EPA to review Pebble Mine (highlights from Mudflats)

Mudflats had an excellent post about the EPA's involvement in Pebble Mine, and the federal government's involvement with Alaska in general.

It's always amazed me how much Alaskans (and especially Alaskan politicians) can rail against the federal government, yet many, MANY times the involvement of the federal government was neccessary to stop the overreaching of the state and state politicians. In any case, Ms. Muckraker says it much better than I:

In towns with no indoor plumbing, fuel at more than $10 a gallon, and communities where schools can be hundreds of miles apart, it’s understandable that Alaskans find it difficult sometimes to “go with the flow” and let those bureaucrats in DC legislate what we do on the tundra from an office in a white marble building thousands of miles away... What would make us frontier-minded, libertarian, get off my lawn Alaskans actually thank a federal agency?

If the relationship between Alaska and the federal government can be described as misunderstood, the relationship between Alaska Native people and the federal government can only be summed up as, "It's complicated."

Where federal intervention in Native issues was the Big Bad Wolf only a few decades ago, federal intervention is coming to the point of being the best option for some Native issues - like subsistence.

As Muckraker says, we can only wait on what happens with the science, but here's hoping...

Alaska Teritorial Guard benefits

If you haven't heard, last week the senate voted to keep the language in the defense authorization act to keep retirement pay to the veterans who served in the Alaska Territoral Guard.

Sen. Begich press release

Sen. Murkowski press release

From Begich:

Sens. Begich and Murkowski introduced a bill providing for the pensions to be restored to the ATG members, but were also successful in getting the language into the Defense Authorization Act. Concern arose after the SAP came out questioning the pensions and stating ATG service was state service and therefore not eligible for computation of retired pay.

I happened upon this commentary about it, and thought it was a great little history about the guard, not to mention some plain facts:

Alaskan Senators Lisa Murkowski (R) and Mark Begich (D) successfully brought forth legislation to restore full retirement pay to the surviving members of the ATG who qualify, and they have sent a letter to President Obama asking him to directly intervene. The fact that this should be necessary is a disgusting travesty. The nation, and the Army in particular, owe a debt of personal honor to these men and women – and an apology.

_

Sen. Kookesh on subsistence

What do you think?

Territorial Guard issue seems to be a no-brainer

There's an issue that has been going around the ringer for awhile now, but really came to a head last week. Honestly, I'm still trying to make sense of it. It seems pretty simple to me.

Twenty six guys, still alive today, were asked to serve their country in World War II. Okay, so a lot MORE than 26 guys were asked, but I'm talking about these guys (and so is everyone else.) They did. They protected a valuable territory - still too few people know that parts of Alaska were invaded, successfully for a time, by the Japanese. They continued to serve their country long after, over twenty years. They are all old men now, in their eighties, and they've been collecting a (SMALL!) pension for their service. They would like to continue to receive their pension. Twenty six guys.

From the Anchorage Daily News article:

State lawmakers passed a bill earlier this year to fill the pay gap until Congress made a permanent fix, but the White House said Friday it didn't think it was "appropriate to establish a precedent of treating service performed by a state employee as active duty for purposes of the computation of retired pay."

This was a WTF? moment for me. I've been a supporter of the Obama Adinistration since well before it was an Administration. In this, they have it way, WAY wrong.

I've heard stories about these men for awhile now, and always thought it was a pretty neat thing for our men to have done. Even while the Aleut people were being forced to leave their homes by the US Government, Alaska Natives served their country proudly, and bravely. It amazes me, in a time when"No Natives or Dogs" was common, that these men had no hesitation. It was, after all, the home of ancestors a millenia past they were protecting.

I'm not even sure I fully understand the "state" comment - especially since there was no state of Alaska when these men siged up - and wouldn't be for another 17 years. So the state is responsible for the program needed by the federal government, 17 years before the state government would come into existence?

From Sen. Begich in a KTUU report:

"And for us to say to them that we're not interested because someone in the chain of command... said, ‘Well, it would set a precedent,' unless you can find me another Alaska Territorial Guard program in this country, I'd have that debate and I'd say, ‘Maybe you're right,' but there is none," Begich said.

I am frankly baffled by this, and wish someone could explain this to me in a way that seems reasonable. For sixty some odd years it was reasonable to continue honoring their service, but now, suddenly, it would set a dangerous precedent?

It seems to me the only precedent the continuation of the payments is setting is that the federal government will continue to care for those that took care of us, when they were called upon. In the billions we are spending right now on pork barrel this and pet project that, we really can't scrape together 26 monthly pensions for some brave old men the majority of Americans all agree deserve it?

This really is outrageous, and I hope someone wakes up over there soon.

_

WAR is over, I can now enjoy my weekend

Palin enjoyed a triple smack-down Thursday, and I must say two of those was something of a relief.

One, in particular, was a great relief, and that of course, was the vote by the Alaska legislature to reject the confirmation of the Palin AG appointmee Wayne Anthony Ross. Anti-subsistence, anti-Native sovereignty, anti-gay Ross was shot down in a 35-23 vote. All democrats and many republicans voted against Ross, and many cited his strange statement recently that lawmakers shouldn't be worrying about "legal or illegal" when confirming Palin's senatorial appointment and just do it as a reason for their final vote.

Palin's reaction was fairly predictable about disappointment, and lawmakers doing it for "petty" reasons - like not wanting a guy who thinks gay people are degenerates and aligns with the governor no matter what being petty, I suppose. But she also called the nay voters hypocrites.

She cites the hypocrisy based off the of positive citation the legislature voted to give Ross on his 65th birthday, then voting him down now, as the hypocrisy.

Uh... two things here guv.

First - annointing someone as attorney general of the state and essentially giving him a birthday card are two pretty different things. I would HOPE there would be much more scrutination here.

Second - that's VERY pot calling the kettle black. Palin publicly praised Walt Monegan for his service and efforts just a few months before firing him.

The other two events also involve rejection of Palin appointees. The first is Palin's second (and fourth?) "appointment" to the open senate seat, Joe Nelson. He withdrew his name for the job, and was not too happy about it in his letter.

The final was the rejection of Palin's board of fisheries appointment Brent Johnson. I was gratified to see that it was not only the imbalance of the commercial fishing to sport fishing board members that made the legislators vote it down, but they also cited the lack of Alaska Native representation.

This lack has been an issue since Palin began, and I'm glad to see the legislative body recognizing it, and doing something about it.

Well, I WAS happy about it...

I spotted this bit in Obama's plan about meals for seniors, including specific allocations for Native programs. Without too much detail, I happen to know a little bit about the great importance local Native programs have right here in Anchorage - including having restrictions on how many seniors they can serve due to funding. As the details of the stimulus package are reported, it was awesome to see programs like these - very easy to ignore - get attention in such hard times.

I was very happy.

But today, with the announcement that Palin is rejecting nearly half (there's different numbers around) of the Alaskan allocation of the stimulus package so we don't "grow government", I saw this tidbit:

Palin is also turning down money for weatherization, immunization, senior meals, child care development, employment services, air quality, justice assistance grants and other programs.

I would love to, and still might, make an argument for all of those things. Immunization? Child care, when we need it now more than ever? EMPLOYMENT SERVICES? When the biggest newspaper in the state just announced today it had to cut 17% of its staff?

I like my irony funny, not tragic.

But the senior meals really hit me. Really? The "I'm making a point here" argument wins out over Elders who just want a hot meal?

These battles will be taken way beyond what I can argue - both Sen. Begich (Alaska Report) and Anchorage school superintendent Carol Comeau (Alaska Dispatch) had words about the biggest chunk Palin turned down - $170 million for education (again, heard different numbers here.) The ADN article about the school official's reaction further drove home the irony of Palin arguing she only wanted money that would help "alaskan jobs":

Much of the stimulus package money for education -- about $74 million -- was designated for poor schools and special-needs kids. It was to be spent over the next two academic years.

Most of the other money is meant to help prevent cuts to classrooms, staff and critical services.

The article pointed out some of the rural impact:

Aleutians East superintendent Phil Knight hopes Palin reconsiders.

Knight's district of six schools, all of which are accessible only by boat or plane, has 250 kids. He had planned to use his district's slated $84,000 to keep open smaller schools threatened with closure next year.

Northwest Arctic Borough superintendent Norman Eck reacted to the news in an e-mail: "I am stunned," he wrote.

His district is under intervention by the state Department of Education because of poor test scores year after year. He said he had planned to use his $1.2 million for education materials the district otherwise could not afford. High electricity and fuel costs hit his budget hard this year, and ended up being taken from money otherwise meant for kids in classrooms.

Even if Palin's argument that the funding would "only be around for two years" - Holy crap! That's TWO MORE YEARS of having an accessible school for some of these communities! In two more years, the economy could be better, the energy costs might not be diverting from the education costs - in short - you just don't know. Two years is a long time in the life of a child, and incredibly long in their education life. Why on earth are we worried about losing the programs/materials/staff two years from now when we are going to lose them right now?

It's like that sad friend you have that always cuts her relationships short because "she knows she's gonna get hurt"... My advice to that frustrating friend has always been - take a risk. You could absolutely lose out in the end, but it's just stupid to prevent the present from also being a good thing. Living with the constant anticipation of losing just means you will never have anything to lose.

Maybe analogies like that are why I'll never be balancing anyone's budget, but Palin is going to have to do a much better job of explaining why she's selling out Elders, disabled children and the unemployed.

How do you know Natives are people just like everyone else?

Masek to plead guilty to conspiracy

Because a Native representative can be just as corrupt as the white/black/whatever guy next to him.

Or her, as it were.

All right, that's a bit tongue-in-cheek, but not a good day for Alaskans. In something like 72 hours, we've sentenced one and will be accepting a plea from another of the infamous "Corrupt Bastards Club."

For the fortunatley un-enlightened, the Corrupt Bastards Club was a name many of our fine republican lawmakers took on when they decided to take ridiculously small amounts of cash (I mean really, a couple thousand dollars for your soul? At least give us the respect of selling out the voters of this state for a bigger amount!) from the now defunct/renamed Veco.

Maybe there is some satisfaction in "getting justice" or something, but really, I'm so over the whole thing. I would MUCH rather we not have had these politicians come into power and wasted our time and money in the first place. From the Anchorage Daily News article:

Prosecutors wrote that they expect Masek to plead for a further reduction in her sentence, citing "alcoholism, financial and emotional distress, and/or situational depression due to her divorce..."

The guilty plea would be the sixth conviction of a lawmaker and the 11th overall obtained by the government in the FBI's massive investigation of corruption in Alaska.

But ah well, I hope somebody somewhere is learning a lesson here. I hope... Anyone?

Though it does look like Masek has taken a page from the Cowdery defense - show up with some ailments and you might just get six months at home instead of jail time.

For those that haven't followed the Alaskan political circus that has been our government the last several years, I guide you to this handy page from the Alaska Report. The front page of the Alaska Report keeps the tally, "Feds: 11, CBC 0." Many, many more to come. Other "unnamed" states may have the "quality" corruption of major craziness and the pinnacle of sleaziness right now, but what we lack in quality, we're sure making up for in quantity.

Ok, I'm trying to get over the tongue in cheek thing.

But I really am tired of the whole thing. This last one, I am really trying to see it as a loss for the Native community, but Masek never lifted a finger for Native interests, so I think it's just a loss for ... uh... hold on.

I'll get back to you on that one.

Really, I can at least point to this as an example of why you just don't take "any Native," or "any republican" or... for crying out loud, look at their resume at least! I don't vote for any person because of their race, or who they're married to, nor do I assume that because of that race or relationship, they will act in the interest of that people group. I have proudly supported Native candidates because of what they've done, and what they represent. I have proudly supported non-Native candidates for the same reason. This woman wasn't representing Native people, but the point is she wasn't representing anyone except herself.

Maybe my more cynically tinted point is, if corruption can reach anyone at any level, regardless of their race, can we also assume the reverse is true, and excellence, honor and pride can reach anyone at any level, regardless of their race?

I'm going to bed.