Republican Governors
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
Alaska's Gov. Sarah Palin, along with Mark Sanford of South Carolina and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, will accept just part of the stimulus. Palin accepting just 69 percent of the stimulus. Jindal rejecting 89 million. Sanford rejecting all 700 million like a 2-year-old if he can't pay down state debt.
The governors say they will accept only money without strings attached. So the fact that they are taking majority of the stimulus money means that they are against it? Apparently staying true to their outdated and flawed fundamental Republican principles is more important to them than actually governing for the good of their constituency. If a Republican administration offered them some money it would be accepted in a heartbeat. We need government right now to help this crisis not downsize government.
But I thought the Republicans were so against the bailout? All talk as usual. A bunch of grandstanding.
They think they are so smart to deny their states the monies their people desperately need - then let them have none. And give it to other states who want it to keep more teachers in their jobs, give more unemployment help to those who have lost jobs, and rebuild crumbling roads and bridges and schools.
Alaska, South Carolina and Louisiana are all third-world-level states in terms of being last in education excellence, last in jobs, last in income levels.
These states either take it all or get nothing. What hypocrites. The pompousness of posturing for a run at presidency is embarrassingly visible in their actions.
Glad to see South Carolina, Louisiana and Alaska are better off than we thought. This is a good example of people putting politics ahead of country.
In Palin's case, good. Alaska doesn't need a dime of stimulus money when they are the biggest pork barrel state in the union. It's not only the fact that Alaska sucks up $1.87 in federal spending for every dollar it contributes. Palin has also asked for nearly $70,000,000 in earmarks for Alaska in the next federal budget.
The residents don't pay any taxes and get money for beer and "snow machines" from the state annually.
They want our money but don't want to hear how we think it should be spent. How noble.
Apparently, it is alright to take money from Exxon, who has trashed the coast of Alaska.
To break even oil needs to average $70 per barrel. Break even means to cover basic expenses for Alaska. Alaska is headed for a huge fiscal shortfall that may make California look like a good investment unless oil hits $120 per barrel by June 1.
The biggest single chunk of money Palin is turning down is about $170 million for education, including money that would go for programs to help economically disadvantaged and special needs students.
The purpose of the money is to stimulate the economy. When that happens the money will no longer be needed. So her logic that it will create a permanent need is uneducated in terms of reality. Governor believes she managed to make it without an education and thinks everyone else can do the same.
Apparently, Sarah has it all under control. Great! Other states will benefit.
This is exactly why you're not the vice-president.
Sarah, stay in your Igloo and watch for the Russians.
Anthony Burchette
Warsaw, via e-mail
Editor's Note: This letter was edited to conform more closely to the 500-word limit stated in our Letters Policy.[[In-content Ad]]
Alaska's Gov. Sarah Palin, along with Mark Sanford of South Carolina and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, will accept just part of the stimulus. Palin accepting just 69 percent of the stimulus. Jindal rejecting 89 million. Sanford rejecting all 700 million like a 2-year-old if he can't pay down state debt.
The governors say they will accept only money without strings attached. So the fact that they are taking majority of the stimulus money means that they are against it? Apparently staying true to their outdated and flawed fundamental Republican principles is more important to them than actually governing for the good of their constituency. If a Republican administration offered them some money it would be accepted in a heartbeat. We need government right now to help this crisis not downsize government.
But I thought the Republicans were so against the bailout? All talk as usual. A bunch of grandstanding.
They think they are so smart to deny their states the monies their people desperately need - then let them have none. And give it to other states who want it to keep more teachers in their jobs, give more unemployment help to those who have lost jobs, and rebuild crumbling roads and bridges and schools.
Alaska, South Carolina and Louisiana are all third-world-level states in terms of being last in education excellence, last in jobs, last in income levels.
These states either take it all or get nothing. What hypocrites. The pompousness of posturing for a run at presidency is embarrassingly visible in their actions.
Glad to see South Carolina, Louisiana and Alaska are better off than we thought. This is a good example of people putting politics ahead of country.
In Palin's case, good. Alaska doesn't need a dime of stimulus money when they are the biggest pork barrel state in the union. It's not only the fact that Alaska sucks up $1.87 in federal spending for every dollar it contributes. Palin has also asked for nearly $70,000,000 in earmarks for Alaska in the next federal budget.
The residents don't pay any taxes and get money for beer and "snow machines" from the state annually.
They want our money but don't want to hear how we think it should be spent. How noble.
Apparently, it is alright to take money from Exxon, who has trashed the coast of Alaska.
To break even oil needs to average $70 per barrel. Break even means to cover basic expenses for Alaska. Alaska is headed for a huge fiscal shortfall that may make California look like a good investment unless oil hits $120 per barrel by June 1.
The biggest single chunk of money Palin is turning down is about $170 million for education, including money that would go for programs to help economically disadvantaged and special needs students.
The purpose of the money is to stimulate the economy. When that happens the money will no longer be needed. So her logic that it will create a permanent need is uneducated in terms of reality. Governor believes she managed to make it without an education and thinks everyone else can do the same.
Apparently, Sarah has it all under control. Great! Other states will benefit.
This is exactly why you're not the vice-president.
Sarah, stay in your Igloo and watch for the Russians.
Anthony Burchette
Warsaw, via e-mail
Editor's Note: This letter was edited to conform more closely to the 500-word limit stated in our Letters Policy.[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092