http://www.qando.net/ - Sen. Stevens Resignation Watch

The Senate Appropriations Committee removed earmarks for two controversial "bridges to nowhere" in Alaska ... The projects have been the subject of strong criticism because of the general backlog of existing roads and bridges in desperate need of repair, especially those affected by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

I expect Senator Stevens resignation on his desk in the morning. (he doesn't kid people, you know)

The resignation of Senator Stevens would be a real victory for fiscal conservatives and libertarians against the loathsome, bloated pigs in Washington. Spread the word—force Senator Stevens to live up to his pledge. Senator Stevens must resign.

[cross-posted to Chequer Board]

UPDATE:

Club For Growth confirms the story, but points out that it's not as much of a victory as it could have been...

CNBC’s Squawk Box is reporting that the “Bridget to Nowhere” has been officially defunded. However, this can only be seen as a small victory. The millions of dollars allocated for this pork project will go to the Alaska state government for them to spend as they see fit…instead of the money going to the Katrina relief effort…or, heaven forbid, back to federal taxpayers.

Senator Stevens might use this to wiggle out. The Fairbanks Daily News-Miner reports...

Sen. Ted Stevens says earmarks for controversial bridges near Anchorage and Ketchikan will be removed from federal law under a proposal agreed to by members of a House-Senate team negotiating a transportation spending bill. The $452.5 million earmarked for the bridges will still go to Alaska, but it won't be directed to the bridges, according to Stevens.

It will be interesting to see if Alaska is willing to spend money on the bridges when they can spend it elsewhere. Ultimately, though, it's hard to see how this is a terribly useful development. The spending remains the same, only the name has changed.

TrackBacks

Return to Main Blog Page

Comments For This Post

Previous Comments to this Post

Comments

It’d be interesting to see the breakdown of money into the state from Washington, vs the amount of money out of the state via oil. Depending on how that one falls out, he may have a halfway legit bitch.

Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com

Maybe, but if the amount of the earmark is tit for tat with the Washington drain, why spend it on something so stupid?

Written By: Unknown
URL: http://

He is going to live with Alec Baldwin in Paris.These loudmouths wouldn’t be half so annoying if only they would keep their promises.

Written By: timactual
URL: http://

Maybe, but if the amount of the earmark is tit for tat with the Washington drain, why spend it on something so stupid?

That depends on the development in the area that follows. Tourism. Oil, whatever. Stuff that wouldn’t happen without it.

Mind I’m not defending it because I don’t know. But these are plausable arguemnts.

Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com

It’d be interesting to see the breakdown of money into the state from Washington, vs the amount of money out of the state via oil.

Oh, oil is free in Alaska? Wow. I would have thought that they would sell it rather than give it away.

Written By: Mark A. Flacy
URL: http://

I read somewhere, but cant remember, that Alaska was a big pork pig state, taking out much more than it put in, of course so is Louisiana. But I think La. needs it more right now.

Written By: Kyle N
URL: http://

Oooh, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). That guy!

I’ve been wanting that MoFo out ever since he proposed censorship. (My pet peeve.)

Mind I’m not defending it because I don’t know. But these are plausable arguemnts.

I do know, I used to live there. And by that I mean Gravina Island. There are no plausible arguments, even by the residents of Ketchikan, AK.
The only somewhat plausible argument is that it would allow for economic expansion. But why should we pay for it. Hey, my area would benifit if a bridge was built over the Brazos river. But you don’t see me asking someone else to pay for it.

It is, however, a common misconception that the “bridge to nowhere” is only for the fifty people who live there. When, in fact, the airport is there as well, and there is a perfectly good ferry system. But it still does not justify a bridge, even with the fifty residents. There are no roads there. So even if the bridge is built, the fifty residents still would not benefit until roads are built.

Anyhoo,
I’d love to see that guy fade into the last frontier.

Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://

Oh, oil is free in Alaska? Wow. I would have thought that they would sell it rather than give it away.

Oh, please.
Did you really think there was no federal tax revenue generated from it being out there?

Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitheads.blogspot.com

95% of alaska is in federal hands, so how can 5% of the land pay for the other 95%. Run a comparsion to the state you live in.
there are different opions on every issue and if you listened to everyone’s and acted on all of them,nothing could possibly get done, that is why we elect people to use their ability to get things done for the rest of us.
you heard it hear first
John L.

Written By: john lewis
URL: http://

95% of alaska is in federal hands, so how can 5% of the land pay for the other 95%.

Well, considering that the state is wealthy enough to give it’s residents proceeds from oil sales, it’s not that much of a stretch.

Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://

Hackarama Alert - In my state, bright blue Massachusetts, if you serve one day you have an additional year added on to your pension.

Does anybody know what the Senate rules are on this score?

Perhaps we’ll see some action on Jan. 3rd?

And for anybody who is tracking the Pork-by-State breakdowns, the best chart I’ve seen is on the TTLB Porkbuster Page. (PS - we do badly here; with 10 Dem Congressmen and Kennedy and Kerry in the Senate, I can’t THINK why....)

Written By: Peter Porcupine
URL: http://capecodporcupine.blogspot.com

Add Your Comment

	NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
	Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Comment:
	Remember Me

Vicious Capitalism

Buy Dale's Book!