By A.M. Johnson
August 19, 2011
Returning from an out of town trip and reading the Ketchikan Daily News issues during that absence, a sequence of items regarding Federal intrusion raise continued concern with the Federal Government agencies over-riding States Rights.
Aug 13, Begich, Murkowski slam ANWR proposal, call the action of a Arctic National Park a waste of time and money. (Under States Rights, this would be a non-issue as Alaska would address development of all the aortic lands within her boundary.)
Aug 16, Ketchikan Daily News editorial "Fish and Wildlife (Federal) is behaving as if it cares less about the nation's MUCH LESS (emphasize less) Alaska's well being". (Under States Rights, All the concerns expressed in the editorial would be subject of discussion within the boundaries of the State with State agencies)
Aug 17, U.S.Forest Service approves exploration work on Niblack project, and added that the exploration work on Greens Creek to continue.(Under States Rights, the development of Alaska resources would be under the control of Alaska agencies.)
Aug 17, Second article: Murkowski on the Yukon River arrest. Quote "Federal agencies was topped out" reference to the Federal overreach of power. State Attorney Burns quote: " Once you lose a right, it's so difficult to regain it" end quote. (Under States Rights, these lands would be under the control of the State. Under States Rights, this would have been a non-issue and if not, Alaska State Troopers are qualified to address such an issue.
When the Congress recognizes the Federal Government can not afford to continue management of vast amounts of Federal holdings within individual States the movement to return these Federal controlled lands will allow for the defunding of various agencies currently inflicting these worrisome Federal edicts that restrict and discourage development by the private sector. One of the first in my opinion, would be the Department of Agriculture, home for the U.S. Forest Service.
Aug 19, Ketchikan Daily News article on Whitman Lake project: quote: Moen, Hatch association consultant stated, "New requirement by U.S.Forest Service added $523,000.00 added cost to project" (See above as regards to the U.S. Forest Service).
What is the common thread in these articles and editorial? What could go wrong? Could not the State of Alaska deal with each of these issues?
I say "Yes!"
In my opinion,the Federal Government has and continues to demonstrate, the power of "over reach" far beyond that allowed within the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Ask yourselves regarding these incidents, how better the State of Alaska would deal with them, or that they would have become an issue? Who better to determine what actions and safeguards are required than those who live and work in this State or any State of the Union with similar concerns.
The quicker a majority of the individual States come to realize the horrid Federal restrictions and regulations that are killing the private economy and community projects the quicker Congress will be influenced to address States Rights over Federal mandates.
The Ketchikan Daily News editorial staff recognize this over reach, Senator Murkowski and Representative Young recognize the hell Congresses, prior and present, have created with lack of leash on all the various Federal regulatory agencies as demonstrated with multitudes of misdirected mandates, always restrictive,never helpful. The Yukon river incident being one.
Perhaps many of the readers will recognize the current trend of the wonderful and great nation of America failing on economic development and unemployment increases. In my opinion, it is the actions of these regulatory agencies that are contributing to this continuing failure. Our local example is the U.S.Forest Service.
Individual USFS employees are free to defend the agency, None bare responsibility or any obligation to the results of their actions. Their position when challenged is "We are following regulations, nothing personal, just doing our job."
So be it, defund the agency and turn over the authority, responsibility, obligations, and funding to the State of Alaska. Alaska has the ability to manage and monitor the natural assets as well as any from distant places with a laptop and briefcase! Alaska natural resource agencies would answer to elected representation voted on by Alaskans. Alaska would lead the world on natural resource development.This should be the mantra for ALL the 50 States.
About: "Life long senior citizen concerned with Federal over reach of Alaska"
Received August 19, 2011 - Published August 22, 2011
Viewpoints - Opinion Letters:
and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Sitnews.
Your full name, city and state are required for letter publication.