[Vision2020] pork

Tue Nov 8 15:28:38 PST 2005

Chris

Good response. I still feel that there is away too much pork every where, Idaho is no exception. Some time in the future maybe some federal land can be sold.
-----Original message-----
From: Chris Storhok cstorhok at co.fairbanks.ak.us
Date: Tue,  8 Nov 2005 15:45:41 -0800
To: 'lfalen' lfalen at turbonet.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] pork

> Roger,
>  I would love to bit on this one.  First I do have to explain how the
> highway bill works.  It is really easy to point to projects in the bill and
> scream pork, your two bridges below are a great example.  But..and this is
> the big but...this money would have gone to Alaska anyway as part of the
> state's allotment from the Federal Highway Trust Fund that receives revenue
> from the federal gas tax.  What the Taxpayers From Common Sense will not
> openly share with you and the nation is that federal highway projects are
> one many items that has its own funding source.  Other federal budgets with
> their own dedicated funding sources include the FAA of which all aviation
> projects are based on revenues from federal aviation fuel taxes; all boating
> infrastructure programs, paid out of taxes on marine fuel collected under
> the Dingle-Johnson Act;  and you naturally know of social security, Medicare
> and so forth.
> 
> Up until the early 1990's Congress did not dedicate highway funds to
> specific projects, it was assumed that state governments would take care of
> the mechanism to divide highway funds throughout the state.  Pork barreling
> highway projects began in earnest under the Clinton Administration (and I am
> not blaming either party for this) when rural communities in mid-eastern,
> western, and southern states started to complain that highway money was not
> flowing their direction.  As you may remember, IDT was just as guilty of
> this sin, remember the completion of unneeded freeways around Idaho Falls?
> Twin Falls?, and the famous Flying Y intersection on Boise?  Can you recall
> Governor Andrus complaining to IDT and the state GOP that Highway 95 was a
> goat trail?
> 
> This type of behavior within state government lead us down the road of the
> creation of the "High Priority" list within the various highway bills.  If
> you read the law (and I guarantee that TFCS, and other eastern organizations
> that really hate spending in the west will not tell you this) the dollar
> amount of "High Priority" projects is subtracted from the state's formula
> allotment.  For example, in 2005 the Federal-aid highway and highway safety
> programs will be funded at $34,422,200,000 and this is regardless of the
> existence of any pork projects, or other lists.  Of that only $2,966,400,000
> (8.6%) is assigned to High Priority projects in 2005.  If the High Priority
> list did not exist, that $2,966,400,000 for 2005 would have been spent
> anyway elsewhere.  
>  
> The real issue is how the state allotment works, large rural states like
> Alaska, Idaho, and Montana receive far more in highway funds than we pay
> into the trust fund; smaller urban states like New Jersey, Ohio, and the
> like pay far more into the  Highway fund than the receive back.  But
> remember history, at one point the U.S. Congress funded projects such as the
> National Road, the Erie Canal, and so forth to open up development of the
> former colonies and the then western territories. These developments
> consumed a large part of the federal budget in their day (far larger as a
> percentage than today)  Really, the question to TFCS is, why will you not
> allow younger frontier states (that unlike their eastern partners are mostly
> owned by the federal government) to construct the highways, airports, and
> ports that our eastern brethren were allowed to construct using federal
> money?
> 
> On to the two bridges:  the bridge at Ketchikan has been proposed to satisfy
> a outside corporation (Princess Cruise lines) who would like to start and
> end more of their cruises in Ketchikan.  Currently, if you cruise Alaska you
> will either start in Bellingham, Wa, or up on this end.  The cruise from
> Bellingham, by definition, has to pass through Canadian waters to get to
> Alaska, guess what? Starting January 1, 2007 passports will be needed to
> cross this path.  So the cruise lines are really interested in developing
> Ketchikan has the southern base of operations.  The runway is great, Alaska
> Air serves the airport well, but the airport is a ferry ride away from the
> port.  Add in the need to construct hotels to support the cruise ships (on
> the same island as the airport) the poor weather which lead to frequent
> delays in the ferry and you have a need for a bridge.  Remember the whole
> Tongess anti-logging movement?  The end of wholesale harvest from Tongess
> has forced Ketchikan into developing an alternate economic base, tourism is
> it and a southern base of operations for the cruise lines will really help;
> so what do you want, a $400 million bridge and a thriving tourist based
> economy or wholesale logging in the Tongess? 
> 
> On to Anchorage..some factors: 
> 1) as you may know development of Anchorage has filled in all of the
> non-federal land in that basin, there is nothing left;
> 2)the Corps of Engineers spend millions each year dredging the port of
> Anchorage to try and keep it operational; however the many species of whales
> that live in Knik Arm within the shallow and fertile waters of Anchorage do
> not like the operation that much;
> 3) Pt. McKenzie is a natural deep water port that does not silt in like
> Anchorage does - no dredging needed;
> 4) The thousands of acres around Pt. McKenzie is permafrost free and
> relatively dry (easy to develop);
> 5) Pt. McKenzie is only a mile from Anchorage.
> Thus the need for the Knik Arm Bridge.  Granted the bridge right now would
> take you to nowhere in a hurry, within a few years of the completion of the
> bridge there will be a somewhere to go. 
> 
> One other point Roger, all those other projects you mention (with the
> exception of the paint job) have similar projects within the confines of
> Idaho...who paid for the new ag building at Idaho? (the feds)  How about the
> millions of $ of fed pork heading to the Lionel Hampton School of Music?
> The 4 lane highway 95 from Moscow to Lewiston?  Agriculture research at UI
> and WSU? WSU grizzly bears?  I know you just copied the text from the TFCS,
> however I think we all should be reminded that western states really are
> sucking tax revenues from eastern states; the TFCS wants that to stop - it
> is a New York organization.
> 
> Hope all is well,
> Chris
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
> [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]On Behalf Of lfalen
> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 12:19 PM
> To: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Subject: [Vision2020] pork
> 
> 
> The following is from an article by Stephen Spruiell in the November 7, 2005
> issue of National Review. Any typo's are mine.
> 
> Rep. Don Young stuffed two bridges in to the highway bill recently passed
> into law. Combined the bridges will cost taxpayers $454 million just
> slightly less than the amount Alaska will give away in PFD checks this year.
> Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) checks are paid to Alaskans out of state'd
> royalties on oil and gas. This year the state will distribute roughly $510
> million to Alaska's 600,000 residents or about $845 apiece. Alaska has no
> stae personal income tax or sale tax.
> 
> On top of this payment they are getting two unneeded bridges. one is
> designed to connect the town of Ketchikan  (population 8,000) to its airport
> on nearby Gravina  Island (pop. 50), supplanting a ferry service that
> currently makes the trip in about seven minutes for a fare of $5 t0 $6. The
> other is the infamous bridge to nowhere. It is a bridge between Anchorage
> and a small rural area called Point MacKenzie ( pop. 11). Citizens Against
> Government Waste ranks Alaska firs in per capita pork spending. 
> 
> Here are just a few of the goodies Young and Stevens have steered toward
> alaska in recent years: $1.8 million for berry research; $1.8 million for
> sea-otter recovery; $10 million for a pyschiatric treatment facility; $48
> millions subsidies for the timber industry; and $500,000 to paint a giant
> salmon on an Alaska Airlines jetliner. 
> 
> A study by Taxpayes for Common Sence revealed that the $285.5 billion
> highway bill contained 119 special projects for Alaska, totaling almost $1
> million. Of the $24 billion worth of pork in the bill Alaska got 4%. Don
> Young compared it to hunting. " i'm always looking for a bigger Head" He
> said about Ted Stevens " i'd lkie to be a little oinker, myself. If he's
> cheif porker i'm upset."
> 
> My comment: I thought Robert Byrd was bad. These guys make him look like a
> piker. Maybe Chris would loke to comment on Alaskan politics
> 
> Roger
> 
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯