“She represented her client (i.e., the people of Alaska) and she got a fair price for their product. “
but she’s part of the government! That’s what throws me off. If I own something and if I had a legal dispute with the companies then I’d try to settle the issue in court, not the legislature.
Ari, it's called "representative democracy" for a reason. She is the people's representative. As I noted, Alaska is a very special state. It's constitution stipulates that the state's natural resources belong to the people, and their leaders must represent their interests in negotiating with those who wish to buy their product.
How can you not grasp this concept of barter? I have a product and wish to sell it for the best price. My representative negotiates with you over the price. That's all well and good. But let's say that you bribe that representative and they draft a deal that cheats me and favors you. It would require a new and honest representative to come in and renegotiate that deal to get a fair value for my product. That's what Governor Palin did. How is that a bad thing? How is that anti-capitalism?
And more important, how is her opening the bidding on the natural gas pipeline to a free market anti-capitalism? She did the most Reaganesque thing imaginable. She developed AGIA (Alaska Gasline Incentive Act) which laid out how much the state would pay for a gasline, laid out the state's requirements, and then presented it to open market bidding. It worked. She called the big three oil companies bluff. No one had been able to negotiate that pipeline before, and they’d been trying for 30 years. Too many people tried to get control of the project. It was as slippery as middle east peace agreement. Palin developed that pipeline inducement program (AGIA) and made Alaska's major goal keeping the pipeline open to all producers. Sounds easy, but only in retrospect. A key to successful negotiations is having a backbone, btw. Not too many of those in Washington.