What Can a "New Federalism" mean for Alaska? - Part 1

Back in September, before the election of Governor Palin, a group put together by the Institute of the North, compiled something called The Talkeetna Transition Report. The report served as a compilation of, "the most imaginative ideas proposed" at the Alaska Dialogue of that year for "whomever is elected Governor."

On page 4 of that report, one of the recommendations is as follows:

A Proactive "New Federalism"
strategy

1. The next governor should
institute a coherent strategy in Congress to mitigate the risks anticipated when
Sen. Ted Stevens one day leaves the scene. Education and communication can
diminish the potential backlash affecting Alaska.
2. Engage local communities in a
process of prioritizing federally-supported services in order to maximize local
initiative, to more efficiently allocate resources and anticipate the potential
of reduced funding.

It would be very wise for Alaska to begin to think along these terms. The fear is that when Ted Stevens retires, whoever takes his spot will not have a fraction of the power he does.
So, what is the point of all this? Changing to a "New Federalism" strategy is not just a decision made by bureaucrats. A "New Federalism" strategy will require a cultural change. The essence of our federal strategy seems to be obtaining a bigger piece of pork barrel spending. That's a cultural problem that Alaska has (culture in the broadest sense of the word).