Posted on 07/09/2009 8:13:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I haven't commented on Sarah Palin's resignation as Governor of Alaska since Friday afternoon, when I noted the story and said that her resignation "seems bizarre to me." Here are some additional thoughts on the subject.
I am, to begin with, an admirer of Governor Palin--the real Sarah Palin, not the creature of myth. Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the Palin phenomenon is that the mythical version, a caricature of Palin as arch-conservative, especially on the social issues, and populist almost to the point of know-nothingism, has been embraced by many of her supporters as avidly as by her enemies.
But the caricature has little to do with Palin's actual record as a public servant. I don't doubt that she is, personally, a conservative, but her record in office has not been particularly conservative and her political career owes little or nothing to the social issues. She represents, rather, an older strand of Republicanism--the reformist, good-government variety.
Given that Palin is now viewed almost exclusively as symbol, it is not surprising that the least-remarked portion of her resignation speech was that in which she recounted her administration's achievements. But those accomplishments are, in fact, considerable:
Here's some of the things we've done:
We created a petroleum integrity office to oversee safe development. We held the line for Alaskans on Point Thomson - and finally for the first time in decades - they're drilling for oil and gas.
We have AGIA, the gasline project - a massive bi-partisan victory (the vote was 58 to 1!) - also succeeding as intended - protecting Alaskans as our clean natural gas will flow to energize us, and America, through a competitive, pro-private sector project. This is the largest private sector energy project, ever. This is energy independence.
And ACES - another bipartisan effort - is working as intended and industry is publicly acknowledging its success. Our new oil and gas "clear and equitable formula" is so Alaskans will no longer be taken advantage of. ACES incentivizes new exploration and development and jobs that were previously not going to happen with a monopolized North Slope oil basin.
We cleaned up previously accepted unethical actions; we ushered in bi-partisan Ethics Reform.
We also slowed the rate of government growth, we worked with the Legislature to save billions of dollars for the future, and I made no lobbyist friends with my hundreds of millions of dollars in budget vetoes... but living beyond our means today is irresponsible for tomorrow.
We took government out of the dairy business and put it back into private-sector hands - where it should be.
We provided unprecedented support for education initiatives, and with the right leadership, finally filled long-vacant public safety positions. We built a sub-Cabinet on Climate Change and took heat from Outside special interests for our biologically-sound wildlife management for abundance.
We broke ground on the new prison.
And we made common sense conservative choices to eliminate personal luxuries like the jet, the chef, the junkets... the entourage.
And the Lt. Governor and I said "no" to our pay raises.
A solid record of achievement in only 2 1/2 years? Absolutely. Red meat for populist conservatives? Not especially.
So I have high regard for Sarah Palin, the effective, good-government reformer. But that brings us to Palin's press conference and her resignation. The biggest problem with her press conference was that her stated reasons for resigning her office didn't make much sense.
She referred to the abuse that she and her family have taken from liberals in the press and elsewhere. No doubt about it: the liberal assault on Palin and her family has been the most despicable I've ever seen. If she had announced that she is leaving politics to return to private life, no one could have blamed her. But that isn't what she is doing; she is resigning as Governor but, evidently, running for President. So the attacks will continue and likely intensify.
She said that she didn't want to continue as a lame-duck governor. But the only reason she was a lame duck is that she had just announced she wasn't running for a second term. If she didn't want to be a lame duck, all she had to do was not hold the press conference.
Recognizing that these themes didn't account for her decision, Palin went on to explain that her real reason for resigning is that she and her office have been fatally distracted by the frivolous ethics complaints that the Democratic Party has mounted against her. She said that most of her time, and her staff's time, is now spent defending against such complaints--successfully, as every one so far has been dismissed. Most of them have been obviously stupid.
So Palin said she was resigning for the good of Alaska, since her successor will be free of this burden. Plus, she has run up a $500,000 legal bill in defending against the Democratic Party's silly charges.
This explanation has a great deal of appeal, but I don't think it holds together. Does Palin really want to set a precedent that a Republican who is unfairly attacked by Democrats will quit? If that principle were followed, the Republican Party would quickly become extinct.
Actually, the Democrats' frivolous ethics charges represent an opportunity. Alaska is a Republican-leaning state. If Palin were to push back against the Democrats--locally, not nationally--she could make them pay a price for their indefensible tactic, and likely cause them to back off. As for the $500,000, that is a minimal amount for a politician of Palin's stature to raise by setting up a defense committee. Donors would quickly furnish a war chest. On a worst-case scenario, Todd Palin could sign a book contract tomorrow for a $500,000 advance. The facts just don't support the idea that quitting as governor is a reasonable response to the Democrats' vicious but entirely unsuccessful ethics-complaint strategy.
Here is why I think Palin quit: she wants to be the Republican Presidential nominee in 2012. No surprise there, she currently has more support than any other contender in the polls. But she has a serious problem. Her rivals for the nomination are beginning to make the circuit of Republican and conservative grass-roots groups. They are able to criss-cross the country, building up support, establishing campaign committees, speaking to Republican groups on an informal basis, supporting other Republican candidates, laying the foundation for a 2012 run.
Palin, on the other hand, is isolated in Anchorage. It takes longer to get to and from Alaska than most people realize. Palin can't zip into Chicago, deliver a speech to a Republican conference and be back in her office in time to sign a bill. If she starts spending 75 percent of her time in the lower 48, she might in fact be able to carry out her gubernatorial duties via Blackberry, but she would be crucified for abandoning the state of Alaska in favor of her national ambitions. So she resigned, in order to free up her time to campaign for the 2012 Republican nomination.
That is, I think, the only explanation that fits the facts. I still think Palin's resignation was a mistake; it will make the logistics of campaigning much easier, but her failure to complete the only major government job to which she has been elected will haunt her.
What is most sad about this, in my opinion, is that Palin herself seems willing to play the role of the symbol she has become, no matter how at odds it may be with her actual record. I doubt that the old, pre-August 2008 Sarah Palin--the real Sarah Palin, in my book--would have quit.
I was a Senator Fred Thompson supporter in 2008 and bundled many thousands of dollars for him. I witnessed Romney operatives trying to sabotage his campaign, as well as Governor Huckabee’s, but you go ahead and call that a “conspiracy theory” if you like. Many here also saw what happened.
Apparently according to who? So you have a citation for it from someone else? You may want to forward it to brainyquote.com. They've sure got it attributed to Plato.
Lots of people attribute this quote to Plato
http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/879.Plato
Who do you think said it?
Biden, though perhaps he wasn't the first. ;-D
To be honest, I really haven't looked at it closely enough to know. But, when she initially quit and that $500K number was bandied about, I looked into it superficially. That's when I realized that Legal Defense Funds in AK are just about the same as anywhere else, and in some instances less regulated than other states.
Simply put, the individual funds aren't required to report fund inflow totals nor outflows of any kind. I get the feeling from your question that you're leaning towards believing that the $500K is somewhat of a red herring. It's the direction I'm leaning as well, but I haven't made up my mind, yet.
I don't see any contradiction in Hindraker's thesis, at all. He saying that she's mounting a campaign for president, and at the same time she has created a flawed foundation from which to launch that campaign. At least, that's his premise or theme of his piece.
You're last question "then why would she do it to run for president?", is intimated in Hindraker's thesis. That's the question he's asking, "Why would a person with presidential aspirations quit the only job that, if successfully completed would lend them credibility upon which to launch their campaign?" It's a good question.
I’m not sure red herring is the right word because I do believe she’s being billed that much, mostly for campaign and Troopergate rather than the less intense ethics stuff. What concerns me is the total lack of information about what’s been raised and spent to date. The fund committed, under their disclosure provisions when set up in April, that they would release to the public a full accounting of contributions every 30 days. Clearly they haven’t done that and it raises red flags. How long can her fund pitch for a debt that’s already been paid off?
The “faulty foundation” is that of those who say Palin resigned to run for President and say “what a stupid move for anyone wanting to run for President!” What has she said or done to indicate that she resigned to run for President? NOTHING. They are throwing darts in the dark and claiming to have hit the bullseye. In reality, they don’t have a friggin’ clue.
To your last question, I don't know. As for the "red herring" comment, I didn't mean to imply that the expenses weren't legitimate, or even mounting for that matter. But, I'm not sure, and I don't know if anyone else is either, that the expenses are "bankrupting" her. It seems that there are adequate funds on hand to cover their legal expenses, or at least will be in the foreseeable future.
They're speculating that Palin is indeed running, precisely because she didn't foreclose that possibility in her press conference, or in any subsequent statement. In fact, when things are said along the lines of "higher calling", fighting for America in a different way and the like, it's fuels the speculation. And Palin knows it.
She could have easily addressed this, as Hindraker points out. But she elected not to. My common sense tells me that wasn't by accident. Others seem to agree.
I guess we’ll find out her motives in less than a year. Either she runs for senate, or she is considering a run for the presidency. If she had no importance nationally in the Republican Party in regards to presidential aspirations, then I would call her a quitter. But it does look like she’s positioning herself for a major run at national offfice. I always thought being in Alaska put her too far away from events. We shall see.
Here’s the story: (Make of it what you will.)
In the wake of Governor Palin stepping down from her job, new allegations have surfaced today in Alaska charging Palin with additional violations of the Alaska Executive Ethics Act.
Zane Henning — a conservative government watchdog from the governor’s hometown of Wasilla and an oilfield worker on Alaska’s North Slope — asserts in a letter to Alaska Attorney General Daniel S. Sullivan that Palin has “been charging and pocketing per diem to live in her home and has used the process for a personal gain since being elected.”
The Washington Post first broke this story last September during the 2008 presidential race, but until now, no formal ethics charges have been brought on the matter in Alaska.
In a detailed press release accompanying his complaint, Henning declared that:
Palin’s use of the per diem is in direct conflict with Section 39.52.120. (a) of the Alaska Executive Ethics Act....More than a thousand state employees commute from the Mat-Su Valley daily and none of them get to pocket free money.
Henning noted that “the State of Alaska provides housing in Juneau for the Governor.”
If she chooses not to live there, Alaskans should not have to pay for it. I am requesting that you and the Personnel Board direct Governor Sarah Palin to reimburse the State of Alaska all per diem funds, plus interest, and a fine that are related to charges while staying in her Wasilla residence.
Henning further argued that Alaska Statute 39.20.010 sets an “annual salary for the governor of $125,000.”
Sarah Palin has collected more than the amount established by law by cashing in her per diem checks. Alaska Statute 39.20.050 (Exclusive Compensation) states that the compensation fixed by law for the governor and lieutenant governor is in full for all services rendered by each of them in any official capacity or employment whatsoever during their respective terms of office. Per diem is therefore any added expenses incurred while in travel status, not when living in your own home.
According to Henning:
State travel regulations say that per diem can’t be claimed when travel is less than 50 miles from a state employee’s workplace. The IRS and state finance officer have already determined that the per diem is considered income. The governor’s workplace in Anchorage is only a 45-mile commute from her Wasilla home.
In February, Palin was required to pay back income taxes on thousands of dollars in expense money she received while living at her home overlooking Lake Lucille in Wasilla. Little more than two weeks ago she was forced to pay back the State of Alaska more than $8,100.00 for nine trips taken by her children that she had improperly charged as being part of official state business.
Henning contends the per diem is another way for the Alaska governor to line her pockets at the state’s expense:
As a Wasilla resident I know that thousands of valley residents commute into Anchorage for work every day. They don’t receive checks from their employers for sleeping at home. Governor Palin does. And it’s wrong, not to mention unethical, for her to even submit these per diem claims. To me, this is a roundabout way for Palin to give herself a raise.
“The Governor is quitting her job,” said Henning, “and now more than ever the State of Alaska, along with its residents, need to be reimbursed for the per diem charges, including interest and a fine...[I]t is up to private citizens, like myself, to hold our Governor accountable.”
A govt 'for the people' today has an entirely different meaning than it did in Lincoln's day.
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.