Yes, Palin Did Stop That Bridge

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2008
Yes, Palin Did Stop That Bridge
115
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 4:32pm

Yes, Palin Did Stop That Bridge

From http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB122100927525717663.html
Yes, Palin Did Stop That Bridge
By JIM DEMINT
September 10, 2008; Page A15

“But, you know, when you’ve been taking all these earmarks when it’s convenient, and then suddenly you’re the champion anti-earmark person, that’s not change. Come on! I mean, words mean something, you can’t just make stuff up.” — Barack Obama, Sept. 6, 2008

In politics, words are cheap. What really counts are actions. Democrats and Republicans have talked about fiscal responsibility for years. In reality, both parties have a shameful record of wasting hundreds of billions of tax dollars on pork-barrel projects.

My Senate colleague Barack Obama is now attacking Gov. Sarah Palin over earmarks. Having worked with both John McCain and Mr. Obama on earmarks, and as a recovering earmarker myself, I can tell you that Mrs. Palin’s leadership and record of reform stands well above that of Mr. Obama.

Let’s compare.

Mrs. Palin used her veto pen to slash more local projects than any other governor in the state’s history. She cut nearly 10% of Alaska’s budget this year, saving state residents $268 million. This included vetoing a $30,000 van for Campfire USA and $200,000 for a tennis court irrigation system. She succinctly justified these cuts by saying they were “not a state responsibility.”

Meanwhile in Washington, Mr. Obama voted for numerous wasteful earmarks last year, including: $12 million for bicycle paths, $450,000 for the International Peace Museum, $500,000 for a baseball stadium and $392,000 for a visitor’s center in Louisiana.

Mrs. Palin cut Alaska’s federal earmark requests in half last year, one of the strongest moves against earmarks by any governor. It took real leadership to buck Alaska’s decades-long earmark addiction.

Mr. Obama delivered over $100 million in earmarks to Illinois last year and has requested nearly a billion dollars in pet projects since 2005. His running mate, Joe Biden, is still indulging in earmarks, securing over $90 million worth this year.

Mrs. Palin also killed the infamous Bridge to Nowhere in her own state. Yes, she once supported the project: But after witnessing the problems created by earmarks for her state and for the nation’s budget, she did what others like me have done: She changed her position and saved taxpayers millions. Even the Alaska Democratic Party credits her with killing the bridge.

When the Senate had its chance to stop the Bridge to Nowhere and transfer the money to Katrina rebuilding, Messrs. Obama and Biden voted for the $223 million earmark, siding with the old boys’ club in the Senate. And to date, they still have not publicly renounced their support for the infamous earmark.

Mrs. Palin has proven courageous by taking on big spenders in her own party. In March of this year, the Anchorage Daily News reported that, “Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens is aggravated about what he sees as Gov. Sarah Palin’s antagonism toward the earmarks he uses to steer federal money to the state.”

Mr. Obama had a chance to take on his party when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid offered a sham ethics bill, which was widely criticized by watchdog groups such as Citizens Against Government Waste for shielding earmarks from public scrutiny. But instead of standing with taxpayers, Mr. Obama voted for the bill. Today, he claims he helped write the bill that failed to clean up Washington.

Mr. Obama has shown little restraint on earmarks until this year, when he decided to co-sponsor an earmark moratorium authored by Mr. McCain and myself. Mr. Obama is vulnerable on this issue, and he knows it. That is why he is lashing out at Mrs. Palin and trying to hide his own record.

Mrs. Palin is one of the strongest antiearmark governors in America. If more governors around the country would do what she has done, we would be much closer to fixing our nation’s fiscal problems than we are.

Mrs. Palin’s record here is solid and inspiring. She will help Mr. McCain shut down the congressional favor factory, and she has a record to prove it. Actions mean something. You can’t just make stuff up.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2008
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 6:46pm
Please post links. I don't trust "facts" from left-wing bloggers. I have seen an interview with her aid who explained it very well. I posted it here on the site. She was in favor of the bridge until it got so bloated, then she killed it. That is responsible use of money for the people of Alaska. I am happy that she will bring these qualities to the nation. We need SOMEONE who cares about government waste.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2008
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 6:49pm

*** What the esteemed Mr. Demint neglects to mention is that Congress had already rescinded the targeted funding for the project when Palin got around to deciding the Bridge wasn't that great an idea after all. All Palin did was kill the project in name, and never actually got to tell Congress "No Thanks" for the funding since they'd already pulled it.

You're mistaken. Congress removed the earmarks but gave the money to Alaska anyway. Alaska would have been free to spend the money on the bridge if it chose to do so. Palin was the one who killed the project.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-09-2008
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 6:51pm

According to the Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, the project's goal was to "provide better service to the airport and allow for development of large tracts of land on the island".

A ferry runs to the island every 30 minutes during most of the year, except during the May–September peak tourist season, when it runs every 15 minutes. It charges $5 per adult, with free same-day return, and $6 per automobile each way (as of 2008).

According to USA Today, the bridge was to have been nearly as long as the Golden Gate Bridge and taller than the Brooklyn Bridge. The bridge would cross the Tongass Narrows, part of Alaska's Inside Passage, so the bridge was designed to be tall enough to accommodate ship traffic, including the Alaska Marine Highway and the cruise ships which frequent Alaskan waters during the summer.

Ketchikan's airport is the second largest in Southeast Alaska, after Juneau International Airport, handling over 200,000 passengers a year, while the ferry shuttled 350,000 people in the same time period (as of December 2006). In comparison, the Golden Gate Bridge carried more than 43,000,000 vehicles in 2006, or about 118,000 vehicles each day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravina_Island_Bridge

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2008
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 6:53pm

She is known for slashing spending. She allotted the money to other projects that weren't so bloated, thus saving money.

I think people are confusing what her job is now and the job she is seeking. As a servant of the U.S. citizens it will be great that she will fight earmarks being sent to states, thus saving the U.S. taxpayers money. As governor of Alaska it is her job to serve the people of Alaska. It would not be serving them to send the money back. It is serving them to allot the money on projects that are not over priced.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-17-2007
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 7:00pm

>>>> It also would not have been in the best interest of the people whose job she has to serve, to send the money back, when there are things that it could be spent on that were more sensible,

That is stealing or fraud.

Photobucket

Siggie by Beth (sweet.dreams.mommy)


Trolls often have personal issues that lead them to try to control others

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2008
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 7:02pm

She did save the taxpayers of Alaska money. That was her job. Her job was NOT to save U.S. taxpayers money.

I am having trouble commenting on the first paragraph, you said, "Congress DID rescind the specific funding for the bridge, that had already occured before Palin decided that her bridge wasn't a good idea and decided not to build it. BUT, Congress didn't cut overall funds going to Alaska, and she accepted all of it, including those funds which were originally tasked to go to building the Bridge.

It seems contradictory to me that you say congress rescinded it, but sent it (..."including those funds which were originally tasked to bridge"...?) Can you explain that? Either they decided not to send it, or they sent it? What am I missing here?

I think someone has been feeding you some false info.

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2008
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 7:04pm
No it isn't. She has been more responsible with taxpayer money than any other Governor.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-17-2007
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 7:08pm

How is taking money designated for a specific project and not returning it, not stealing? It wasn't hers to do with as she pleased.

Perhaps thats how it works North of where I am but down here, we call that stealing.

Photobucket

Siggie by Beth (sweet.dreams.mommy)


Trolls often have personal issues that lead them to try to control others

Photobucket

Avatar for undefeated
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 7:12pm

http://www.adn.com/sarahpalin/story/511471.html


Well, here's one from one of her state's papers.


The one I posted was from the Huffingtonpost, but I could have posted from a dozen other sites.


There were, in fact, scads of articles, but you can just google bridge to nowhere and find them.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-17-2007
Thu, 09-11-2008 - 7:52pm

Ok, I better understand now. The Feds pulled back and redirected the money. She didn't do that on her own.

Still, she did flip-flop and in her speech at the convention, I do believe she misrepresented her actions.

Photobucket

Siggie by Beth (sweet.dreams.mommy)


Trolls often have personal issues that lead them to try to control others

Photobucket

Pages