Tag Archives: Ted Stevens

Alaska Loves Federal Money

Yesterday I posted about how Alaska politicians talk a big game about wanting the federal government to leave them alone, but in reality they suck down more federal money than any other state. Having just spent a week in Alaska, I brought some photographic evidence of our biggest state’s big appetite for taxpayer money.

Here is the beginning of a beautifully built and maintained trail at the Mendenhall Glacier outside Juneau. You can see that construction of the trail, which must have employed several people to cut brush and grade the path, was paid for by the federal stimulus package. As for the big Bob Marley joint depicted on the sign….it’s unclear if federal dollars paid for that.

Trail paid for by US taxpayers

In Gustavus, a small town which is the gateway to Glacier Bay, a brand new $20 million dock is being built with federal stimulus dollars. I spoke with the owner of my hotel and with the pilot of my whale watching boat, and both said that the dock was completely unnecessary. But it was employing a whole bunch of skilled laborers, so many that they had to come in from Juneau, since Gustavus didn’t have that many construction workers.

The new dock at Gustavus

Here is a photo of all the pickups and SUVs owned by the people working on the dock. Again, these are local workers being paid with US taxpayer dollars.

Construction worker trucks

I have no problem with stimulus dollars paying people to build paths and docks; that is how a government stimulus package works. The government injects money into the system to boost employment and spending.  My problem is with a state that talks about how it doesn’t believe in the stimulus or in federal help at all while it continues to take as much federal money as it can.

Advertisements

Voters are Ill-informed; Politicians are Hypocrites

The NY Times recently ran an article about Alaska, which attracted my attention since I was planning a vacation to that giant state (in fact, I am drafting this entry on my flight to Anchorage). But this article wasn’t about fishing, or the awesome glaciers, or how to avoid being eaten by bears. No, this article was about the irony of Alaska being the home of such anti-government fervor (Sarah Palin’s small government views are pretty representative of her home state) while at the same time being the largest recipient of federal stimulus money.

For example, Alaska state representative Carl Gatto called to roll back the federal government’s “entire socialistic experiment in federal hegemony.” Yet he also celebrated that “for every $1 we give them in taxes for highways, they give us back $5.76.”  Jay Ramras, another state rep, embodied the dichotomy in a single quote: “If you want to feed us federal money like it’s a narcotic and make the state into a junkie of the U.S. Treasury, O.K.,” he allows. “But we would like to be an Emersonian Alaska and just get control of our resources.”

Of course, Alaska is not alone in this irony. There is a strong correlation between conservative states talking a big game about “government out of our business” while sucking aggressively at the federal teat. This map shows how red states take more than they give, and this chart shows traditionally republican states leading the way in receiving more federal dollars than they pay in taxes. And here is a brand new map from the NY Times based on census data.

So how do we explain this paradox? I suppose it could simply be the essential greed of humanity, people feeling that they are justified in taking as much as they can while giving as little as possible. Or it could be a canny political move, trying to drain the coffers of the government in order to force it to shrink, sort of a “starve the beast” movement at the grass roots level. But I don’t think either of those explanations fly. I think, instead, that the average voter doesn’t even make the connection between small government and services provided, between taxes paid and resources received. When voters say “don’t tax me” while taking a bridge paid by other citizen’s taxes, they don’t see the irony because they don’t even realize that taxes are what pay for bridges. See this piece by James Kwak on how the whole tax & service thing works, and this piece by David Sirota on how American voters seem to lack the ability to remember what policies worked or didn’t work in the past.

The politicians, on the other hand, who vote for these policies, like Carl Gatto and Jay Ramras from the NY Times article, or Ted Stevens, a major obtainer of federal dollars for the state, should actually understand how taxes and services are related. I mean, they are professional legislators, and this is a basic part of government budgeting. They are not ignorant, like the voters; they’re just hypocritical, saying and doing whatever they must to get reelected. They recognize the irony in calling for lower taxes while trumpeting the bacon they bring home from Washington…they just don’t care. They use that irony to cynically take advantage of the electorate’s lack of understanding, and it gets them elected year after year.

I just returned from a week in Alaska, where I saw this phenomenon in action multiple times. There will be follow-on posts on this topic.

Modern Corruption: Deny Until the Cell Door Closes

Kwame Kilpatrick, the mayor of Detroit, is caught up in a maelstrom of legal troubles. Accused of firing several police officers because they wouldn’t help cover up his affair with a one of his employees, he denied the affair until text messages revealed his deceit. He has been charged by the Wayne County prosecutor with several felonies, but he refuses to step down. He was just jailed for violating the terms of his bond, and today is being charged with two felony counts of assaulting a police officer. Still he denies all wrongdoing and refuses to resign. It’s hard to imagine that the city is being well run while its mayor is in and out of jail, but Kilpatrick is clearly more interested in his name than in the city he was elected to lead. Does Mayor Kilpatrick have no sense of decency?

But really, Kilpatrick is just an example of a growing trend among corrupt politicians: pretend it isn’t happening, totally reject all claims, and continue your denials until the day you’re in prison.

Senator Larry Craig, so amusingly charged with soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom, has categorically denied that was his intent, and his famous “wide stance” excuse became the butt (I couldn’t resist) of much humor on the late night shows.

The FBI found $90,000 in marked bills in the refrigerator of Congressman William Jefferson, but he denies all wrongdoing and refuses to resign. Senator Ted Stevens was just indicted for failing to disclose oil company gifts. He claims complete innocence and is planning his reelection campaign. Congressman John Doolittle (what a great name for a modern congressman) was implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal and admits paying his wife a 15% commission on all campaign contributions, but he denies any mendacity and refused to resign, choosing instead to retire at the end of his term.

Gavin Newsom, the mayor here in San Francisco, had an affair with his best friend’s wife, at a time when both the friend and the wife were on Gavin’s payroll. Mayor Newsom at least admitted the affair, but did so using the popular new excuse of addiction, and immediately went into treatment. There was no talk of him resigning, and in fact Mayor Newsom is gearing up a run for Governor.

The common theme in all these examples is the refusal to resign for the good of the office and its constituency. These politicians declined to admit or take responsibility for their actions and the impact those actions could have. They were all elected to serve, but ultimately they put their own need (to claim innocence) above the need (for effective representation) of the people who elected them. Whatever happened to admitting wrongdoing? It’s not like these guys are going to get away with it; if the accusations are true, they will be convicted and go to jail. But honestly, I don’t care if they keep denying – just get out of office so that somebody effective can come in and serve the public.

Implications? These politicians are really part of a broader evasion of responsibility, which I will have to write about later. But for now, the main beneficiaries of this trend are media companies. If Mayor Kilpatrick and Senator Craig would do the right thing and resign, then media companies (and blogs!) wouldn’t be able to milk the stories for weeks on end.