The View From ‘Nowhere’

« Return to Article

Discuss

  • Posted By: tjma86 @ 10/25/2008 3:11:55 PM

    o snap!
    @ laura... seriously? get your head out of the gutter what small community w/ 14,000 people afford a bridge that cost 4 hundred million dollars? you need to knock yourself in the face w/ a brick and be more realistic when a small community just want change. what is wrong with change?Im sure Alaska can afford that. since they give out 2400 dollars a year in dividends so. why not a bridge?

    • Posted By: millions of reasons @ 10/25/2008 3:19:09 PM

      If you can get past your emotional, idealistic vomiting you would see that you have made a logical argument against the bridge being built; it is impractical in the sense that the potential growth of the city cannot accomodate a reasonable return on the state's or the nation's investment.

  • Posted By: ANCSteve @ 10/25/2008 3:19:03 PM

    I live in Alaska and I get really tired of Alaska bashing by the Lower 48. We are a small state in population (which skews any calculations based on "per capita"). The vast bulk of the Federal money coming into the state funds the strategically located military bases which predate statehood. We don't have an interstate system, so there are no highway funds. All Ketchikan wants is the promise made to build a bridge to the ariport, made 30 years ago, when it was placed on an island accessible only by bridge or boat against the resident's wishes. So all you Outsiders, just back off now, ya hear, or we'll send our lipsticked bulldog after you (some of us would be REALLY glad to be shed of her!!).

  • Posted By: rosieo7 @ 10/25/2008 3:18:00 PM

    Get Sarah to use Alaska's oil revenue together with her clothing allowance to build your bridge.
    You have PLENTY of money up there - so use it - stop giving out refunds and bonus checks.
    Speak to the Govenor !!!

  • Posted By: netracy @ 10/25/2008 3:17:52 PM

    Thank you Dave Kieffer for your articulate article giving us more of the story. Most of us understand what we hear and read in the mass media is only part of the whole story...driven by market share and what is most politically expedient. I hope you get that bridge you so despirately need for further development. Sounds like a good tourist stop for me in the future..

  • Posted By: MKPadmore @ 10/25/2008 3:16:27 PM

    My wife and I have visited Ketchikan twice by cruise ship and plan to do so again next August. We found it to be an interesting town and those of its population whom we met very pleasant and helpful.We thought it odd to have put an airport on the opposite side of the river to the town without a bridge to connect them. From our very limited knowledge of the area it seems to us that the town has little room to develop and a bridge would be a trigger for its develoment. We wish your efforts every success.
    June and keith Padmore
    Birmingham England

  • Posted By: ShannonCA @ 10/25/2008 3:15:30 PM

    Kudos to Newsweek for publishing the unheard side of the story. I'm not surprised at Palin's disregard for a community in her own state when it became more valuable as a political ploy than a constituency. Clearly she has shown her expertise at picking and choosing which communities in America suit her political needs and which don't. Just look at how much she has succeeded in dividing our country into "pro" America vs. "elite" America in the 2 short months she's been in the spotlight. She's a national disgrace.

  • Posted By: nbctjon @ 10/25/2008 3:15:27 PM

    Use your yearly bribes that you receive from the oil companies to allow them to foul your environment to build your bridge, then put a toll booth on it and charge a big enough toll to support maintenance on the bridge.

  • Posted By: mish @ 10/25/2008 3:14:38 PM

    Good job Kiffer. You really added much needed perspective on an issue most people don't know much about besides the jokes. I especially like the way you obliquely point out at the end that there are no "Real Americans." We are ALL Americans just trying to make our lives work in communities subject to unique problems. "Joe the Plumber's" problems are not the only ones that need some fixing and just because Joe might think those problems are silly doesn't mean they aren't important problems to discuss and fix.

  • Posted By: gilmanc @ 10/24/2008 4:51:10 PM

    What seems to keep getting lost is that Alaska has a financial surplus! Alaska already gets more money from the feds than it sends. Why is it so wrong for Alaska to find a way to fund the bridge for Ketchikan, rather than the Federal government, and by extension, the lower 48.

    What was Palin's extra check for Alaskans? $1,200 per citizen? That's $600,000,000, which would have funded the bridge twice over. It's obvious Alaska has the money. If it isn't important enough to Alaska to fund it themselves, why should the lower 48 fund it?

    • Posted By: Palinnomore @ 10/24/2008 4:55:39 PM

      it is from the Permanent fund...revenue for the oil industry...not the government

      • Posted By: markci @ 10/24/2008 5:02:16 PM

        We know it's oil money, retard. But spending from the Permanent Fund is up to the legislature.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Permanent_Fund

        • Posted By: JenDee @ 10/24/2008 5:34:19 PM

          By law, the Legislature cannot tap into the Ak Permenant Fund, without a vote from the citizens.

          • Posted By: abomasucks @ 10/25/2008 3:14:09 PM

            obama, and his supports lick donkey balls and love the taste.... and he and his supporters are some of the dumbest retards i have ever seen...

          • Posted By: firetheprincipal @ 10/24/2008 5:42:22 PM

            In California they have propositions that ammends California's constitution, is it unconstitutional in Alaska for propositions to ammend the constitution in Alaska?

            • Posted By: JenDee @ 10/24/2008 7:07:41 PM

              Well, when the statutes say that only the voters can change a particular law (as in this case), then it is unlawful for the legislature to do so.

      • Posted By: kdtripp2786 @ 10/24/2008 6:17:15 PM

        Your math on the $1200 is off by a bit, it was around $60M not $600M. The reason for that money was the outrageous cost of fuel/heating oil for the Native Alaskans living in remote communities accessible only by air, snow machine or 4 wheeler. The hundreds to thousands of dollars they pay each month makes the difference between freezing or not freezing. In addition, they pay much more than you can possibly imagine for something as simple as a gallon of milk. In order to get some relief to those individuals, the legislature had to give the money to ALL Alaskans, otherwise there would be lawsuits for discrimination. Many of you make judgements about Alaska and are very critical, but consider that we are a relatively new state and I am sure that when the state you lived in was only 50 years old there was a similar amount of money being spent on your infrastructure.

  • Posted By: netracy @ 10/25/2008 3:14:00 PM

    Dave Kieffer,

    Thank you for your articulate article describing what really has happened to your community. Most of us know what we read and see in the news media is only part of the story...usually what is most politically expedient or the "sound bite" that captures the attention of the masses. Thanks. Let's hope you get your bridge soon so you can develop and flourish.

    Norm

  • Posted By: JeffinLA @ 10/25/2008 3:13:37 PM

    Every year, every resident of Ketchikan (and every resident of Alaska) gets a huge check from the government. Yes, Alaska has so much oil revenue that not only do its residents pay no income or sales taxes, they actually get huge checks from the government. Even a huge chunk of their tax revenue is from taxes imposed on tourists, like cruise ship charges. tazxhttp://www.tax.alaska.gov/programs/documentviewer/viewer.aspx?1338f In short, Alaska has the money to build countless bridges to nowhere, but its residents choose selfishly to take that money for themselves, rather than spend it on community needs. The only "need" for federal money comes from their GREED.

  • Posted By: vietnam65 @ 10/24/2008 9:58:56 PM

    Get over yourself "Skippy". You have access to the airport for your little villiage and you did get the money to spend on a road that will eventually connect to a "bridge to no where". Palin requested the money originally, I assume based on you and your resident's request. Then when it became political dynamite, she put on fresh lipstick, trotted out her "brood" (on Alaska resident's tab) and claimed to have always been against it.

    You live where you choose, touting the "Alaska Lifestyle", live with it!

    • Posted By: ANCSteve @ 10/25/2008 3:13:36 PM

      Re-read the story. "Over the objections" of the residents YOUR US GOVERNMENT built the airport on Gravina Island with the PROMISE of a bridge to get there. Seems like someone forgot that second part. As for the ferry, it's cute and nice but when the weather turns crappy it is problematic. And Ketchikan isn't looking for any more of a "handout" than those folks in Minneapolis last year when their bridge collapsed. As to the Federal dollars pouring in to Alaska, a very large portion of that is for the military bases which are strategically placed there to protect the Lower 48 and were there before Alaska became a state.

  • Posted By: Don-AL @ 10/25/2008 3:12:54 PM

    To Laura in TX
    As if your community in Texas payed for the bridge in your's

  • Posted By: fogger00 @ 10/25/2008 3:12:00 PM

    How about we stop sending billions to Washington DC for them to dole out? 99% of all problems are local so handle them locally. Let the communities decide how to govern themselves (as originally intended in the Constitution). If one community wants gay marriage and abortion, great. If another doesn't, that's great too. No reason for DC to be deciding unilaterally. No one will ever be happy with a centralized command authority micromanaging our lives from afar.

  • Posted By: mizter6 @ 10/25/2008 3:10:53 PM

    You guys deserve a bridge for a change to grow. just like everything else in America. I think that most earmarks that ask for some giant operation that is deemed unnecessary for the country wasteful with the exception of infrastructure. All infrastructure improvements or redesigns are too costly for most communities to handle. Generally, it is the large urban cities that can afford these improvements due to their high income. assAAsking for

  • Posted By: INIKEYA @ 10/25/2008 3:10:46 PM

    well his govenor is the one who made it famous "the bridge to nowhere"

  • Posted By: Fed-up-In-K-Town @ 10/25/2008 3:10:44 PM

    This clown does not speak for me or anyone I know that lives here in Ketchikan. The bridge may have been a viable option 30 years ago, but that ship has sailed and the crybabies really need to get over it. There is NO GOOD REASON to build a bridge. I use the airport ferry several times a year and it works just fine. However, we could use a decent shelter for the folks that walk on, and possibly a conveyor belt to help with luggage.

    "What also went unstated was our town's need for development." Oh, that's rich. It's also ridiculous considering the multitude of properties for sale on this side of the channel. We also have the property at Ward Cove, site of the former pulp mill. It's also at Ward Cove where a derelict fishing boat lies half submerged at the opening of a spawning creek. This boat slowly sank for weeks and nothing was done to stop it. Our local government does a lousy job. They want hundreds of millions of dollars for a little convenience while folks in the borough still use catchment systems for water... all the while paying too-high property taxes and traveling on broken down, DANGEROUS roads and street bridges.

    "The media reports never seemed to mention that Ketchikan has a year-round population of 14,000???making it the fourth-largest community in the state." I'm going to have to call BS on this as well. Ketchikan has been dwindling since the pulp mill closed. I have lived here 15 years and I've never seen as many for-sale signs as I do now. What a joke, too bad I'm not laughing.

  • Posted By: brtlaw@hotmail.com @ 10/25/2008 3:10:34 PM

    Hopefully you guys can tax your people and make it a toll bridge to pay for it. But the rest of the country should not pay for it. John McCain is right about that, so is Sarah Palin. Barak Obama would not only have the whole country pay for it, but he would make small business owners responsible for about 80% of the cost as his tax plan proposes.

  • Posted By: alfmoreno @ 10/25/2008 3:10:08 PM

    It's about time that someone spoke up!! Congratulations, I only wish that Palin had owned upt to it and stated these facts like you have done

  • Posted By: Miron @ 10/25/2008 3:09:41 PM

    I think that the whole issue about "bridge to nowhere" was politically motivated attack on Sarah Palin. This is such a shame. Why don't we leave it to our professional politicians, fund overseers, and yes, the communities work to allot funds and then, well, respect decision.

    I hate it when a few clever and dirty political operatives come and damage what communities and government worked on for decades.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse