Talk of Alaska: The Ted Stevens Legacy

Tue, August 5, 2008
Posted in Talk of Alaska

Whether they loved him or hated him, Alaskans felt the indictment of their senior Senator like a punch in the gut. Ted Stevens’ legacy is large and undeniable — he may be the single most influential Alaskan of the past half century. Can you imagine what Alaska would be like, had there been no Ted Stevens?

Join us in defining the Stevens legacy — positive and negative — on this week’s Talk of Alaska.

Download Audio (MP3, 60 min)

HOSTS: Steve Heimel, APRN and Michael Carey, independent journalist

GUESTS:

Terrence Cole, history professor, University of Alaska Fairbanks
Live callers statewide

PARTICIPATE:

Post your comment before, during or after the live broadcast (comments may be read on air)
Send e-mail to talk [at] aprn [dot] org (comments may be read on air)
Call 550-8422 in Anchorage or 1-800-478-8255 during the live broadcast

LIVE Broadcast: Tuesday, August 5, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. on APRN stations statewide

SUBSCRIBE: Get Talk of Alaska updates automatically by e-mail, RSS or podcast

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Comments

8 Comments to “Talk of Alaska: The Ted Stevens Legacy”

Robert Lee on August 5, 2008 at 10:25 am

All the good ole boys are coming out of the woodwork to support the unsupportable. Alaska is not an egalitarian place and Ted Stevens is living proof of that. There is no tragedy here because there must be an ending to the story in the dramatic sense in order for it to be a tragedy or comedy. I think the word you were looking for is irony.
Joe Holbert on August 5, 2008 at 10:45 am

As his press secretary, I sat in the corner and watched a spirited debate in Governor Hickel’s home office in Turnagain following the death of Senator Bob Bartlett. The argument focused on whether the governor — himself headed for D.C. as President Nixon’s secretary of the interior — should appoint his close friend Carl Brady, a state senator, or Ted Stevens to fill the Bartlett seat. Brady support prevailed for much of the day. But in the end Hickel decided that appointing Ted promised the best representation and benefits for Alaska and Alaskans. Concern about Ted’s short fuse, temper and independence was more than balanced by his Washington expertise, influence and contacts in D.C. and the Department of the Interior.
Steven J Heimel on August 5, 2008 at 11:36 am

Quite a few callers seemed to feel I was too easy on Stevens. Maybe so. But I wanted to reach to deeper issues than the Elmendorf housing contract and Ben and Trevor and the marketing earmark. The show was not designed to about all the great - and not so great - things he has done for Alaska, though that was part of it. It was about who we are as Alaskans, and what his part has been in who we are.

My personal perception is that he grew to be out of touch with the real Alaska. He was taking counsel from the wrong people. He was letting his former aides get away with an awful lot. But it is not clear to me that he himself had evil or venal motives in those things.

There are basic issues of civics, of history and of the conduct of public life to be explored in the story of Senator Ted Stevens, and we are just beginning. He is still booked for the show on the 19th.
Burr Deming on August 6, 2008 at 7:41 pm

Our site has taken a somewhat more sympathetic view of the good Senator than most, regarding his troubles as more symptomatic of the party as a whole. Thanks for adding the opportunity for comment.
Steven J Heimel on August 8, 2008 at 2:49 pm

With three Grand Juries still at work and the former Governor’s Chief of Staff having pled out it would appear that there will be more to come.
Dan O'Neill on August 9, 2008 at 6:36 pm

What a disappointing program. The host and guests (Steve Heimel, Michael Carey, and Terrance Cole)spoke for perhaps 90% of the hour, and I think that every single one of their comments were sympathetic to Ted Stevens, defended him, excused him, offered him the benefit of the doubt, argued with callers who felt otherwise. (I listened on line and took notes.) I can’t see that the tenor of the conversation could have been more favorable to the senator if it had been Stevens’ campaign staff in the studio.

Meanwhile, every single caller tried without success to direct the three presenters’ attention to solid circumstantial evidence of corruption.

I found I disagreed with all of Terrence’s defenses. It’s not Stevens’ fault, he argued, if the senator is so effective that the system of checks and balances couldn’t control him. The moral core of that argument is that if you can get away with stealing public money, say, it’s ethical perforce.

Another one: Every person in Alaska has benefited from funds Ted delivered, so in a way we are all complicit and have no cause to point to Stevens’ apparent illegalities. By that logic, if we drive on a federally maintained highway, we endorse in advance any crimes our representatives in Congress might commit. The argument also forgets that many of us DID repudiate Stevens-delivered pork by voting against him.

A third: Cole says, “To say Stevens’ primary goal was to enrich himself is complete nonsense.” But that misstates the premise. Who knows or cares what Ted’s “primary goal” might have been? The list of reported instances where Stevens directed money to entities that in turn enriched either himself, his family, friends, or business associates is as long as my arm. One corrupt deal answers sufficiently for the case against.

I see Ted will appear on the program on the 19th. I look forward to hearing from some guests with a point of view at least as critical of Stevens as these four presenters are forgiving.
Steven J Heimel on August 13, 2008 at 5:36 am

Dan, I don’t think the three of us were trying to form a whitewash crew. Would it not have been presumptuous to attempt to try an indicted man on a radio show? This was a show about history, not about whether Ted Stevens is corrupt. This was an attempt to get a first impression - on the run - of how history is going to see this incredible episode we are going through. And in the process to get a pulse check on the body politic in the midst of a crisis.

There will be time later to talk about the fishery stuff, the aborted JL Properties transaction, and no doubt other unsavory things. But at this point it’s time to wait and see what the co-operating witnesses and prosecution efforts yield. Not to mention juries.
Amy Johnson on August 19, 2008 at 10:48 am

Senator Stevens:

I am a registered Democrat and in the past have voted for you only when the opposing democratic candidate has been way too out there to even give a sympathy vote.

I believe that, no matter what my feelings are about your politics, you have done more for Alaska than any other congressman during your tenure. I also plan to vote for you in the general election.

It is very easy to criticize someone when they are down. Hopefully, the bulk of the public is recognizing that when judging you they should also look at their lives and see how they have also depended on you.

Good luck!