"I told the Congress "thanks, but no thanks," for that Bridge to Nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves."
Now, to refresh your memory, the Bridge to Nowhere unleased a fire storm of fury over the wasteful, downright negligent practice of earmarks. The bridge -- championed by Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska (recently indicted on ethics charge) -- was to cost as much as $398 million to construct and would connect a remote island of about 7,000 people with an even more remote island of about 50 people (currently serviced by a ferry boat). Lawmakers in the House and Senate decided to drop the project after it was derided by critics as "pork-barrel spending" at its most blatant.
Obviously any rational person would oppose it -- except Sarah Palin didn't. That's right, when asked by the Anchorage Daily News during the 2006 Governor's race whether she supported the proposed funding for the bridge she said:
"Yes. I would like to see Alaska's infrastructure projects built sooner rather than later. The window is now-while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."
Her support was lauded in the Ketchikan Daily News where the late editor, Lew Williams Jr., said Palin was the only gubernatorial candidate who consistently supported the the bridge.
What caused Palin to change her mind about supporting the bridge? In her words (Spet 21, 2007):
"Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project and it's clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island".
So it looks like she opposed the bridge after it became apparent it was never going to get built. You show 'em Sarah!