This can't be good (for certain Republicans with national office aspirations). The judge in Alaska just told the five Republicans trying to stop the "Troopergate" probe to piss off (AP):
Judge Peter Michalski on Thursday threw out the lawsuit filed by five Republican state legislators who claimed the investigation had been manipulated by Palin enemies who wanted to produce a damaging report just weeks before Election Day. Their attorney, Kevin Clarkson, said the legislative body that ordered the investigation had exceeded its authority.
But Michalski agreed with defense attorney Peter Maassen, who argued that the Legislature has broad authority to investigate the governor. The mere appearance of impropriety does not mean any individual's right to fairness was violated, Michalski wrote in his decision.
"It is legitimately within the scope of the legislature's investigatory power to inquire into the circumstances surrounding the termination (of) a public officer the legislature had previously confirmed," the judge wrote.
As you can see on the right, Governor Sarah Palin is considering alternate strategies for solving this problem.
It in the meantime, Steve Branchflower, the investigator that the Alaska State Legislature hired to investigate this, is expected to turn in his report next week on October 10.
Just curious, will we ever have a slow news week again? Ever?
Palin won't build the bridge, but she's sure willing to use it
Greetings from Nowhere, Alaska. I am a three-term Ketchikan City Council member. I am, and have always been, an opponent of the bridge, but Gov. Palin is taking a cheap shot.
The purpose of the bridge was not a quicker way to the airport (which actually it wouldn't be) but a way to reach developable land. Ketchikan is 30 miles long and 4 blocks deep -- jammed between the Pacific and mountains. A large hydro project will come on-line in two years but there are very few places suitable to build additional businesses or industry on this island.
The bridge was to open up a large expanse of flat land for development on Gravina Island. It was not a project created so greedy buffoons could drive to the airport. Gov. Palin knows this but continues to trot Ketchikan out for national ridicule.
What does it say about a leader who is willing to ridicule constituents to make political points?
-- Marty West
Ketchikan
Seems it is not just the media and left wing bloggers that Sarah Palin has to watch out for.
The great crew at TPM has now dug even deeper uncovering just what it was that the State of Alaska and it's reform-minded governor were asking for. The link to TPMMuckraker is here. The link to the State of Alaska's requests is here.
Apparently, it includes $3.2 million for seal genetics research among a slew of other things. I pick this out because TPM Muckraker contrasts this with John McCain:
"We're not going to spend $3 million of your tax dollars to study the DNA of bears in Montana," McCain said earlier this year, referring to a request from Montana for federal money to study the endangered grizzly bear. "I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money."
It's amazing. You really have to wonder if Bill Clinton would have gotten away scot free with the "I did not inhale." line if Karl Rove had been his advisor. Hell, he might never have gotten impeached!
Since the single largest minority in Alaska are the Native Americans, with somewhere around 18-19% of the population claiming some descent, the focus is largely on that.
Given the governor's propensity for advertising the Yup'ik descent of her husband, Todd Palin, one has to wonder if this subject might yet become a focus for the national media.
OK. First we'll do the sensationalist part. Here is the address Alaska's Gov. Sarah Palin made to the Alaskan Independence Party:
(Clarification: I am not responsible for the annotations (blurbs) in the video. I do not necessarily agree or disagree with them.)
Now. To be fair. The current platform of the Alaskan Independence Party does not call for independence:
Platform
We pledge to exert our best efforts to accomplish the following:
To effect full compliance with the constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Alaska.
To support and defend States' Rights, Individual Rights, Property Rights, and the Equal Footing Doctrine as guaranteed by the constitutions of the United States of America and the state of Alaska.
To advocate the convening of a State Constitutional Convention at the constitutionally designated 10 year interval.
To reinforce the unalienable rights endowed by our Creator to Alaska law, by eliminating the use of the word "privilege" in the Alaska statutes.
To amend the Constitution of the State of Alaska so as to re-establish the rights of all Alaskan residents to entry upon all public lands within the state, and to acquire private property interest there in, under fair and reasonable conditions. Such property interest shall include surface and sub-surface patent.
To foster a constitutional amendment abolishing and prohibiting all property taxes.
To seek the complete repatriation of the public lands, held by the federal government, to the state and people of Alaska in conformance with Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, of the federal constitution.
To prohibit all bureaucratic regulations and judicial rulings purporting to have the effect of law, except that which shall be approved by the elected legislature.
To preserve and protect the Alaska Permanent Fund, Permanent fund earnings, earnings reserve fund and individual Permanent Fund Dividends.
To provide for the direct popular election of the attorney general, all judges, and magistrates.
To provide for the development of unrestricted, statewide, surface transportation and utility corridors as needed by the public or any individual.
To affirm and assert every possible right-of-way established under R.S. 2477 of July 26, 1866, before its repeal by the Federal Land Management Policy Act of October 21, 1976.
To support the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.
To support the complete abolition of the concept of sovereign or governmental immunity, so as to restore accountability for public servants.
To support the rights of parents to privately or home school their children.
To support the privatization of government services.
To oppose the borrowing of money by government for any purposes other than for capital improvements.
To strengthen the traditional family and support individual accountability without government interference or regulation.
To support the right of jurors to judge the law as well as the facts, according to their conscience.
To support "Jobs for Alaskans...First!"
Here's a link to their "Issues". The items in red did not make the platform.
On the other hand. The stated goal of Alaskan Independence Party is:
The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:
Remain a Territory.
Become a separate and Independent Nation.
Accept Commonwealth status.
Become a State.
The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, that Alaskans achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, and promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences.
Again, to be fair, this is not an out and out call for Independence, although that is the philosophy under which the party was founded. It is really a call for the ability to vote on one of the four options. And, no, the option for Alaskans to vote to become a separate nation in 1958 was not on the ballot.
Still, for John McCain, a person running with a "Country First" theme, it seems very odd that the vetting team would let this pass muster. At the very least they should have had some counterattack at the ready. I have seen no such effective counter as of yet. Of course, this also assumes that she was vetted. That, apparently, depends on what your idea of vetting for the next in command of the free world entails.
I am getting to the point where I think that the "Oops, we didn't really vet her properly!" strategy may cause less damage here for McCain. If you did vet her, and you knew all of this stuff, and you still picked her, then everyone has to start wondering about your ability to make decisions Senator McCain.
America's newest Vice-Presidential candidate was involved in instituting a "cash payment", as opposed to using the term bounty, which would have been overtly illegal, to those who "bring in the left forelegs of wolves taken from any of several designated control areas." She and the State of Alaska had to be taken to court to end this.
March 27, 2007 Defenders of Wildlife Asks Judge to Shut Down Palin's Wolf Bounty Program
Bounty Law Repealed in 1984 – Alaska Does Not Have Regulatory Authority to Impose New Incentives
Anchorage, AK -- Today Defenders of Wildlife, the Alaska Wildlife Alliance and the Alaska Chapter of the Sierra Club asked the Alaska Superior Court to shut down Governor Palin's $150-per-wolf bounty program citing the fact that Alaska's bounty laws were repealed in 1984 and the State has no current legal authority to implement the bounties.
"The Governor is overstepping her legal authority by offering cash payments for each wolf killed by aerial gunners," stated Tom Banks, Defenders of Wildlife's Alaska Associate. "That's a bounty by anyone's standards regardless of what they call it."
Hoping to boost the number of wolves killed this year by permitees, Palin announced the state would pay $150 for each kill. According to an Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) news release, the bounty was instituted to "motivate permittees to redouble their efforts and to help offset the high cost of aviation fuel, ADF&G will offer cash payments to those who return biological specimens to the department." The state's press release, issued last Wednesday, indicates that "Permittees will be paid $150 when they bring in the left forelegs of wolves taken from any of several designated control areas."
"Governor Palin needs to take a close look at wildlife management practice in her state and restore the use of sound science," concludes Banks. "She said would heed the will of the public, but it's increasingly clear she's only listening to that segment that is willing to sacrifice Alaska's natural heritage for the benefit of a few."
The judge is expected to make a decision fairly quickly.
Defenders and the co-plaintiffs expressed an additional concern that the bounty offered by the State will encourage the illegal killing of wolves outside the control area.
Defenders of Wildlife is represented by Mike Frank of Trustees for Alaska, a public interest law firm, and Valerie Brown, an Anchorage attorney in private practice.
Defenders Pleased As Alaska's Wolf Bounty Ends; Concern as State Targets Black Bears
Statement by Tom Banks, Defenders of Wildlife
Anchorage, AK -- In a status report filed by the state with the court on April 6 and received by Defenders of Wildlife and the other plaintiffs earlier this week, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) stated it had immediately terminated the bounty program in response to the temporary restraining order and had decided not to pursue any further “incentive- type” payments such as aviation fuel for the remainder of this predator control season. The report also stated that the Board of Game has given no indication that it intends to meet to adopt emergency regulations to allow bounties. Following is a statement from Tom Banks, Defenders of Wildlife Alaska associate.
“Defenders of Wildlife is very pleased to learn of the state's action. The Commissioner of ADF&G and the Governor violated the law in implementing the bounty program. While we are pleased with this victory, we are deeply troubled by the recent expansion of the predator control program in Unit 16B, an 11,000 square mile area north and northwest of Anchorage, to allow hunters to kill up to 1,400 of the estimated 1,500 to 2,000 black bears in this area. Most troubling is that sows and cubs are being targeted for the first time and the timing of the hunts could mean that cubs born this year could be left to starve if their mothers are killed. Lastly, airplane use is already outrageous. It'll be even more so if this expansion goes forward."
Nevertheless, George Miller (D-CA) felt compelled to introduce legislation to close the loopholes that the Alaska Department of Fish and Game was trying to exploit in the 1984 law.
And, apparently, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game still is having problems following the law on this score.
