I’m guessing that you are trying to make Alaska look like a socialist state with the “share the wealth” quote from Sarah.
In their State Constitution they stipulate that the natural resources of the State would belong to the State - and NOT the Federal government or private enterprise. So, unlike in most (all?) states where a mineral right can be bought by an oil company, it is the State that owns it - even if it is on Federal Land. BTW - the amount of Fed land in Alaska is almost equal to the entire state of Texas. And not just oil - but any natural resource (fish, minerals, timber, etc.)
The folks that agreed to becoming a state said fine, except we get to keep what is ours. The revenues from those natural resources go back to the people that own them in the form of schools, roads, and of course the annual check that each resident gets.
"One hot summer's day a Fox was strolling through an orchard till he came to a bunch of Grapes just ripening on a vine which had been trained over a lofty branch. "Just the thing to quench my thirst," quoth he. Drawing back a few paces, he took a run and a jump, and just missed the bunch. Turning round again with a One, Two, Three, he jumped up, but with no greater success. Again and again he tried after the tempting morsel, but at last had to give it up, and walked away with his nose in the air, saying: "I am sure they are sour."It is easy to despise what you cannot get."
Did Gov. Palin write the constitution of Alaska, or play any role whatsoever in drafting the language which declares that the mineral resources are to be shared among the people?
If not, whether it is good or bad that the Alaskan constitution says what it does, I see no reason to fault Governor Palin for upholding it as she is presumably sworn to do.