Reply #2: chill out... [View All]

[jljamison]

people -
the federal excise tax on fuel goes into the highway trust fund. That trust fund is then allocated back to the states using a legislated formula. The money going to alaska was money alaska was entitled to.

An earmark is just a way to say "a chunk of this money will be spent in the following way" usually bought and paid for by some lobbyist which in this case would circumvent Alaska's Dept of Transportation's deliberative process they use to allocate federal highway dollars.

Maybe it isn't quite that simple, but that is my basic understanding. If anyone can enlighten me, please do.

Ask yourselves this question: given that you pay all of those gas taxes that go to the federal government, how would you feel as a resident of your state if most or all of that money went to some other state and your state got stiffed by the feds?

So Palin I don't think did anything wrong by "spending" the money that would have gone to the bridge. Alasaka needs good roads and needs to maintain its bridges and transportation infrastructure just like any other state.

But her politicking on the earmark issue is BS. She was for it before she was against it, and she did in fact seek other earmarks for other purposes.