Letters
In the Peninsula Clarion on March 9, it was reported that the Pebble Partnership (mine) developers contributed $5 million "to enhance (the Bristol Bay area) fisheries and sustain local economies." This is $1 million per year over five years "to support community-led initiatives." 050708 LETTERS 2 Peninsula Clarion In the Peninsula Clarion on March 9, it was reported that the Pebble Partnership (mine) developers contributed $5 million "to enhance (the Bristol Bay area) fisheries and sustain local economies." This is $1 million per year over five years "to support community-led initiatives."
Wednesday, May 07, 2008

Story last updated at 5/7/2008 - 2:51 pm

Reader: There's no such thing as free money

In the Peninsula Clarion on March 9, it was reported that the Pebble Partnership (mine) developers contributed $5 million "to enhance (the Bristol Bay area) fisheries and sustain local economies." This is $1 million per year over five years "to support community-led initiatives."

Is this a bribe to attempt to buy off local residents or fishermen or lodge owners who are objecting to the Pebble Mine development? No, because a bribe is generally defined as a corrupting influence in exchange for enticements, and this money would not necessarily be corrupting anyone.

Then, would this contribution be a lobbying action? No, because the term lobbying is usually reserved for paid lobbyist influence with elected officials.

Well, then, what could it be? A "free lunch"? No, because everyone in the business world knows there is no free lunch.

So, one might become suspicious, when money or other enticements are seemingly gratuitously offered, and ask: "What is the expected quid pro quo?" This term is used a lot in politics. The Latin "quid pro quo" means "something for something."

To you and me, $5 million is a lot of money, but to large corporate conglomerates like the Pebble Partnership, BP-ARCO, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Microsoft, Wal-Mart, et al, $5 million is chump-change. And since this contribution is to an Alaska-based nonprofit charity, it's also a tax write-off for the donor. Thus, this contribution does not impact the donor's profit margin at all.

I would ask, who, among you readers, thinks the Pebble Partnership is altruistic (defined as an "unselfish concern for the welfare of others") in giving their money away? We all know they are in business to make a profit from their investments, which is their bottom line.

Is Alaska's bottom line only $5 million to risk losing the Bristol Bay fisheries, pertinent clean drinking water aquifers, lakes and streams and adjacent wildlife habitats forever to cyanide, heavy metals and acid pollution?

One billion (a thousand million) dollars would not be worth this risk.

Everyone involved should think long and hard before accepting one penny of this "free" money. Anyone, who accepts this money for whatever purpose, will be forever obligated to the Pebble Partnership.

Richard Hahn

Soldotna




THE MUSKEGGER

Visit Brittany Retherford's blog in which she delves a bit deeper into Southeast's natural resources.

"Goldbelt issues first shares since 1999"

Post your comments and check out other people's remarks at "The Muskegger".





Top Ads

Loading...

Top Jobs

Loading...

Top Homes

Loading...

Top Autos

Loading...

Top Rentals

Loading...
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS?

Contact Us