Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
As noted, the trooper was previously punished for his indiscretions. Additional punishment may be seen by some as punitive and 'double jeopardy'. It also appears that as part of the 'punishment' privacy rules were broken and workman compensation laws violated. It also looks like Todd had a vendetta and was using his wife's authority (with her permission) to go after this guy.
The other side is that this guy was not really punished. It is the Governer's job to oversee this and felt that the punishment was unsatisfactory given what he had done. Was there a little personal feelings there? More than likely. We still feel she did the right thing, and I have not personal feelings there.
I understand the issues surrounding the Ketchikan bridge and its purpose. I personally feel it is not our responsibility to tell Alaska what transportation infrastructure they want. The point of the controversy is that the Governor is representing the event in a false fashion. As part of her campaign for governor she supported the bridge. The US Congress stripped the earmark designation for the bridge. And the month before the Governor 'turned down the project' the Alaska DOT recommended that the project be canceled and suggested the ferry as a more prudent option.
The governer got a recommendation to cancel, and she did. So what? She is not a transportation expert.
She raised royalty fees and taxes on the oil companies by 9% - maybe that has something to do with the cost of your gas. The State oil royalty payment (coming out this week ??) to citizens is now over $3,200.00 as I understand it.
I'm glad she taxed the oil companies. They are making billions. And we actually use relatively little of our fuel. This is where understanding comes in:
The oil companies had a contract with our military bases to provide jet fuel at a certain price. The skyrocketing fuel costs have hit their pockets, and now they raise consumer fuel prices to make up for it. It has nothing to do with the tax.
The PFD has to do with stock market performance of invested royalty monies. It trails roughly five years. We are seeing an upturn in the money because of investments made and the trend of the stock market from a few years back.
The plane was purchased in 2005 for $3.7 million and used 58% of the time to transport prisoners both in and out of state. Yes. Murkowski was wrong in purchasing the jet outside of the legislative budget process. The jet was taken out of service when Palin became governor and sold 6 months later for $3.1 million. Note the variations in the following funding from the Alaska State budget ...
Coincidence? It looks to me like the jet was saving the State of Alaska $500,000.00/yr in inmate transportation costs. Governor Palin has acknowledged the potential need in purchasing another aircraft.
Again, live here. He was not saving the state money. How much does it cost to have a private pilot, crew, hangar and maintenance for a jet of that nature?
The 'chef' is still employed by the State of Alaska
I'm glad he didn't lose his job. I'm sure they have placed him elsewhere where he is more needed.
Not only did she bill the State of Alaska a 'per diem' for staying in her own home, she billed the State $43,000+ to transport her husband and children.
This is something that is allowed, but something I disagree with on the surface. It isn't a deal breaker though because she was technically away from home and she is allowed travel expense for family.
The Town of Wasilla as a 'commercial hub' voted in a sales tax increase (I think it took less than 350 affirmative votes.) which the 70,000+ residents of Mat-Su borough now pay when they shop there.
GOOD! The people that drive there litter, use roads and infrastructure. They needed to pay tax. Because of those people you need better highways, more infrastructure. They should pay for it!
We don't need more oil. We do, however, need the natural gas from the North Slope. Governor Palin pushed thru legislation that pays TransCanada $500,000,000.00 dollars with no requirement that the gasline be built.
I would be interested in how you feel about the alternative of building the new gasline alone the existing right-of-way of the Alaska pipeline to a new LNG terminal at Valdez. It looks like a much better project for the citizens of Alaska, less expensive and more quickly built, and is better positioned to supply the future energy needs of our country. And beats the crap out of moving all that natural gas thru Canada into Chicago.
I think it would be a fantastic idea. It would give us LNG now. However, I still firmly believe in drilling ANWR. We do need the oil. Look at all the cars on the highway. People talk about reducing dependency, but that is all it is.
Facebook
Twitter