Sarah Palin (cont.)
Still in response to http://llachglin.livejournal.com/67641.html
Adressing claims 3-5. More to follow.
CLAIM: Budget surplus with veto of half a billion dollars in wasteful spending
REALITY: Alaska's 2009 budget surplus is $1.1 billion, less than half of the $2.5 billion federal subsidy to the state and more than twice the supposed savings of the vetos.
ACTUAL REALITY:
Again, I can't tell if this is a series of factoids you are stating or a critisizm. Alaska's budget surplus is $1.1 billion. Ok, are you saying they should have spent more money? Are you just making a statement? Do you think it should be more?
Less than half of the $2.5 billion federal subsidy to the state. Yes, and the subsidy to the state has all been promised to specific plans and programs. If they don't spend it where it is designated to be spent then you would be making a post saying that they got the money under false pretenses. Which way would you like to go with this?
And more than twice the supposed savings of the vetos:
The vetos are not supposed, they are documented fact. Sarah's platform in AK has been focused on lowering government spending on unnecessary things. She and the Legislature went through the budget and cut out unnecessary expeditures. How is this a problem?
CLAIM: Suspended fuel tax
REALITY: $40 million in state gas taxes were suspended by the legislature, and signed by the governor as a short-term measure. This is essentially the "gas tax holiday" idea that McCain has floated in the past.
ACTUAL REALITY:
Ok. The state can afford it and it's good for the people who live in the state. The key word here is "short-term". It isn't intended to solve all of the problems, just to give the citizens a break while they look to longer term solutions.
CLAIM: Championed earmark reform
REALITY: Alaska still gets more earmarks than almost every state, and Palin herself has accepted and kept earmark money, most notably from the "Bridge to Nowhere." Palin requested several earmarks in 2008. When she was mayor of Wasilla, she lobbied for and received $27 million in earmarks for a town of 6000 people--more than $4000 per resident. Note that according to the Anne Kilkenny letter, Wasilla was left with a $22 million deficit after Palin left for the statehouse, despite these earmarks.
ACTUAL REALITY:
Governor Palin is not single handedly responsible for the earmark money that is requested or granted. She did originally support the "Bridge to Nowhere" and when she had more experience in her office she changed her view. It is not unreasonable for her to have done so. The money is in the Alaska budget. Once money has been granted by the federal government there is no process for giving it back. The money, however, before it was granted was redesignated for other projects. All the information you could ever want to read on the subject is available in a 166 page budget analysis located here www.legfin.state.ak.us/Overview/Overview2009.pdf.
The Anne Kilkenny letter is full of things which are untrue. While Mayor of Wasilla (and this is according to Wasilla residents whom I personally know) Palin improved roads, built a new park, increased traffic to Wasilla by bringing in new businesses, and yes proposed the new sports building (which was voted on by the Wasilla people and approved). She did not make that decision single handedly. The sports building has been a huge draw in Wasilla and is something the people in town love. Particularly the students who prior to its being built were forced to drive to other towns (up to three hours for some) in order to practice.
I have spoken with people in Wasilla. This "small town where everyone knows everyone" was surprised by the letter purported to have been written by one of their own. No one I spoke to had any idea who Kilkenny was. Most of the public reaction to her letter have been shock and derision that the people in the lower 48 are getting excited over the crap that the letter contained.
Adressing claims 3-5. More to follow.
CLAIM: Budget surplus with veto of half a billion dollars in wasteful spending
REALITY: Alaska's 2009 budget surplus is $1.1 billion, less than half of the $2.5 billion federal subsidy to the state and more than twice the supposed savings of the vetos.
ACTUAL REALITY:
Again, I can't tell if this is a series of factoids you are stating or a critisizm. Alaska's budget surplus is $1.1 billion. Ok, are you saying they should have spent more money? Are you just making a statement? Do you think it should be more?
Less than half of the $2.5 billion federal subsidy to the state. Yes, and the subsidy to the state has all been promised to specific plans and programs. If they don't spend it where it is designated to be spent then you would be making a post saying that they got the money under false pretenses. Which way would you like to go with this?
And more than twice the supposed savings of the vetos:
The vetos are not supposed, they are documented fact. Sarah's platform in AK has been focused on lowering government spending on unnecessary things. She and the Legislature went through the budget and cut out unnecessary expeditures. How is this a problem?
CLAIM: Suspended fuel tax
REALITY: $40 million in state gas taxes were suspended by the legislature, and signed by the governor as a short-term measure. This is essentially the "gas tax holiday" idea that McCain has floated in the past.
ACTUAL REALITY:
Ok. The state can afford it and it's good for the people who live in the state. The key word here is "short-term". It isn't intended to solve all of the problems, just to give the citizens a break while they look to longer term solutions.
CLAIM: Championed earmark reform
REALITY: Alaska still gets more earmarks than almost every state, and Palin herself has accepted and kept earmark money, most notably from the "Bridge to Nowhere." Palin requested several earmarks in 2008. When she was mayor of Wasilla, she lobbied for and received $27 million in earmarks for a town of 6000 people--more than $4000 per resident. Note that according to the Anne Kilkenny letter, Wasilla was left with a $22 million deficit after Palin left for the statehouse, despite these earmarks.
ACTUAL REALITY:
Governor Palin is not single handedly responsible for the earmark money that is requested or granted. She did originally support the "Bridge to Nowhere" and when she had more experience in her office she changed her view. It is not unreasonable for her to have done so. The money is in the Alaska budget. Once money has been granted by the federal government there is no process for giving it back. The money, however, before it was granted was redesignated for other projects. All the information you could ever want to read on the subject is available in a 166 page budget analysis located here www.legfin.state.ak.us/Overview/Overview2009.pdf.
The Anne Kilkenny letter is full of things which are untrue. While Mayor of Wasilla (and this is according to Wasilla residents whom I personally know) Palin improved roads, built a new park, increased traffic to Wasilla by bringing in new businesses, and yes proposed the new sports building (which was voted on by the Wasilla people and approved). She did not make that decision single handedly. The sports building has been a huge draw in Wasilla and is something the people in town love. Particularly the students who prior to its being built were forced to drive to other towns (up to three hours for some) in order to practice.
I have spoken with people in Wasilla. This "small town where everyone knows everyone" was surprised by the letter purported to have been written by one of their own. No one I spoke to had any idea who Kilkenny was. Most of the public reaction to her letter have been shock and derision that the people in the lower 48 are getting excited over the crap that the letter contained.