The Wrangell sentinel., 1944-04-14
STATEHOOD
POLITICAL ISSUE

1ULA44IA4 496BG
 Elsewhere in this newspaper you will find an Associated Press story from the national capital reporting that four government departments War, Navy, Interior and Justice have recommended adversely on statehood. It is not surprising nor unexpected. Under our democratic processes it is one of the functions of a government agency to perpetu- ate itself. It must ever prove to Con gress that it's functions are essen iaI and necessary to obtain appro- priations and the greater need 1t shows. the greater, n a UT l y enough, become it's appropriations. With greater appropriations it can focus on enlarging it's sphere which, Of course, is nothing more than per petuation of itself, whether the re- suits are good or bad.
 IL is not our purpose here to dis Cuss bureaucracy, its merits or de- merits. but only to point out that federal agencies cannot be expected 10 support statehood. Statehood will only be gained over the opposition of Federal government agencies.
 But we can vision, as the adverse Federal department reports get a. round. the anti-statehood individ- uals pointing to them as reason Alaska should not consider state hood. Which brings us to our point.
 Statehood for Alaska is not prim- arily economic. It is not based en- tirely on abundant populatloh These are of course, contributing factors. But. actually, statehood for Alaska is fundamentally political. Only when the Congress of these limited States can be convinced that it is politically sound to make Alas ka a state in the Union will a state hood bill for the Territory De passed. Now is most excellent time to achieve that very goal.
 Two great political parties are battling vigorously, in the midst or a presidential election year, for con trol of the next Congress. It is an interesting note that both parties have in political caucuses recom- mended statehood for Alaska You will recall that Republicans ot II western states met recently in Salt Lake and did little more than en- dorse statehood for Alaska. Demo- crats have done likewise. Why this marked interest in Alaska statehood outside the Territory? Should state hood be granted and approved by the people of Alaska, the state or Alaska would have two Senators in the U. s. Senate and at least one Representative in the House. Two additional Senators from Alaska could be a very important point in determining control of the Senate.
 Despite the economic history sur rounding the admission of Nevada to statehood with smaller resources and less population than Alaska has today, the political fact is that the silver Senators of those days needed more support and by adding q couple of Senators from Nevada they were pretty sure of getting it. Nevada became a state with some thing under half the population oi Alaska today.
 Why any Alaskan can say that now isn't the time to push. state hood is a little beyond us. Now ii just exactly the time. There will not be such a good time again fol another four years.
 Of course, if Alaskans do not want a vote in the affairs of thii republic, if they want to continue to send a non-voting Delegate tC Congress and continue to be a step child of the Federal government, all we'll and good. The thing then tC do is to. join with the obstruction ists who dodge the issue of state mood by saying this is not the time - the Shattucks, the Rodens, the Zieglers, the Federal agencies and reactionary thought generally.
 But if statehood is desired now k the time to beat the drum. Remem Der statehood is not a party issue But it is definitely political issue and if you want statehood you will join with those of progressive thought, not the reactionaries who say this isn't the time"