The list is in...

[ironglow]

   Top porkers in the government...

         The following are the top pork barrel siphoners of tax money in the federal government:

     1) Rep James Clyburn  D.. S Carolina

     2) Sen Richard Shelby  R..Alabama

    3) Rep John Murtha   D ..Pennsylvania

   4) Rep James Oberstar  D..Minnesota

   5) Sen Blanche Lincoln   D..Arkansas

   6) Rep Don Young  R..Alaska

                           Where was Robert "Sheets" Byrd of W Virginia..was he asleep ? 
  A mark of audacity was made by  James Oberstar D..MN..when he proposed a 5 cent tax increase on gasoline..
  to replace $25,000,000 that was apparently pilfered by MN politicians from the bridge building funds already appropriated !

[Sourdough]

The really ironic thing about Don Young, is that the really big project he pushed through that got him on this list was not even in Alaska.  He pushed through a big spending bill rider for a road in Florida, to help a campaign contributor.

[SHOOTALL]

when people spend 10 times what they will be paid for a job what do ya'll expect ?

[deltecs]

On lthe Fox News live channel this morning, it was reported about the proposed new ferry for use across Cook Inlet to Matanuska Valley.  The commentators are up in arms over its cost and then brought up the proposed bridge across it and the extreme expense to the federal government.  What these people do not understand, is that as Alaska is 1/5 the geographical size of the US, so any road or highway construction from point A to point B is very far with no or very little existing infrastruture.  Not only is it 1/5th in size, this size extends from Mass to California and from Wash to Flor.   Look at the funds the feds have spent on the road system covering this distance and then tell us that road construction is too costly.  The cost of building roads in Alaska are much higher than in the lower 48 per mile.  The necessity for insulation of any permafrost or soft muskeg terrain mandates placement of a barrier upon which the road surface is then placed, another additional cost not needed in the lower 48.  The coastline of Alaska and the mountainous terrain with glaciers, mandates road right of way detours around physical objects that the lower 48 rarely contends with.  So, it is apparent that any road construction is going to be really expensive on a per capita basis, yet Alaska has a right to federal funding on highway projects, just as other states.  The federal government also collects more money from Alaska, due its returns on mining and subterranean mineral assessment, unlike other states.  The feds own the subterranean minerals on most of Alaska,s land, which is by far more than any other state, not the property owner as in the lower 48.  What the feds do not claim, the state of Alaska does.  For Alaska to expand, a viable highway infrastructure is necessary, required, and due its share of federal highway funds.  Other states have already been paid by the feds for its infrastruture and now that they have it, want to deny Alaska's right to expand.

[ironglow]

  You have a good point there deltecs ! I have family that live in Alaska and they gave me a bit of a different picture than the news outlets do..
  Look at a map of Anchorage, Alaska..Anchorage is growing like topsy, and they have no place to go. Their land expansion is cut off by park and mountains.
  The only way they can expand is across water.
  Lots of cities have bridges, New York, Seattle, San Francisco..in Alaska's unique case, the bridge must be built BEFORE the area is built up..because they are reaching out to virtually
  unsettled land without other towns and highways or large settlements or infrastructure..whereas here in the lower 48 most bridges were built to connect two settled areas.
   There is no doubt that if the bridge were constructed, there would be a building boom in the freshly opened area.
   The bridge is not to "nowhere", it is a bridge to very much needed room for Anchorage to expand. That bridge across that narrow strip of water would put all that expansion room many road miles closer to Anchorage (and the roads would have to be built). I quibble with most silly spending, but that bridge is legit !

   You need not take my word for the way Anchorage is now boxed in ...just check Google maps..then pull up Google earth with it's satellite pictures.

[deltecs]

Thanks Ironglow for taking the time to research our topography.  The same applies for the island coastline of Southeast Alaska too.  This section of Alaska is right as the edge between steep, high mountains and the sea.  Many communities could be serviced with bridges from one island to another since there is no available land to expand on nearby.  The capital of Alaska, Juneau is cut off from any direct highways and the only vehicle service to it is by ferry.  These ferry's are not at all the little ships transversing Puget Sound or San Francisco Bay or else where.  These much more costly vessels are designed for ocean sea conditions with ice and encounter such in their travels.  Southeast Alaska is also geographically limited with regard to normal amenities enjoyed elsewhere like utility grids, natural gas pipelines, fuel, and other necessities.  This also applies to almost all the other places outside the road infrastructure.  Each community is reliant on either air or marine means of supply.  Many of these places are supplied only a few times a year due adverse and inclement weather conditions.  Yes, I realize we have the right to relocate and that is the price we pay for living here, but it galls me when the lower 48 experts make statements that are not only erroneous, extremely misleading, but are additionally detrimental to our economy and self rule under states rights. 

[dw06]

That list surprised me,I was sure our very own Robert "sheets' Byrd would have been #1 or #2,where he has been for many many years!! Somebody please take his pulse,just to be sure he is asleep.

[Graybeard]

The value of such a list is highly questionable on many counts. No source is given to substatiate the validity and no explanation is given for what criteria was used to determine what is pork and what are valid useful and needed projects.

Just because money is being spent in the area a Congressman or Senator represents DOES NOT make it a pork barrel project.

Without a reference as to the source of the list and some criteria explaining why the spending is labeled as pork I think it's totally and utterly meaningless.

[magooch]

Alaska certainly does have some unique challenges when it comes to infrastructure, but that alone does not negate the need for common sense and cost effectiveness when decisions are made in how to spend federal tax money.  I have seen how all too many of these projects are funded and it often has more to do with, you scaratch my back and I'll scratch your's and not so much on the merits of the project.

In my state there are people who choose to live on some of the many islands in our inland waters.  While I envy their lifestyle choice, I do not want to subsidize it with my tax money.  Too many of these folks want those of us who don't have the luxury of living on an island to help them pay for their ferry boat rides.

[SHOOTALL]

the federal govt. purchased Alaska from Russia ! so i guess they (we ) do own it and all above and below its ground .
if some purchased the land from the govt. with the govt. retaining certain rights to oil , minerals etc. whats the beef ?
don't ya'll get to split profits from tax on these items ? if ya'll want roads start paying state income tax and get them built !

[ironglow]

Magooch, Shootall...am I to extrapolate from your statements that federal funds should never be used for building bridges ?
    Magooch;
    This project is being considered..NOT to help certain privileged people to sustain a luxurious lifestyle on a private island but to allow the necessary expansion of a
  city that is important to all of us.
   
   Shotall;
   You indicate that Alaskans should pay for their own bridge..fair enough..does perhaps an extra $10 tax on each barrel of oil sound about right ?
   
    Maybe an extra couple dollars tax on each air passenger that passes through Fairbanks..going to the far east ? I'm sure you can think up some  easily
  placed taxes to help this low population state pay for the badly needed infrastructure

    Guys;
   One thing to keep in mind; Alaskans are generally a self-sufficent group and rarely ask for help..but try to picture this:

   Alaska is a land area that if placed as a map on a map of the lower 48, would reach from NY to San Fran..and Minnesota to Texas. Thus, they could someday need more highways, bridges etc than any other state...plus they have special construction problems in dealing with severe cold, permafrost etc.
   
    Last I recall, this great land area only had a total population about equivalent to the city of Des Moines, Iowa. It is plain their situation is unique an should be handled as such.

[SHOOTALL]

the primary roads and secondary roads should be state roads , the interstate road system is for defense ( that's why it was built ) . So if the federal govt. sees a defensive need to build the road then so be it !
as far as oil add what ever you want , every one else does ! and do so with air travel also . but keep in mind if you raise the cost people will shop else where !
Hey make it a toll road like we do !

[deltecs]

the primary roads and secondary roads should be state roads , the interstate road system is for defense ( that's why it was built ) . So if the federal govt. sees a defensive need to build the road then so be it !
as far as oil add what ever you want , every one else does ! and do so with air travel also . but keep in mind if you raise the cost people will shop else where !
Hey make it a toll road like we do !

While defense was the initial intent of the interstate highway system, the reason now is for marketability and shipping of goods and services.  This is why Congress enacted the Federal Highway Trust Fund and is so stated.  Since then the Trust has expanded the definition to fund congestion by funding mass transit, bridges, and more lanes on existing roads, whether or not they are interstate.  I don't see anyone complaining of costs of the San Francisco bridge, Mackinaw bridge in upper Michigan, Chesapeake Bay bridge, all the bridges and highway to Key West, and the connecting roads to these bridges, not to mentions the hundreds of other bridges that have no defense priority.  Alaska due its geographic nature needs highways to expand.  The federal government spent hundreds of billions of dollars in other states road expansions.  Now these same states want Alaska to fund 100% of its money for interstate commerce roads, since almost all products must be shipped to Alaska.  Sounds to me like sour grapes.  I got mine so go to ****.  Also if defense is the major reason, why aren't roads built to McGrath Air Force Base, a major first defense base for the US.  If defense is the major reason, why don't the feds fund the entire project, since it benefits the entire nation.  This is same excuse used that requires Alaskan oil to be sold on the American market.  No other state is required to sell its oil at less than world market prices by being required to sell it on the American market.  Yes, Alaska has a disproportionate share of federal highway funds currently, since it is a young State with the same problems as every other state had when it was expanding.  Alaska is also unique in being divided by over 400 miles on the highway having to go through another entire country.  No other state has to contend with this situation.  No other means of vehicle travel is available to go our Capital in the winter while it is in session.  We must go through another country to access our State Capital in the winter.  The feds have paid for other states highway infrastructure and Alaska as an equal State deserves the same treatment.  Just because we were smart enough not to make the same mistakes as other states, does not negate the feds equal treatment.  And we do pay tolls, the Alaska Marine Highway system is very expensive to travel on and that is the only way to get to our state Capital by vehicle.  You ought to try it.

[Sourdough]

Shootall:  That comment about the Federal Government bought Alaska from Russia so they own it, burns me up.  That infers we are a colony, not a state.  That seems to be the view of most of the people in the lower 48.  That they own Alaska, and have to rule everything we do up here.  They want to rule every aspect of our lives, things you would not put up with if someone tried it run your business like the lower 48 wants to run ours.  And we are not a small island off the coast of California either as so many people in the lower 48 think.  We were granted statehood and all the privileges that go with it.  Yet the Federal government has not lived up to their end of the bargain, by giving over possession of land as called for in the Statehood Act.  We are the only state where the Federal Government controls hunting and fishing on federal land, that's 3/4 of the state.  They discriminate as to who can hunt and fish there as well. 

Get a map sometime and look at the roads we have.  Not very many, compared to the size of our state.  The last highway the Feds helped up build in Alaska was back in 1972, the Parks Highway.  The only road built since then (The Haul Road or Dalton Highway 1976) was built by private industry.  There has been no new roads built since then.  That's 32 years since we had a highway built.  That peanut farmer locked up huge portions of the state for no understandable reason.  Now when we ask for subsidies for a road or bridge they call it a bridge to no where.  That bridge at Knik is a bridge for expansion.  The city of Anchorage is blocked in and has no place to go except across the water.  The distance is so far and remote by road, that no one has really built anything there yet.  It's also a long way across Knik Arm with strong tides and currents, and a bottom made up of silt.  You guys down south have had all the bridges and highways built by the federal government.  Now you have yours paid for by the federal government, and you want us to build our own with no help?  Sounds real fair to me.  As for strategic military value, Alaska is the place where intercepts will be done from.  Anything coming from Asia, or Northern Europe headed to the lower 48 can be intercepted from Alaska.  It would be good to have a military base close to Nome, Point Hope, or Barrow, but there are no roads to there.  The Federal Government in fact won't let us build a road if it crosses federal land, which is almost everywhere, without jumping through impossible hoops.  BTW, The second costliest battle of WWII in the Pacific theater was fought on Alaskan soil, at Attu. 

You set there in your comfortable homes that you heat with cheap Natural Gas, much of which comes from Canada, and complain that we have all the oil so we should just tax it.  Well how about letting us drill for it?  Every time we talk about drilling in ANWR or the NPR congressmen from the lower 48 get up in arms that we might hurt a Caribou.  Caribou aren't even present during the winter when drilling has to be done.  They have all migrated to Canada.  Now we are looking at drilling in the Beaufort Sea, suddenly it might hurt Polar Bears.  Now the move it to have Polar Bears placed on the endangered species list to stop us from drilling there as well.  We are heating our homes with fuel oil for well over $3.00 per gallon.  We don't have Natural Gas here in Fairbanks, Anchorage is the only area that does.  The rest of the state has to burn fuel oil.  Most of our Electricity is produced by fuel oil as well, and is also expensive.  Now the Feds are putting restrictions on mining.  We've got all the minerals, but again we are restricted on mining for them due to Federal Red Tape. 

So why can't we have what you all ready have?  We helped pay for yours, can't you help pay for ours? 

Everyday I feel more and more, Old Joe had the right idea.  Since the US bought Alaska, and we are a colony.  Can we get out Independence too?

[deltecs]

Shootall:  That comment about the Federal Government bought Alaska from Russia so they own it, burns me up.  That infers we are a colony, not a state.  That seems to be the view of most of the people in the lower 48.  That they own Alaska, and have to rule everything we do up here.  They want to rule every aspect of our lives, things you would not put up with if someone tried it run your business like the lower 48 wants to run ours.  And we are not a small island off the coast of California either as so many people in the lower 48 think.  We were granted statehood and all the privileges that go with it.  Yet the Federal government has not lived up to their end of the bargain, by giving over possession of land as called for in the Statehood Act.  We are the only state where the Federal Government controls hunting and fishing on federal land, that's 3/4 of the state.  They discriminate as to who can hunt and fish there as well. 

Get a map sometime and look at the roads we have.  Not very many, compared to the size of our state.  The last highway the Feds helped up build in Alaska was back in 1972, the Parks Highway.  The only road built since then (The Haul Road or Dalton Highway 1976) was built by private industry.  There has been no new roads built since then.  That's 32 years since we had a highway built.  That peanut farmer locked up huge portions of the state for no understandable reason.  Now when we ask for subsidies for a road or bridge they call it a bridge to no where.  That bridge at Knik is a bridge for expansion.  The city of Anchorage is blocked in and has no place to go except across the water.  The distance is so far and remote by road, that no one has really built anything there yet.  It's also a long way across Knik Arm with strong tides and currents, and a bottom made up of silt.  You guys down south have had all the bridges and highways built by the federal government.  Now you have yours paid for by the federal government, and you want us to build our own with no help?  Sounds real fair to me.  As for strategic military value, Alaska is the place where intercepts will be done from.  Anything coming from Asia, or Northern Europe headed to the lower 48 can be intercepted from Alaska.  It would be good to have a military base close to Nome, Point Hope, or Barrow, but there are no roads to there.  The Federal Government in fact won't let us build a road if it crosses federal land, which is almost everywhere, without jumping through impossible hoops.  BTW, The second costliest battle of WWII in the Pacific theater was fought on Alaskan soil, at Attu. 

You set there in your comfortable homes that you heat with cheap Natural Gas, much of which comes from Canada, and complain that we have all the oil so we should just tax it.  Well how about letting us drill for it?  Every time we talk about drilling in ANWR or the NPR congressmen from the lower 48 get up in arms that we might hurt a Caribou.  Caribou aren't even present during the winter when drilling has to be done.  They have all migrated to Canada.  Now we are looking at drilling in the Beaufort Sea, suddenly it might hurt Polar Bears.  Now the move it to have Polar Bears placed on the endangered species list to stop us from drilling there as well.  We are heating our homes with fuel oil for well over $3.00 per gallon.  We don't have Natural Gas here in Fairbanks, Anchorage is the only area that does.  The rest of the state has to burn fuel oil.  Most of our Electricity is produced by fuel oil as well, and is also expensive.  Now the Feds are putting restrictions on mining.  We've got all the minerals, but again we are restricted on mining for them due to Federal Red Tape. 

So why can't we have what you all ready have?  We helped pay for yours, can't you help pay for ours? 

Everyday I feel more and more, Old Joe had the right idea.  Since the US bought Alaska, and we are a colony.  Can we get out Independence too?

I'm becoming more and more for an independent nation of our own.  The Statehood contract between the feds and our State has been severly breached.  A breach of contract without a severability or savings clause, legally nullifies the agreement or contact.  I would vote for secession from the feds subject to adoption of the US Constitution in its entirety without change as our new Constitition.  Along with the Constitutions verbage, a secondary document stating national intent by strict literal enforcement of law, only Congress (Legislature) can enact laws and judges must adhere to its applicability without regard to social doctrine, all laws are enacted with a preample of legislative intent, on all charges of violation of oath of office the burden is placed on the government official to prove his adherence to it, all appeals for adjudication must be presented at once within the appeals time frame (one chance and one chance only for appeal), the appeals court can rule on only the facts as presented in the lower court, no laws enacted to subvert the 5th Amendment to enforce compliance by incrimination or implied guilt, definition of marriage to be between a man and woman, no such laws that the value of society is more important than the rights of the individual, absolutely no discrimination based upon cultural heritage as all citizens must be treated equally, taxation must be earmarked and spent for no other use within a balanced budget 15% less than accounts received, government and employees must work on the principal of productivity, very restrictive immigration and enforcement, and no such laws that prevent or restrict the rights of parents by castle doctine.  There are others, but these broad limitations on government could be refined further.  This I would support wholeheartedly.

[ironglow]

  I don't know if many here have thought about it, but Alaska has been treated rather shabbily by the feds. Between the land held by feds as national parks and the land given back to the native tribes (again by the feds)..a lot of Alaska is out of circulation for Alaskans.
   The rest of Alaska, the part that hasn't been grabbed by the feds, needs some infrastructure..but when the subject comes up, the "suits' in Washington have the same " I've got mine" attitude as some on this forum have.
   When Alaskans say " OK we'll drill for more oil so we can build for ourselves !"..it's just about then that some fat senator from Massachusetts will join hands with some skinny, vegan congress person from San Francisco to prevent Alaskans from running their own state !

   ..And " the interstate system was built for defense" myth is laughable..When ever I am on the interstate, I see hundreds of trucks labeled Walmart, Mobil, Krispy Kreme, Ace hardware and Tyson Foods..  I also see motor homes, SUVs with skis on top, vacationing families and pickup trucks carrying guys wearing hunter orange...
   Give me a break, let's at least be practical and honest !
  Defense..Putin and his Russia are again flexing their muscles and rattling sabres..do you know that it is there that Russia is only a few short miles from US territory..at the Diomede islands ?
   Do you know how many military bases Alaska has ? ..Or the importance to defense the oil there is ?

  The Alaska Natl Guard is an important part of our defense..and there is no unit in the south 48 that could exactly replace them..

   Perhaps it is time to stop fulminating and start thinking..

[Graybeard]

We southern folks tried that secession thing already. It didn't work out too well for us. You really don't want what they'll do to you after you lose the fight I promise you.

[deltecs]

On an aside, not including active military, there are more veterans per capita living here than any other state.  In population, Wyoming and Vermont have less.  Alaska has 2 1/2 times more coastline than the entire rest of the US.  There is 5 separate and distinct climates, not weather, with associated flora and fauna, The island of Kodiak is the second smallest island flying the US flag, Prince of Wales Island in Southest Alaska is 3rd.  It is larger than all but 18 sovereign nations unto itself.  65% of its land is owned or managed by the federal government.  (The managed part has not been transferred to the State under Statehood act)   Government or Native Corporations own 99% of Alaska's land.  Less than 1% is in private ownership.  Alaska is the northenmost, westernmost, and eastermost State in the US.  (Several of Alaska's Aleutian islands are actually in the eastern world hemisphere.)   Alaska possesses a pervasively strong independence movement favoring secession from the US, with the Alaskan Independence Party labeled one of the "the most significant state-level third parties operating in the 20th century".   As to the economy put back into the US, Alaska has the 3rd highest Gross State Product, and that without the infrastructure of contiguous US states and very small population.  After the purchase of Alaska from Russia for 7.2 million dollars and before statehood, only the Louisiana Purchase has brought the US a higher return on property.  So, I think the federal government and the individual states could cut us a little slack when it comes to highway trust funds for roads which will assist our expansion to available property.  Our secession efforts are politically and not militarily.

[Heavy C]

You go man!  Good post, not to mention informative!

[Sourdough]

By the way, we have one of the highest property taxes in the Nation, we pay far more for fuel oil and gasoline, and a lot of our jobs are seasonal, meaning they don't work in the winter.  Items at the grocery and all retail stores is also much higher than in the lower 48.  a lot of our retail stores have a 100% mark-up.  That is why most Alaskans hunt and fish, to help supplement their families grocery bill.  Now the movement in the lower 48 is to stop us from managing the wolf, and bear populations.  Folks in the lower 48 feel it is better we starve and feed the wolves and bears all the Caribou and Moose left.

How about we send a hundred wolves, and a dozen bears to every major US city and turn them loose.  Let them run through lower 48 back yards like they run through ours.  Kill and eat your pets, like they do ours.  I bet Defenders Of Wildlife would loose their financial support real fast.  Also a predator control program, shooting them from helicopters, would be implemented real fast.  You might even reinstate a bounty on wolves, and approve setting out poison, just like last time.  Things we are not allowed to do, by the Federal Government.

They say we are a state, but we feel like an over taxed and abused colony.

[SHOOTALL]

sorry the fact that Alaska was bought burns you up , truth hurts sometimes . When the Chesapeake bay bridge tunnel was built it connected states as in crossed state lines , which is when the fed. govt. is suppose to get involved !
half the complaints on this site and others is the Fed. Govt. getting involved in states rights !
Then when a project is wholly in a state they go begging the feds for funding . To be quite honest a little fed. help with ya'lls roads is not bad but to expect the fed govt to hand it to ya on a silver platter is ridiculous !
around here we build toll roads to cover cost , ya'll should do the same then each time someone from the lower 48 uses YOUR road you can feel good about them helping pay for YOUR road !
we still have many dirt / gravel roads in VA. the reason is simple , the county does not have funds to pave them , the state can't justify the cost because not enough people will use the road . and the fed don't bother with state rights unless they get something back ( votes etc. ).
now think about this , we watch 6 guys on a crab boat work 2 weeks tops and get paid 50-100 thousand dollars , we see millions spent on Coast Guard services to keep these crab guys safe , we pay 12 dollars + per lb. for this crab .
so how can the lower 48 be blamed for not supporting ya'll  and this is but one thing . add the cut from the oil companies each citizen gets not to mention a life style of their choice . Excuse me for not feeling sorry ! and don't even go to the danger of north sea fishing , i work in trenches and more men die in trench cave ins and falls on construction  than fishing !

[magooch]

I don't have to be told about Alaska.  I spent more time up there than I want to think about.  All I'm saying is that if federal money is spent there, it ought to be on the merits of the project and special considerations shouldn't be any more important than they are in any other region, or state.

Anyone who has driven on California's Interstate highways recently--I-5 in particular would certainly believe that a lot more motorists would be served if more federal money were spent there.  I'm not saying I would support that, but that is just an example that Alaska isn't the only place that can justify more federal funds.

A huge new bridge is just being completed over the Tacoma Narrows in this state and it will be paid for by what I consider to be a prohibitively high toll.  I certainly won't be using it.  And I would bet that there was probably some federal money used in building it.  If Alaska really needs a mew bridge, then they might consider paying for it in the same manner.

[Chilachuck]

Shootall, we cannot have dirt or gravel roads because the dirt will not support them and the feds prohibit them.

We cannot have private ferries due to the cost of insurance and all the other federally mandated stuff.

Your settlements were a few miles apart with privately owned farms along the way, ours are 10 times as far apart across land that cannot be settled because of who owns it.

The cost of the roads is a lot higher, and the roads cost more per mile because of the soil, weather, and the federal laws and regulations.

Your area was settled with horses and oxen; no feed for either here and the soil destroys their hooves.

Know what the US bought? Trading rights to the south coast of Alaska. That's the Aleutians, across Cook Inlet, and PWS, and down SE Alaska. The US did not buy the interior, nor the land, it just sort of seized it like a fat man seizes the seats on either side of him on an airplane.

The US does not actually have valid title to any land in the State of Alaska.

I'd be perfectly happy to do without federal money being spent here, if the feds would get out. They won't because the condo-conservationists want Alaska to be their Fantasy Utopia.

That brings to mind what was going on about 30yrs ago: Lot's of fuss about Brazilian rainforest being clearcut? Lock up Alaskan rainforests. Alligators losing habitat? Expand wild life refuges in Alaska. A desert tortoise endangered in SoCal? Make a National Monument in Alaska.

That stupidity got old fast.

Crabbers? That's million dollar boat. I'd like to know how the money from the sale of the catch was split, if the crew got 50,000 each or if that was divided. You see, the boat "gets a share" to cover amortization, repair, fuel, etc.

[SHOOTALL]

the dirt road was meant to impress we don't get all we want either !
an the numbers for the crabbers came out the mouths of the crew yes the boat owner and captain got much better as do the fishing boats here !
whats a million dollars a drill rig to put in watter wells here cost that !
 no parks , blm land , coast guard bases or military bases no federal land ?

[Sourdough]

90% of those crab boats are from Seattle.  They are registered in Alaska so they can fish here, but are owned and spend the off fishing season in Seattle.  Almost the entire fishing fleet that fishes Alaskan waters is from the lower 48.  As for building a toll road or bridge, that is the plan.  The plan is to put a toll on the bridge to recoup the cost of building.

As for the fact that the states bought Alaska, they also bought all the states in the Louisiana Purchase, but you don't treat them as a colony.  Portions of Arizona and New Mexico were bought but you don't treat them as a colony.  The rest were just annexed, sometimes by war.  Maybe it's because we are geographically separated that you all feel that way.

Anyway all the money that you folks think goes to the people in Alaska, boy are you mistaken.  Those grab boats are usually owned by Seattle interest and crewed by mostly Seattle crews.  The pipeline is owned by British Petroleum and Exxon, so most of the goes out of state.  A large portion to the Queen of England since she is BPs largest investor.  Those young fishing guides, and park guides, that you see who is making so much money every summer are from Washington or Oregon, the tourist industry recruits from the lower 48 and won't hire our kids.  All those high paying jobs on the north slope people talk about, again the oil industry hires from Oklahoma and Texas, they won't hire Alaskans.  So all those high paying jobs you think we have, we don't.  Sure would be nice if some of that money stayed here but most goes south.  My Father-IN-Law wanted to go to work for the oil industry.  He tried and tried unsuccessfully to get hired.  Finally he took a vacation to Arizona to visit his sister.  While there he borrowed her car and drove to Oklahoma.  Went in to one of the oil companies and was hired on the spot.  They gave him a ticket to Prudoe Bay from Phoenix.  Then after five months when they discovered he was really from Alaska they tried to fire him.  Court action was the only reason they did not.  During the summer we are totally inundated with construction workers from the lower 48.  The big construction companies do most of their hiring from the lower 48.  Yes we do make money, but not as much as you think we do. 

Got my monthly heating fuel bill yesterday, $768.79 for a fill up.  My last fill up was four weeks ago, it was $617.22.  And we live on a fixed income, those fuel bills hurt.  Many people are leaving due to the high cost of fuel.

And the low tonight is expected to be -50.

[deltecs]

I think someone better research the Highway Trust Fund.  The Chesapeake Bay bridge is connection between states and funded partially by the Trust Fund.  But so was Golden Gate Bridge and the Mackinaw Bridge and they only connect in state.  These bridges too were built to expand new and relatively barren populated areas, and most definitely not for defense purposes.  Don't forget the roads built to connect these bridges.  The Highway Trust Fund is majority funding source for construction of new instate roads in every state., especially when they connect to an interstate highway or provide an avenue to marketable products.  Mass Transit Authority (MTA) was funded from this source and it is limited to a city, much less, national concerns.  Get the facts straight.  Alaska is only requesting funding assistance on projects that have been approved in other areas of the country in other states on like projects.  By the way, Graybeard, I think I know the feeling of the South's frustration since I think Alaska too is under reconstruction by the feds.     Sourdough iterates our Alaska position well.

[ironglow]

  Yes guys;
   I believe that if the South still had the wherewithal, when the Scalawags and carpetbaggers started their ugly tactics..there would have been war all over again!
   After WW2, the Germans and Japanese were treated better..than were our own countrymen in the South. ...Different era I suppose..

    Just as Alaska is often treated as an "orphan" now.. similar to the way we rural folk are treated in a "blue' state..

[nomosendero]

  Yes guys;
   I believe that if the South still had the wherewithal, when the Scalawags and carpetbaggers started their ugly tactics..there would have been war all over again!
   After WW2, the Germans and Japanese were treated better..than were our own countrymen in the South. ...Different era I suppose..

    Just as Alaska is often treated as an "orphan" now.. similar to the way we rural folk are treated in a "blue' state..

Some did. After fighting in the War, one of my ancestors returned to Texas & killed 3 Carpetbaggers & that's how some of my folks wound up here in AR. 

[Sourdough]

After the war of Northern Aggression, my ancestors there in Tennessee had everything, homes, farms, livestock, and any other valuables,  confiscated by Carpetbaggers, and Scallywags.  They lost the right to vote, and refusing to swear an allegiance to the United States, they were never again allowed to vote or hold public office.  Now I'm talking about my Great Grand Parents.  I remember them, back when I was small.  I also remember how they hated Yankees, and the Yankee government.  That hatred was carried over to my Grand parents, and my Parents. 

[deltecs]

After the war of Northern Aggression, my ancestors there in Tennessee had everything, homes, farms, livestock, and any other valuables,  confiscated by Carpetbaggers, and Scallywags.  They lost the right to vote, and refusing to swear an allegiance to the United States, they were never again allowed to vote or hold public office.  Now I'm talking about my Great Grand Parents.  I remember them, back when I was small.  I also remember how they hated Yankees, and the Yankee government.  That hatred was carried over to my Grand parents, and my Parents. 

We are all proud and remember our cultural heritage.  I'm a transplanted Yankee from PA.  However, right now and for the last 39 years, I'm Alaskan and proud of it.  I don't care one whit about cultural heritage from anyone.  I do care about what they think when it comes to our government, and especially Alaska.  The best way to prevent discrimination is to think the past or our race is more important than our ideas.  My cultural heritage was founded on Celts, who rased and pillaged every civilized European nation in the world and were never bested.  So what.  I lost relatives at Gettysburg from the South and several from the Feds in the Whiskey Rebellion.  So what.  My common interests and that of my immediate family members stand beside Sourdough in similar situations, as we live in Alaska, our politics are Alaska common, and our lifestyles are relatively independant of civilized communities.   These common interests are more important that where we were from or what our ancestry is.  Like I posted before, the next civil war, whether violent or peaceful, will be along lines not previously alined on geopolitical.  It may be between Blue states versus Red states instead of the Blue and Gray.