WOW.

Raise a glass to Alaskans. Bless their little hearts, and may we all follow their lead.

I've flown into that airport and taken the ferry ride. I think that even if they built the bridge, I'd still prefer to take the boat.

Lots and lots of pork in federal spending in AK. They should drill for that and for ANWAR oil.

I like the sentiment, but can't help wishing Louisiana had to return some of its "levee" money that never went to a levee to pay for rebuilding.

I want to cry. That is so wonderful.
Wonder if it'll fly, though.

skinbad, I think we can safely assume that money made its way to 3,000-a-night hookers long ago.

If, and that is a big "If" this is correct, it should be a huge story. The MSM wants a piece they can sensationize? This is the perfect opportunity. They can hype this one all they want to, but I truly doubt it will make a splash in all but the moderate - to - right areas.

Alaska gets the most fed spending in both normal and per capita terms. All for a state with 660,000 people and $32b in the bank.

wait, I thought DeLay said we were running at peak gummint efficiency!... God bless the locals who know otherwise and all willing to say so...

Seriously - why not just GIVE the 50 people on the island some really pimped out all-weather hovercrafts, a million gallons of gas for'em, and free lifetime pimpmobile on-site shop service?

That would be a lot cheaper than building the bridge.

The bridge is just going to encourage unwanted visitors, stray animals, and allow URBAN BLIGHT to find its way onto the island.

'Those who follow politics know that Alaskans get an outsized share of pork'?? I follow politics quite closely, born and raised here in the 49th state. Are from here?

That bridge to nowhere you're referring to... would that be the Metlakatla bridge, or the bridge from Anchorage to Point McKenzie?

Neither is quite what you would call a bridge to nowhere. They both have their uses and they both will stimulate and enable growth in areas that need it. I reckon I could be missing another bridge though.

On the other hand, I've not heard a thing about what you're talking about. I do recall Nagin saying something to the effect that the levees were not repaired because Alaska kept getting the money for, I reckon it was outsized pork products' , or some such. However, as anyone who follows politics knows, Nagin is an idiot. They had plenty of money to fix them, but didn't.

I wouldn't mind a point in the right direction to these letters to the editor you're referring to.

A road trip over a $315 bridge to a nearly uninhabited island, or a 7-minute ferry ride to get to said island?

Yeah, that bridge is REALLY necessary.

$315 million that is.

If it's the Ketchikan/Gravina Bridge, the federal rules prohibit building a road system off the airport side of the airport ferry. The ferry can only be used to service the airport. (Penalty is having to give back all the airport ferry funding.)

Might have been easier, and certainly would have been cheaper, to try to get that restriction waived.

Alaska's economy has been crippled by the "environmental" rules. Most of the state is owned by the feds, and most of the resources in that land are untouchable. That's why Alaska's economy is, frankly, in the trashcan. Sure, we have a lot of money saved up. It's going to have to last when the oil income vanishes because we don't have the civilian industrial infrastructure required for a decent tax base. We cannot build one up.

Stupid d***n condo-conservationists want Alaska to be pristine wilderness spotted with quaint and primitive villages for them to look at in their travel magazines, they can pay for the privilege.

There's also a crazy idea among many that land in government hands has value. It does not. It is a cost center, pure and simple. Government makes money off cash flow, and land tied up under government ownership creates no income.

Where do you live Phillep? I'm a former resident of North Pole and Eielson A.F.B.

Sure, we have a lot of money saved up. It's going to have to last when the oil income vanishes because we don't have the civilian industrial infrastructure required for a decent tax base. We cannot build one up.

You're thinking wrong - become a gay destination. They bring money, gentrify, etc. What gay center isn't economically successful? San Fran, Key West, Provencetown, etc. Winners every one!

Culture shock sure, but the economic advantages to going gay are undeniable.

Throw in a bizzare animal sex theme as well and you'll be rolling in jack in no time. What jet setting cash heavy perv could resist the lure of doing a bull moose au-naturale? Its compelling, very compelling.

I shared a duplex log cabin in North Pole with a couple of lesbian jr high school teachers. Point is, I think Alaskans tend to not care much about other peoples sexual preferences (human or otherwise)

See, you're all set then.

Forget about that hard industrial stuff and become a gay tourist/service economy.

The tree huggers will be happy, and the moose will get some variety if you do the animal perv thing.

Here's a quote by Mike Carney, the Ketchikan Airport Manager, from The Anchorage Daily News, Sept. 18, 2005.

"at least one of the ferries will still run, even with a bridge. The bridge will likely be shut down sometimes because of windes". "I can get a medevac out of here on a jet a lot quicker (by ferry) than you would with a bridge"".

This is the Ketchika Airport Manager folks. Also, the bridge cost has been quoted as $233M and $315M. My guess is that the final cost will be over $400M. Even Gov. Murkowski stated in a meeting in Ketchikan a few months ago that this is just the beginning...meaning that the price will likely go much higher.

I've taken the Ketchikan Airport ferry many times and it would be much less expensive and much more cost effective to improve the ferry system so that it ran 24/7/365 at no charge.

Geeze, the Ketchikan burough can't provide adequate services to all of the burough now, just what do they think they can provide on Gravina Island?