Quote:
Originally Posted by Metlakatla
It isn't much of an issue to me; I suppose if pressed I'd say I'd rather the capital remain where it's at.
But truly...
Yes, it is much more than the northern suburb of Anchorage. Those communities that some of you are disparaging are communities in their own right, with identities of their own beyond simply being "close" to Anchorage. Personally, I've felt more "in" Alaska when I'm there than I ever have in SE. But that's a personal preference of mine and I'm sure as hell not gonna sit around shouting over a fence at my neighbors that my part of the state is somehow "better" than theirs.
Any state of this size is likely to have issues over the location of the capital and not everyone is going to be happy with however it turns out. But slamming other parts of the state cheapens this ridiculous enough argument no matter what "side" you're on.
|
Stating the fact that the Mat-Su valley is and always will be a bedroom community for Anchorage is NOT slamming that part of Alaska. I won't go into the various real slams that have been aimed at Juneau. None of that really makes a difference.
What does make a huge difference is whether we damage the viability of half of Alaska's population by centering government on the other half. This is a VERY serious issue, and does not need to be argued based on emotional propaganda, geo-political biases, or any of the other illogical and utterly false analysis that very commonly is foisted on the puplic... to be repeated in places such as this forum as if it were of some value.
Consider that the viability of this state depends on resources, virtually all of which come from Bush Alaska. Consider that we also need the infrastructure and the support systems that have developed in transportation hubs such as Anchorage and Fairbanks. Then consider such facts as the underfunding of educational systems in Bush areas. Consider that for more than two decades as after the oil started flowing half of Alaska was crapping in a honey bucket and did not have running water... a condition that was only relieved to some degree (now only about 1/4 of Alaska fits that description) because the North Slope Borough decided to all but bankrupt itself and install those facilities on their own without State or Federal assistance. The rest of Rural Alaska benefited from the NSB action because it embarassed Ted Stevens and the State of Alaska into action.
These are issues which will affect Alaska for the next 100 years. A capital move effort is one that, without any doubt at all, would make those types of issues worse. We prevented the Legislature from removing all State support for education on the North Slope, we've been able to force the funding of High Schools around the state, and recently have almost been able to force the State to fund maintenance of those schools. That is what we risk losing if the capital is moved.
Further, I would caution that we do not know what the future holds. Let me give you a scenario that was related to me recently by a rather sharp visitor from Silicon Valley, who fully understands the consequences of current events. Oil companies are currently drilling for oil in three directions around Barrow, and soon enough will be drilling west of us too. They have already hit at least some oil. Imagine if they were to find another Prudhoe Bay, or two. Then imagine an ice free Arctic Ocean in 30-40 years.
Now imagine how Anchorage in 2060 will have shrunk to 100,000 population, mostly as a transportation hub for the shriveling southern half of Alaska. Barrow, with a still booming growth rate, has 400,000 people and is the major port of entry to Alaska for ocean routes and airlines...
Do we move the capital to Atqasuk? And do we cut of state funding of schools in Kenai, Palmer, and Juneau?