Alaska Politics Blog : Schwarzenegger: 'Women can do just as a great a job ..."

Alaska Politics Blog

This is the place to talk about Alaska politics -- state, local, national. Public life in the Last Frontier has probably never been more interesting than right now -- the governor as candidate for vice president, the broad and still-evolving corruption investigation, a big election, powerful members of Congress under scrutiny, and the usual hardball Alaska politics. Come here for news, tidbits and information, and join the discussion. Keep your comments civil and on point. Avoid personal attacks. Do not use profanity. Posts that violate the Terms of Use will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned.

Contributors

Erika Bolstad

Erika Bolstad covers Alaska issues, including the congressional delegation, from Washington, D.C., for McClatchy Newspapers. Before joining the bureau in 2007, she spent seven years as a reporter at the Miami Herald, where she covered politics, government and the state legislature. E-mail Erika at ebolstad@adn.com.

Sean Cockerham

Sean Cockerham writes about Alaska state politics. He spent three years based in Juneau for the ADN before joining the Tacoma News-Tribune to write about Washington state politics. He went to Iraq twice for the News Tribune, and previously wrote about Alaska government and politics for the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. E-mail Sean at scockerham@adn.com

Kyle Hopkins

Kyle Hopkins covers politics and other stories for the ADN. He covered the 2006 campaign for governor, has blogged extensively about Alaska politics, covered Anchorage city government and was a reporter based in the Mat-Su. He grew up in Southeast Alaska and previously was a reporter at the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner and Anchorage Press. E-mail Kyle at khopkins@adn.com

Features

SECTION

Alaska political corruption

The FBI raided state legislatures offices in Aug. 2006, and the fallout since has been epic in Alaska's political world.

Schwarzenegger: 'Women can do just as a great a job ..."

Posted by Alaska_Politics

Posted: August 29, 2008 - 4:27 pm

From Kyle Hopkins in Anchorage

As if all this didn't seem unreal enough already:

login or register to post comments

4 August 31, 2008 - 1:32pm | jojobo1

palin

I have been to Alaska a few times as I have family that lives in the Anchorage,Eagle River,Wallasa.Talkeenta area and I have to say that Palins claim or I should say McCains claim that she helped with a surplus in Alaska is null and void.There has always been a surplus from taxes on the oil and gas companies,so she agrees with Senator Obama on that issue anyway,Every man woman and child in Alaska has been sent a check each fall from the profits of the oil and gas companies.So this is nothing new.With the surplus it was only the right thing to do considering where Alaska is located.If she had waited and sent a bigger check this fall to each person it would not have helped her politically,giving the rebate at this time makes her look good now and not after the fall elections

August 31, 2008 - 1:59pm | rfn

Some adjustments....

It is technically correct that Governor Palin did not bring about a surplus from oil taxes. That was the handiwork of the legislature. She did sign it into law but that hardly takes much. She did encourage the legislature to think reasonably about the tax, discouraging a Murkowski-style free pass. But the sentiment was already there.

As to there having always been a surplus, not so. The previous tax plan left Alaska with rapidly falling income with the earlier Knowles administration clamouring for a personal income tax. It was followed by the Murkowski administration which opened with spending cuts but ultimately rising oil prices helped save the day.

While not stated, I believe I sense a confusion between the energy assistance payment and the permanent fund dividend. They are not the same. The PFD payment cannot be manipulated by any governor; the mathematical formula for it is fixed by law. The money in The Permanent Fund does NOT come from taxes on anything; it comes from royalties on extracted resources. A portion of the royalty income is invested diversely and the payout (dividend) represents a percentage of the earnings of the fund but not from the principal of the fund. Many states might have chosen to establish similar investment plans but the politicians in control chose rather to hog all the revenue for their own disbursement. Alaskans simply would not sit still for that political bossism, so was born The Permanent Fund and the Permanent Fund Dividend.

It was mere convenience (and minimizing accounting expense) to send the payments concurrently. "Waiting" would have delayed the payment of The PFD or required separate payouts, doubling expense. Plus, waiting much longer would have caused the energy assistance to arrive after the problems of warmth in the fast-approaching winter were already out of control. November isn't autumn in much of Alaska; it's well into winter.

I do have philosophical issues with the energy assistance. It's more badly needed in rural areas. Even Anchorage homeowners are somewhat impacted but more through gasoline costs than heating. They most use natural gas which has jumped in price but not nearly so sharply as the fuel oil used in rural Alaska. Many in Anchorage, I believe the majority, do not directly feel the cost of heating as they are renters. Due to overall economic conditions rents have not risen proportionate to the cost of heating and this will have longer term negative consequences in deferred maintenance.

Problem with location or means testing is The Alaska Constitution. Do something for one citizen; do it for all or do it for none. To avoid benefiting wealthy lawyers and doctors in South Central Alaska is to deny assistance to those in rural areas where the need is, for many, a matter of survival.

At the time the energy assistance was proposed Ms. Palin was not running for any office and was sufficiently popular. The legislature may have felt temptation and with good reason for those up for re-election. Their vote in favor might be remembered but, with the payout coming in the next week or two, it will be long spent and forgotten on election day.

3 August 30, 2008 - 1:13am | Emperor

Ignorance.

Then they expect us to take them seriously.

2 August 29, 2008 - 5:16pm | LindaandDaisy

Sarah Palin photos

I had an email at 8 am requesting use of one of my photos of Sarah Palin .... I wondered why until I turned on the TV - Now they are up on www.imageworkspub.com
I knew I was taking them for some reason.

1 August 29, 2008 - 4:41pm | AK_Lady

Really?

We've had a budget problem recently?

August 29, 2008 - 5:44pm | TheSdog

I read these quotes on the SD U-T

site earlier today.

There can be little doubt the McCain campaign sent out talking points and may have even tailored them to who they were going to.

Arnold has had constant fights with the legislature in CA over spending. The unions, especially the teachers, are after them because he actually wants people to do their jobs and not rob he state.

That is hardly a problem for The Palin, she just hands out bribes and never has to worry about anybody complaining.

August 29, 2008 - 7:23pm | rfn

Strange....

Feels like sort of admiration for Arnold over his running battles with the legislature....yet no appreciation of his acceptance of women in roles of authority.

I find the use of the term "bribes" crude when it comes from those who decline to say "no" to the energy assistance coming their way. I am not, however, astonished.

August 29, 2008 - 7:34pm | TheSdog

Arnold

faces off against an extremely liberal legislature almost daily. His fights over the fiscal problems in California should be admired.

This is not about The Palin being a woman or at least it should not be. It is always about her being a oman to you because you are the true sexist who actually cares.

Arnold and the rest of the Republican machine will fall in line behind the liberal ticket of McCain/Palin. Even Karl Rove will fall in line as best as he can but it was obvious during an interview I just saw that he knows this is a collosal mistake.

And it was a bribe unless you actually plan on using it for gas. Yeah right.

Paying 90+% in taxes yet. Didn't think so.

August 29, 2008 - 7:43pm | rfn

"oman" or "omen"?

I prefer to believe "omen". An omen to those who have come to believe the glass ceiling is forever. An omen they really need to heed.

As to energy assistance, "gas" is somewhat ambiguous. It might mean "gasoline"; "natural gas" or "propane". I believe it will pay for about 250 gallons of fuel oil though the price for winter is not yet established. That should last about one (1), possibly two (2) months.

Those who feel it's a bribe really should feel an obligation to opt out or be eaten alive by their conscience (if any).

As to oil taxes, the rate on Oil Giant obscene profits is quite moderate when one considers the many deductions and easily manipulated "profit" to which the tax is applied. As I have so often said, Alaska would do with a much lower tax rate on the gross; far easier to keep honest though honesty seems to be not much of a concern to many.

August 29, 2008 - 7:45pm | TheSdog

Yes it was my brain getting

ahead of my typing.

Keep making it about gender and being one of the biggest sexts on here.

shal we just nickname you Vic? Could it be The Palin could have had you for a Quarter Pounder?

August 29, 2008 - 8:08pm | rfn

Exhausted?

How about the unlimited opportunities in New England?

The value of energy assistance given the price of home heating oil?

Are these of no importance?

The demonstration of compassion on the part of Governor Palin in helping people cope with obscene energy prices, particularly for home heating, further illustrates her qualification to represent the people of America in a government that so frequently forgets about them.

August 29, 2008 - 8:19pm | TheSdog

Actually

I am a bit tired. Lots of call will do that to you.

It is not compassion. Most of that money will not go near energy expenses. It is all bribes and you are buying the smokescreen for it.

It is either because you like your bribe and cannot deal with the fact it is a bribe or are too ignorant to know when you are being bribed.

So which is it?

August 30, 2008 - 11:00am | rfn

Given that personal attacks

are now permissible, I must point out the arrogance of that statement: "It is either because you like your bribe and cannot deal with the fact it is a bribe or are too ignorant to know when you are being bribed."

This is a classic, though usually desperate, rhetorical technique. Narrowing the possibilities to two which are equally repugnant. A technique repugnant in itself. Sad to see a professed intellect reduced to such a ridiculous ploy.

It would be equally fair for me to assert that ...you either like seeing the pain of others or covet the last few pennies of the ill or injured. But I won't do that; just stating an example of the technique.

Reality:

Many in Alaska are neither ignorant nor corrupt and resent an individual projecting their own personal propensities upon others. Energy assistance will be the difference for many in Alaska this winter. The difference between having to choose between food and staying warm. Forget expensive prescriptions; they were priced out of reach years ago.

To attribute need to ignorance exemplifies ignorance.

It's sad that neither intellect nor compassion are considered when professional licenses are issued or renewed.

August 30, 2008 - 11:14am | TheSdog

rfn

In this case those are the only two possibilities. You have been bribed and much like the CBC are trying to come up with any excuse you can.

People are not going to use it on energy and to keep repeating a lie does not make it true. That is your classic and tried strategy.

August 30, 2008 - 11:31am | rfn

There you go again.

Projecting your own proclivities upon others.

I should yield to the experience of one obviously so familiar with bribes.....those "detail" people really do openly use that word these days, don't they?

This "people" is going to use the energy assistance payment for home heating. In truth it may cover more than the increase I'm already seeing but any excess will help with the huge jumps in the cost of food caused by "fuel surcharges" on air cargo and barge shipments.

Of course you are free to speak for yourself as to whether you'll use or abuse the assistance. Unless, of course, you have done the honourable thing for one who feels this way. That is, simply opt-out. The PFD people are not reporting any great number of withdrawals just yet but there IS still time.

August 30, 2008 - 11:01am | Cartman3_15

Woohoo!!

Well said and well observed, rfn.

August 30, 2008 - 8:31am | Cartman3_15

Either you're opposed to it and

will refuse it, or you'll accept it and give it your tacit approval.

Or, in standard Dog fashion, you'll ignore the question and continue to deflect to avoid genuine accountability. That shows something, too, though, doesn't it?

So which is it?

August 30, 2008 - 11:01am | rfn

redundant

August 29, 2008 - 5:00pm | leowassilie

lol

I admit, reading your comment first then watching the video is very funny.

I feel the conviction seething from that li'l ol' comment. :)

She did veto a lot though. I guess that's what he means.

Search Jobs | Place an employment ad