Some comments on Marks article
A careful read of Roger Marks' Jan. 18 article shows that he argues for decreasing the Permanent Fund dividend and using that money to fund the operating budget. 1. "Funding the dividend will now require de-funding something else or raising additional revenue" is the way he puts it. And, 2. "So without the dividend the deficit would only be $200 million and less new taxes would be necessary."
Mr. Marks also says, "But are there more efficient ways to help lower income Alaskans than paying the same fixed amount to everyone?" Some conservatives would argue that it is best to let people decide for themselves how best to spend money from the dividend rather than having government decide for them. In addition, if an income tax like the one I used to pay in Alaska (1958 until it ended) was reimposed, the "everyone" referenced could use their dividend to help offset those income taxes, which would be a deduction on federal taxes. Alaska has lost millions upon millions to out-of-state workers who have not had to pay anything for the privilege of working here. We cannot afford to continue this.
One thing that Mr. Marks did not point out is that any reduction in the dividend is essentially a tax on resident Alaskans only. Some recent ads show that some interests would not mind keeping that status quo. Should we?
— John T. Jensen
Anchorage
Are these code words?
Trump's enemies claim he is not the legitimate president. If he is not legitimate, then he is not president; if he is not president, then he is a usurper. What happens to usurpers in the Middle East and South and Central America?
With that in mind, "Trump is not the legitimate president" begins to sound like a code phrase for something very dark.
Something very like King Henry's coded message to his followers … "Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?", referring to Thomas a Becket. Well, three of his followers understood the code and promptly murdered Tommy Boy.
Could it be that Trump's enemies are waiting for someone to understand their code words?
— David Cox
Palmer
Initiative doesn't violate rule
The Anchorage municipal attorney, Bill Falsey, has rejected a proposed initiative to modify the municipality's discrimination statute related to sexual orientation. Per Alaska Dispatch News, his reason is that the initiative violates the "single-subject rule." This decision is obviously one-sided and probably encouraged by the elected official for whom the attorney works. Clearly, Mr. Falsey chooses to ignore that the initiative does indeed deal with one subject, which is the free exercise of religion.
— Vince Fennimore
Anchorage
Murkowski's office not reachable
As a former educator and believer that our public school system is vital to our democracy, I was very dismayed over the confirmation hearing on Betsy DeVos for the Department of Education. Not only has she worked most of her life to weaken the public education system by pushing vouchers and charter schools, but she stated she would not rule out taking federal money out of the public system.
We need an education secretary who firmly and unequivocally believes in the public system. So I tried to call our Alaska senators to leave that message. I got through right away to Dan Sullivan's office but not Lisa Murkowski's. No one answered her D.C. phones and the voice mailbox was full. So I called her Anchorage office and got the same result — no answer and mailbox full. It is alarming to me that I was unable to contact her office in person. Too many calls? Tired of taking calls? In this scary political atmosphere, the least we can hope for is that someone answers the phone.
— Jennifer Carr
Seward
State could borrow from the fund
Why can't the state of Alaska borrow money from the Permanent Fund earnings and start paying back after five years in monthly or yearly installments without interest?
If some kind of structure is not set up, then the state of Alaska will use up all the earnings that would go toward the dividends. Also, we should put a limit on how long the Permanent Fund will help — only the next three of four years for the state to borrow money. If the state then still needs help, they need to look elsewhere.
— Sanjay Talwar
Anchorage
Small-state advantage is not why Trump won presidential race
Stephan Paliwoda (Letters, Jan. 23) — with whom I otherwise agree — repeats a common fallacy that "it was merely because of the unequal distribution of electoral votes among the states that Trump became today's president." But this is not true.
Even with the small-state advantage — if electoral votes were otherwise distributed proportionally to popular votes in each state — Trump would have lost (given that campaigns were run, and ballots were cast, as they were).
The reason Trump won is because most states give all their electoral votes to the popular vote winner in their state — effectively disenfranchising minority voters in each of those states. For example, one-third of Alaska's voters — those who voted for Hillary Clinton — were given no voice in the Electoral College.
As ruled by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore (2000), voters have a right to expect equal treatment of their votes. Disregarding minority votes in each state doesn't sound like equal treatment to me.
— Rick Wicks
Anchorage
Hostile media deserves exile
Robert Reich, in his Jan 19 column, points out that the Trump administration is considering moving the "press corps" from the "White House press room" to some other location outside the White House to allow more of the press to participate in press conferences. Reich is apparently convinced that the purpose here is to get more of the "right wing" Trump-supporting media involved, and provide room for Trump supporters and staff to be present, so as to dilute the hostile actions of the national press corps.
As far as Reich is concerned, such a move is unacceptable. Really! Who among you in your right mind, no matter left- or right-leaning, after being bashed by the national media day in and day out for more than a year, would accept such hostility and do nothing, and not be looking for ways to repel such attacks?
— Jim Lieb
Palmer
The views expressed here are the writers' own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a letter under 200 words for consideration, email letters@alaskadispatch.com, or click here to submit via any web browser. Submitting a letter to the editor constitutes granting permission for it to be edited for clarity, accuracy and brevity. Send longer works of opinion to commentary@alaskadispatch.com.