I'm just curious. How do conservatives (and others) feel about the fact that Alaska soaks up $7.6 billion in federal hand outs? Arizona, the state John McCain represents in the senate, receives a mere $18.70 per resident in earmarks. Alaska is a lot less modest, taking $506.34 per citizen just in earmarks.

Alaskan citizens are paid by the federal government for living there! Anyone making $35,000 or less in Alaska pays no federal income tax. All told, tax payers in the lower 49 subsidize Alaska to the tune of $12,500 for each of the 650,000 people living there. This is highly unusual, to say the least.

What do you think about the Bridge to Nowhere, the one Palin supported? On 9-21-2007, she said

Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer. Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island. Much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened.

Notice the sharp contrast. The bridge stopped being the answer after Congress stopped being willing to pay for it - not because there was any ethical problem with taking the money. Congress told Alaska, not the other way around. ("I told Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that bridge to nowhere," Palin said Friday in Ohio, using the critics' dismissive name of the project. "'If our state wanted a bridge,' I said, 'we'd build it ourselves.'")

Some of this will be changing, as Ted Stevens was one of the most important people in America in terms of appropriating earmarks. But, in the meantime, I'm curious what people think about this welfare state?

• Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) 2007 rating was 10 percent, making his lifetime score 18 percent. The 2008 Congressional Pig Book contained 53 earmarks worth $97.4 million for Sen. Obama, including $1,648,850 for the Shedd Aquarium.


• Sen. Joe Biden (D-Del.) received the worst possible rating in 2007 with 0 percent, while his lifetime rating is 22 percent. According to the Pig Book, Sen. Biden had 70 earmarks for a total of $119.7 million in fiscal year 2008, including $246,100 for the Grand Opera House in Wilmington.


• Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) received a score of 100* percent and has a lifetime rating of 88, has never requested nor received a single earmark, and has pledged to veto any spending bill that contains any earmarks.

In his first three years, Obama requested nearly $1 billion in earmarks, which is more than 34 times the number of earmarks Palin secured for Wasilla. This includes the million dollar earmark he secured for his wife’s employer, shortly after they nearly tripled her salary. Obama also sought $3.4 million in earmarks for clients of Biden’s lobbyist son.


Both in Illinois and in Washington, Obama has used his position to cosponsor legislation that rained millions of dollars upon Tony Rezko and his other major donors in the slum-development business, to obtain state grants for his private law clients, and to earmark funds for government contractors who donated money to his campaigns.


Basically, Obama showed no restraint up until this year. Biden never has. Biden requested $119 million in earmarks last year alone, according to Citizens Against Government Waste.

Reading that CBSNews article really raises some questions about how these enterprises are doing their financing.

Obama requests $1.4 million for St. Xavier(2006,2007). Of the 1.4 million in requests, $192,000 ends up earmarked. Hunters Biden's firm earns $320,000 for their lobbying efforts.

So let me understand this correctly. This university, which collects tuition and probably has countless millions in endowments, pays $320,000 to ask the government for $1.4 million dollars of taxpayer money, of which they receive $192,000. Have I got this right? I'm trying to get my brain around this because it seems wrong on a variety of levels.

From a business perspective, paying $320k to a lobbying firm for money that may never come seems like gambling(could it be called an investment?). Also, reading the other thread complaining about usury from payday loans, 320k to raise 1.4mil seems rather usurious(to the taxpayer). At the end, paying 320k to raise 192k seems like stupidity(to the university).

All this, of course, ignores the fact the $192k is taxpayer money that got inefficiently laundered into Hunter Biden's lobbying firm's pockets, at a net loss of $128k to the University at the request of Obama.

What a debacle. Its like a giant shell game, and the taxpayers flit the bill. This must be the government that Obama is wants to be president so he can change it.

I have to say, reading your post, my respect for McCain just went up. The problem with this type of thing is that everyone has their hand in the pot, so while most pay lip service to changing it, almost nobody really wants to do it. For Joe Biden to be in favor of changing it, he would be in favor of taking food directly off of his son Hunter's plate.

Maybe someone can explain to me why a private university would be entitled to taxpayer money so they can be more profitable? Doesn't it seem like money raised for private enterprise should come from the private sector in the forms of loans and VC, not from government gifts "purchased" from lobbyists? I think the earmarks for his wife's hospital fall into this category as well.

So it sounds like you guys are pretty bothered by Alaska's "welfare queen" status (which, admittedly, isn't Palin's doing - she's only playing the game), which was the question you're both avoiding.

Just pointing out that there is only one person that doesn't play that game, and he's on our side.. I bet he's better able to teach her how to not do that than either of your guys..

Originally Posted by Feydakin

Just pointing out that there is only one person that doesn't play that game, and he's on our side.. I bet he's better able to teach her how to not do that than either of your guys..

My primary problem with McCain is that he has flipflopped on almost everything he stood for in his previous campaigns where he didn't get close to winning the nomination. Once he started winning, he reversed himself on almost everything and appears to be willing to say and do ANYTHING to get elected.

I realize that is politics for the most part, but my concern is how can ANYTHING he says be trusted? How do we know that what he tells you today is reality once he actually gets elected? Especially since he has also said that he will be a 1 term president, which means he'll have ZERO accountability once elected since there is no incentive to get re-elected.

And now, with the Bush people running his campaign, he has completely stopped doing town-halls, stopped doing interviews, and hasn't said anything substantive since before the convention.

I'm a long-time republican and I've only voted for one democrat in my life (because he earned it). I can't bring myself to vote for Obama, but I won't be voting for McCain either. I'll be writing in Huckabee since he seams to be the only honest person left in the Republican Party at the moment.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

I'm just curious. How do conservatives (and others) feel about the fact that Alaska soaks up $7.6 billion in federal hand outs? Arizona, the state John McCain represents in the senate, receives a mere $18.70 per resident in earmarks. Alaska is a lot less modest, taking $506.34 per citizen just in earmarks.

I think it's despicable to be honest with you. Especially considering that every resident also gets a check from the oil companies.

When I was 14 years old, my best friend and I opened our own business with the help of my father. Four years later, we sold that business and during the time we ran it we prospered because of Ronald Reagan's friendly policies towards small businesses. Two weeks after my 18th birthday, I rewarded Reagan with my support and vote for his second term. I've been a registered Republican ever since.

In 1993 my ex-wife and I started a business and new laws by the Clinton administration supporting small business and women owned businesses gave me a reason to vote for the only Democrat I've ever supported, Bill Clinton. When Bush ran against Gore, I didn't trust Gore and felt he would not be good for business. I don't know if he would have, but I can tell you the GW Bush was HORRIBLE for small business.

In 2001 we started losing government contracts aimed at small business to big corporations that were given loopholes so they could bid on those contracts. We survived (barely) by playing the game ourselves and allying ourselves with a large corporation. In 2004, a year before Katrina, our business and home were decimated by Hurricane Charley. We got almost no help from the government and Bush's brother helped the insurance industry by providing them emergency loopholes to deny or severely reduce insurance claims.

Having lost everything, my ex and I parted ways and I went back to the private sector as a programmer. In the past 4 years I have been laid off 3 times by companies that outsourced my job overseas to cheaper labor. And they were given tax credits for doing it.

I HATE GW Bush with a passion I don't think he'll ever understand. And so far the McCain camp has ignored my emails and questions at rallies about his support for small business. But looking at his voting record, he went along with most of Bush's policies that are destroying small businesses in this country.

Obama is no Bill Clinton and I don't know if he can be trusted. So I can't bring myself to vote for him. But at the moment, I can't bring myself to vote for McCain either.

So, how do people feel about Alaskans being paid for living in Alaska, out of federal tax money?

And to Dave, I'm sorry to hear about your recent misfortune!

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

So, how do people feel about Alaskans being paid for living in Alaska, out of federal tax money?

I think its time I moved to Alaska.

I say we move the whole WT community to Alaska. We can start our own town, collect the goverment handouts & play online all day long!

Is there any industry other than OIL coming out of Alaska that benefits the rest of the U.S ?

I've got some fabulous baby seal gloves..

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

I'm just curious. How do conservatives (and others) feel about the fact that Alaska soaks up $7.6 billion in federal hand outs? Arizona, the state John McCain represents in the senate, receives a mere $18.70 per resident in earmarks. Alaska is a lot less modest, taking $506.34 per citizen just in earmarks.

The reason the have all that money is becuase they have good represnetation.

Furthermore $7.6 billion is but a fraction of the $26.3 billion per year that illegal aliens cost the United States.

At least Alaskans are citizens.

The federal government collects a lot more than the give back on gas tax and such. They produce a lot. They should get a lot back.

But whatever, the election is over.