With the hunger versus heat crisis that happened in Western Alaska this winter, I wonder how serious our leaders are when it comes to building up a wide array of transportation infrastructure in rural Alaska. I personally believe that now is the time to start building a network of gravel roads stretched across Alaska.
There is the proposed Yukon River Highway, but I believe that the tribes should take it up as a sovereign issue. I mean that there shouldn't be any new bridges over the Yukon at Tanana and over the Koyukuk River at Koyukuk to constrict runaway development in this vast area. Yet build a paved highway running from Kaltag to Nome.
If you look at my other site http://accessparty.com you could find my rural roads page and other pages on the site to really determine your own thoughts about how I justify building a network of new roads to many villages.
Further advancing my ideas is the humanitarian crisis that occured a short time ago. That alone should in all context of the issue be reason enough to launch a new massive humanitarian effort to give a new mode of transportation to rural Alaskans that is way behind America and urban Alaska.
The military launched a massive effort with their broad resources in building the Alaska-Canadian Highway in order to move supplies to military bases in Alaska. It is in this same type of context, but as a humanitarian effort not for war, that I argue that the State, Federal and Tribal governments to coordinate such an ambitious project. The Tribes have considerable human resources just as the military did when they built the Alcan Highway.
We need our own Rural Alaska 'Recovery and Reinvestment Act'. Think of State and Federal savings when spending tax dollars on Rural areas. Think of reversing the outmigration of the villages. Think of bringing educated natives home. Think of tourists. Think of a new Alaska where we can all be called equal regardless of where we live. Think of your fellow Alaskans and your fellow Americans.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Monday, April 20, 2009
Capitol Move
Here is a part of the Associated Press article printed in ADN today.
JUNEAU -- A new report about an old issue says moving the state capital from Juneau would devastate the economy in the region.
Jim Calvin, lead researcher for the Juneau-based McDowell Group, said if the capital moved Juneau would lose between a quarter and a third of its economy.
The report was paid for by the Alaska Committee, a group dedicated to keeping Alaska's capital in Juneau. McDowell Group researchers used state data on the work force and location of state government jobs.
If the capital was moved, total employment losses could be between 4,358 and 5,810 jobs, the report said. It estimated Juneau would lose about 29 percent of its 30,000-plus residents.
The relative importance of state government to Juneau's economy has dropped somewhat since a similar study in 1992, Calvin said. That's because tourism has grown. Cruise visitors, for example, doubled to about 1 million a season in the past decade.
The report is openly one-sided in their argument for keeping our colonial capitol. With comments arguing for a capitol move or against. The comments bring up valid points, such as the larger issues of dealing with energy and building up a statewide surface transportation system. Others bring up newer arguments for moving the capitol, such as access and the special interests that can afford to lobby in such an isolated location.
There were a few comments about modern communications being a way to contact your representatives, but there is nothing more effective than getting a one-on-one sit down with your elected official, which is hard and expensive to do with them being in Juneau. I'm sure they enjoy their privacy, but they are public officials. Alaska needs to evolve and progress if we are to make it in an increasingly global economy. I say to move the capitol to Anchorage and that is my firm opinion.
JUNEAU -- A new report about an old issue says moving the state capital from Juneau would devastate the economy in the region.
Jim Calvin, lead researcher for the Juneau-based McDowell Group, said if the capital moved Juneau would lose between a quarter and a third of its economy.
The report was paid for by the Alaska Committee, a group dedicated to keeping Alaska's capital in Juneau. McDowell Group researchers used state data on the work force and location of state government jobs.
If the capital was moved, total employment losses could be between 4,358 and 5,810 jobs, the report said. It estimated Juneau would lose about 29 percent of its 30,000-plus residents.
The relative importance of state government to Juneau's economy has dropped somewhat since a similar study in 1992, Calvin said. That's because tourism has grown. Cruise visitors, for example, doubled to about 1 million a season in the past decade.
The report is openly one-sided in their argument for keeping our colonial capitol. With comments arguing for a capitol move or against. The comments bring up valid points, such as the larger issues of dealing with energy and building up a statewide surface transportation system. Others bring up newer arguments for moving the capitol, such as access and the special interests that can afford to lobby in such an isolated location.
There were a few comments about modern communications being a way to contact your representatives, but there is nothing more effective than getting a one-on-one sit down with your elected official, which is hard and expensive to do with them being in Juneau. I'm sure they enjoy their privacy, but they are public officials. Alaska needs to evolve and progress if we are to make it in an increasingly global economy. I say to move the capitol to Anchorage and that is my firm opinion.
Saturday, April 18, 2009
Erosion Report
I was surprised to find the erosion report sitting in obscurity in The Village Rural Blog on ADN.com, considering that this is a top issue in Rural Alaska. Kyle Hopkins, editor of The Village even states it in his short article. He says, "Rural issues don’t get much bigger than this, with villages in danger of falling in the ocean, but few easy answers because relocation projects come with massive price tags."
What a farce this blog is. I see it as an attempt to minimize and control the efforts rural Alaskans make to advocate for the issues. In the opening statement Kyle writes, "The Village is a Daily News blog about life and politics in rural Alaska." I have written him about my ideas, my blog and website with no response.
The report is 65 pages in length with some pages left blank. The report states that 178 communities were found to have reported erosion problems. ADN neglects this report considerably, only stating that 26 communities need some kind of 'immediate action'. While the report states that the Corps designated 26 communities "Priority Action Communities" - indicating that they should be considered for immediate action by either initiating an evaluation of potential solutions or continuing with ongoing efforts to manage erosion. Furthermore, stating that 69 additional communities should be considered "Monitor Conditions Communities".
Anchorage Daily News is grossly under-reporting this significant report that is vital to efforts by rural and Native organizations to seek assistance, such as where the report states under Table ES-1 that," The erosion issues in these communities warrant immediate and substantial Federal, State, or other intervention." I find the wording of this to be of importance. IMMEDIATE and SUBSTANTIAL intervention.
I have written news organizations and politicians alike on the issue of erosion. In a Letter to the Editor, I wrote that using surplus oil revenue, the State should fully fund the relocation of three PAC communities. Considering that there is no longer a surplus generating revenue, it would be politically impossible for a politician to press for a spending bill for relocation of Kivalina, Newtok, and Shishmaref.
In other related news, ADN and Fairbanks Newsminer reported that the National Weather Service Hydrologist Larry Rundquist says snowfall and the thickness of frozen ice are almost at historical averages in much of the state. This only further complicates the problem of erosion along river communities. Many individuals and businesses have reported amongst themselves purchasing flood insurance. Only another bill in Rural Alaska on top of the already horrendous cost of living out here.
The erosion problems in these PAC communities are threatening the viability of these communities. Yet I believe that the wait-and-see approach a majority of the Legislatures and Representatives are taking is simply a let-them-evacuate-when-the-time-comes and then set them up in a urban high school gymnasium until they can get them North Slope jobs and fully assimilate them into modern society. I hope and pray that this report is taken into serious consideration. Otherwise, rural Alaska may have to start talking about creating a separate state, flush with oil and gas revenues that can finance the gross neglect from the Urban dominated politics of the past.
What a farce this blog is. I see it as an attempt to minimize and control the efforts rural Alaskans make to advocate for the issues. In the opening statement Kyle writes, "The Village is a Daily News blog about life and politics in rural Alaska." I have written him about my ideas, my blog and website with no response.
The report is 65 pages in length with some pages left blank. The report states that 178 communities were found to have reported erosion problems. ADN neglects this report considerably, only stating that 26 communities need some kind of 'immediate action'. While the report states that the Corps designated 26 communities "Priority Action Communities" - indicating that they should be considered for immediate action by either initiating an evaluation of potential solutions or continuing with ongoing efforts to manage erosion. Furthermore, stating that 69 additional communities should be considered "Monitor Conditions Communities".
Anchorage Daily News is grossly under-reporting this significant report that is vital to efforts by rural and Native organizations to seek assistance, such as where the report states under Table ES-1 that," The erosion issues in these communities warrant immediate and substantial Federal, State, or other intervention." I find the wording of this to be of importance. IMMEDIATE and SUBSTANTIAL intervention.
I have written news organizations and politicians alike on the issue of erosion. In a Letter to the Editor, I wrote that using surplus oil revenue, the State should fully fund the relocation of three PAC communities. Considering that there is no longer a surplus generating revenue, it would be politically impossible for a politician to press for a spending bill for relocation of Kivalina, Newtok, and Shishmaref.
In other related news, ADN and Fairbanks Newsminer reported that the National Weather Service Hydrologist Larry Rundquist says snowfall and the thickness of frozen ice are almost at historical averages in much of the state. This only further complicates the problem of erosion along river communities. Many individuals and businesses have reported amongst themselves purchasing flood insurance. Only another bill in Rural Alaska on top of the already horrendous cost of living out here.
The erosion problems in these PAC communities are threatening the viability of these communities. Yet I believe that the wait-and-see approach a majority of the Legislatures and Representatives are taking is simply a let-them-evacuate-when-the-time-comes and then set them up in a urban high school gymnasium until they can get them North Slope jobs and fully assimilate them into modern society. I hope and pray that this report is taken into serious consideration. Otherwise, rural Alaska may have to start talking about creating a separate state, flush with oil and gas revenues that can finance the gross neglect from the Urban dominated politics of the past.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Reasonable Assistance
Since Governor Sarah Palin was selected by Senator John McCain to be his running mate a lot has happened with the discussion about the future of rural Alaska.
The price of heating fuel has taken a tremendous toll on a number of communities on the lower Yukon River. In 2005 the price was around $5/gallon in these communities, this year it is at $8/gallon. That is a 62% increase in four years! Even $5/gallon was 25% or higher than urban residents spent.
Substantial negative effects on residents that invested in fishing has increased the burden. The price hike in the expense of fuel and the poor catch made fishing near uneconomical. These factors may eventually cause the decline of Native cultures that can be felt at a more pronounced rate by those who value their native heritages and traditions. I say 'those who value', because I have seen some who only call themselves native when it suits them. I have even heard some natives say that they don't consider themselves native because they don't live the life. That's honesty.
Though I have launched heavy criticism through several published letters, I support Sarah Palin as a native and a republican. I may catch flak for either supporting or criticizing the woman for her appointments or lack of vision or supporting her legitimate concern for an expanding government that may be unsustainable.
Governor Palin recently visited some western villages to deliver food and other assistance to these proud and unique people. I am glad that she seen a part of Alaska that she's never seen before. Sad that she had to do it after she seen more of the lower 48 than her own state. It is worthwhile to commend her on her efforts, yet at the same time, she lacks vision. I feel it my obligation as a free thinker to both give her respect where respect is due and also to provide constructive criticism.
I hear no new ideas from neither the natives, the non-natives, the republicans, the democrats, or anyone launching criticism or support for or against our governor. In this two party system that we've got, we're no longer a democracy but just plain democrazy. I read the news quite often and it's simply republican base conservatives voices versus the democrat socialist liberal dictate the news media voices. So much for change.
Governor Sarah Palin mentioned during her visit to western Alaska that the youth should seek jobs on the North Slope so they could contribute to their villages. Great, it is always good to encourage people to seek rewarding work. Not so great when there is an inherent if not ignorant or absent in understanding the cultures and family connectivity in these communities.
Here is what I recommend to Sarah do as governor, or any Senator willing to take the mantle of leadership and propose a way for village residents to work on the slope. What I am talking of is proposing a tax deduction for oil companies and their contractors to pay current workers as well as new workers airfare to their hometown. Such a tax policy for the 10,000 people in the region she spoke of without a job would cost the state $40 million per year depending on airfare. Yet the wages earned by those 10,000 people would approach $360+ million per year. Vastly eclipsing the amount spent on government assistance to these same people.
Such a tax policy would be constructive in that it saves wages earned for providing for families in an inherently expensive environment. It may prove unpopular for urban residents who would see it as more government assistance to a group more often seen as recipients rather than contributors. I believe that the monthly cost of airfare easily leverages over the cost of providing broad government assistance to these same people. While providing greater opportunity for isolated communities, the state could decrease its assistance expenditures and at the same time bring hope for prosperity and cultural renewal for many Alaskans. Who knows, maybe this could even reverse the out-migration trend and help foster sustainable communities.
The price of heating fuel has taken a tremendous toll on a number of communities on the lower Yukon River. In 2005 the price was around $5/gallon in these communities, this year it is at $8/gallon. That is a 62% increase in four years! Even $5/gallon was 25% or higher than urban residents spent.
Substantial negative effects on residents that invested in fishing has increased the burden. The price hike in the expense of fuel and the poor catch made fishing near uneconomical. These factors may eventually cause the decline of Native cultures that can be felt at a more pronounced rate by those who value their native heritages and traditions. I say 'those who value', because I have seen some who only call themselves native when it suits them. I have even heard some natives say that they don't consider themselves native because they don't live the life. That's honesty.
Though I have launched heavy criticism through several published letters, I support Sarah Palin as a native and a republican. I may catch flak for either supporting or criticizing the woman for her appointments or lack of vision or supporting her legitimate concern for an expanding government that may be unsustainable.
Governor Palin recently visited some western villages to deliver food and other assistance to these proud and unique people. I am glad that she seen a part of Alaska that she's never seen before. Sad that she had to do it after she seen more of the lower 48 than her own state. It is worthwhile to commend her on her efforts, yet at the same time, she lacks vision. I feel it my obligation as a free thinker to both give her respect where respect is due and also to provide constructive criticism.
I hear no new ideas from neither the natives, the non-natives, the republicans, the democrats, or anyone launching criticism or support for or against our governor. In this two party system that we've got, we're no longer a democracy but just plain democrazy. I read the news quite often and it's simply republican base conservatives voices versus the democrat socialist liberal dictate the news media voices. So much for change.
Governor Sarah Palin mentioned during her visit to western Alaska that the youth should seek jobs on the North Slope so they could contribute to their villages. Great, it is always good to encourage people to seek rewarding work. Not so great when there is an inherent if not ignorant or absent in understanding the cultures and family connectivity in these communities.
Here is what I recommend to Sarah do as governor, or any Senator willing to take the mantle of leadership and propose a way for village residents to work on the slope. What I am talking of is proposing a tax deduction for oil companies and their contractors to pay current workers as well as new workers airfare to their hometown. Such a tax policy for the 10,000 people in the region she spoke of without a job would cost the state $40 million per year depending on airfare. Yet the wages earned by those 10,000 people would approach $360+ million per year. Vastly eclipsing the amount spent on government assistance to these same people.
Such a tax policy would be constructive in that it saves wages earned for providing for families in an inherently expensive environment. It may prove unpopular for urban residents who would see it as more government assistance to a group more often seen as recipients rather than contributors. I believe that the monthly cost of airfare easily leverages over the cost of providing broad government assistance to these same people. While providing greater opportunity for isolated communities, the state could decrease its assistance expenditures and at the same time bring hope for prosperity and cultural renewal for many Alaskans. Who knows, maybe this could even reverse the out-migration trend and help foster sustainable communities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
