Even much of the land that was under the jurisdiction of the BLM has now been made into new National Parks, thus eliminating any chance the State might have to claim it. This has cost the State Billions of dollars and countless jobs.
Guess what? Now that self-same Federal Government (that's you, me and a bunch of others who pay taxes) has its panties in a wad cause some of those upstart Alaskans want part of their money back. Had the land been transferred to State control as was promised, the City of Ketchikan could build a bridge to Gravina Island and then on to Wrangell and Juneau plus drill a tunnel through the nountains to the Alcan Highway!
Until you know what you're talking (typing) about it might be wise to do a bit of research.

[Rodney King]

The issue is not the cost of development, it is the lack of land to develop. There are many other viable commercial uses for the land as well. Every year around 800,000 people take cruises here. There is a need to cater to this very large tourism market. How much revenue would a world class golf course with a couple of world class resort bring to the state?? Mix in some upscale homes and I say the value is well worth it.

If the value is well worth it, then the people who live nearby should be happy to pay for it themselves and make a fortune by charging a toll.

[commonasdirt]

Since logging is long gone and I do not predict any assembly plants being proposed for Ketchikan....try this. Run a bond issue and try paying for it yourselves instead of making the rest of us pay for a bridge that has very limited use and has no potential to provide for meaningful revenue producing growth. The fact is unless you plan on leveling a few mountains you are not going to see a great deal more growth.

[AmericanChef]

-A statue should be raised to him.-

Sure - we'll pay for that, too. Might as well make it solid gold since it's "free".

[RightWhale]

Stevens has been an excellent Senator, and not just for Alaska. As to the infamous bridge, Alaska could better use some other projects, but it is beyond the power of any one person to guide things that closely.