Posted on 11/16/2005 3:56:13 PM PST by redpoll
I've had it with the phrase "Bridges to Nowhere." Someone has to speak up for Alaskans.
I've lived in Ketchikan and the Mat-Su valley, two of the places next to "nowhere." Ketchikan is a thin strip of roadway on a mountain cliff next to the ocean. The bridge would connect Ketchikan to the island next door, which has many square miles of flat land that could be developed for the benefit of the community. The Knik Arm bridge connects Anchorage, Alaska's largest city, with the Mat-Su valley, Alaska's fastest growing community. Calling the Knik Arm bridge a bridge to "nowhere" is either stupidity or willful disregard of the facts.
Do these places deserve more roads? Look at a map of Alaska. Look at the towns. Now look at the roads connecting them. Most of the state has no roads at all. The village where I'm typing this is 280 miles from the nearest road. As a result, a trip to Wal-Mart costs me $500 on a small plane to Fairbanks. A gallon of milk costs $12 at the local grocery store. Gas is running at $4.20 a gallon. A road between my village and Fairbanks would radically reduce the cost of living, as well as help connect us to the rest of the economy of North America. Of course, building the road would mean a road to "nowhere."
The critics of the bridges have their arguments backwards. Gravina Island, located next to Ketchikan, has 50 residents because the only way to get there right now is by boat. Since there is no infrastructure, there are no residents. You need to build the infrastructure first to get the residents. The Knik Arm bridge will connect a relatively unpopulated section of the Mat-Su valley to Anchorage; it will also turn a 60-minute commute from Wasilla into a 20-minute drive. You don't often find commuters "nowhere."
There is a long tradition in this country of building infrastructure with government funding to boost local economies. The Cumberland Road went "nowhere" at first. The railroads in the 19th century went through vast expanses of "nowhere." The Golden Gate bridge connected San Francisco to "nowhere," the undeveloped sections of Marin County. The Mackinac Straits bridge went from lower Michigan to "nowhere." A lot of the interstate highway system goes "nowhere."
Sure, there are boondoggles, from the C and O Canal to the poorly built dikes around New Orleans. On the other hand, there's Hoover Dam and the George Washington Bridge. A good argument could be made that one of the things that government does well is build infrastructure; certainly the founders had that in mind when one of the specific duties of government was the construction of "post roads" and other infrastructure to help commerce.
It would help Ketchikan to have a bridge connecting that city to Gravina Island. It would help Southeast to have a road connecting most of the towns there, too. It would help Alaska to have roads connecting Nome and Bethel and Barrow to Fairbanks, too. (The Knik Arm bridge would cut one hour off the trip between Anchorage and Fairbanks.)
Of course, if nothing is done, no roads are build, no bridges allowed to connect our communities with the rest of the state, most of the state will remain "nowhere." Villages will languish in poverty. Economies will have nowhere to grow. Notice that the first thing that they had to do when oil was developed at Prudhoe Bay was build a road. The road went "nowhere" until the trucks rolled up the road, built the pipeline, and put in the oil derricks.
These are not "bridges to nowhere." They're a needed part of the development of the state. We could argue about cost and design, certainly, but the need for more roads, bridges, and infrastructure here is obvious.
You can't be talking about the Great Western, since it was too early (Algiers to Opelousas - 1860). The Louisiana Railway and Navigation Company through Alexandria and Shreveport wasn't built until the early 20th century, and I don't think it was funded by federal land grants. So I can't think of what railroad you are referencing. And I can't think of a route which I would describe as Sacramento to New Orleans.
They may call them "property taxes", but it's not the property that pays the taxes.
Figure his fair share. My fair share is about 1/3,000,000th of the road system in this area; take that fair share and multiply by his local population and then tell me what kind of road system he ends up with, and how it compares with what he has.
Of course, if he chooses to live 280 miles from the nearest road, it's not my problem to fill in that gap. Choosing to live under certain conditions does not obligate others to rectify those conditions.
1884 Timetable
You completely misunderstood my prior posts. To reiterate:
It's your state; what's stopping you? a few drops of ink on paper 5000 miles away, written by complete strangers?
Don't chew me out - I'm advocating leaving people alone & not forcing them to do things. It's the AK crew that's harping for the contents of my wallet, not the other way 'round.
I'm advocating capitalism, not socialism.
We have a ballot initiative coming. Tax the natural gas in the ground at Prudhoe until they start producing and shipping it to market. Too bad we can't do that for ANWR since we don't own the land.
The East India Tea Company had a bigger army than the King of England. Real men with guns are not impossible.
"It's your state; what's stopping you? a few drops of ink on paper 5000 miles away, written by complete strangers?"
It's the FU#KING FEDERAL FU#KING GOVERNMENT that is stopping us you ignorant Cheechako!
YOUR SENATORS, YOUR REPRESENTATIVES, vote against Alaska, as a matter of course, it's for "our own good" of course, like we are your FRIKKING COLONY.
Do you think it's hyperbole that less than 1% of the land is available to the residents of the State?
NO OTHER STATE IN THE UNION has more of it's land owned and/or controlled by the US Federal Government. The Feds put you in JAIL up here if you insist on breaking Federal law.
Alaska is run by the ignorance of the rest of the United States.
So, until you leave us alone to run our business as we see fit, when it comes to ALASKA, ALL of you Cheechakos should just STFU.
Yeah, that's gonna happen.
"WE still don't care how they do it OUTSIDE!"
Yeah well starting today MY state has an army of between 500 to 700 thousand in the field. Wisconsin's deer season started today. Bring it on baby (;->
Yeah well starting today MY state has an army of between 500 to 700 thousand in the field. Wisconsin's deer season started today. Bring it on baby (;->
Make it a Bridge where they charge a toll.
Getting warm today. +15. People are walking around without hats nor gloves. Riding bicycles. Must be cheechakos.
I was being "nice", (WDCHTDIO).
It was raining/snowing mixed here yesterday, still wet at drip lines, everything else is pretty solid today. This'll establish a killer base.
A toll is planned for the bridge.
I'm kind of fascinated by the posts which have been popping up, especially about the support government gave to the establishment of the railroads through land grants and the modern highway system.
My belief is in limited government. The federal government shouldn't be involved other than those items listed in Article 1, Section 8, which includes "To establish Post Offices and post Roads."
I would imagine that there would enough money for the Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges if the federal government was only doing what it was supposed to be doing. I would also point out that a lot of promises made by the federal government about the development of our land have never been fulfilled.
The most pathetic postings have been the ones telling me that constructing a road or a bridge is "whining" and I should move. I can imagine someone in Baltimore circa 1790 saying, "Why should I help develop the Midwest?" Or someone back east circa 1840 saying the same thing about California. What kind of thinking tells the pioneers and settlers that they ought to just move back instead of looking forward?
There's a reason why the founders listed roads as one of the enumerated powers. They understood that roads, the post office, the patent office, a common currency, a sound military, and secure borders (yeah, I know about our current lack thereof) are essential to a sound economy and a sound country. Our oil has been good to the American economy. What else is out here that could benefit the United States - if it could just be easily reached? That's just good sense, and, yes, it would have been done already if the feds didn't have such a strangehold on our land up here.
Anyway, interesting discussion all around.
A small drawbridge across the Narrows, that's a nice concept, but there is nothing small in scope about it especially with Pon Pon Pon Pon about mid-November. AS far as untouched wilderness, have you been to POW lately...Last time I was there half the island was clear cut...now that's what I call capitalism. too bad most of that money went to some CANDADIAN loggers....
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.