The proposed bridge would have connected the city of Ketchikan to its airport located on neighboring Gravina Island. City residents have to travel by boat to reach the airport. U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens and Rep. Don Young pushed the project through Congress, securing a $452 million earmark in a federal transportation bill for two bridges, one in Ketchikan and another in Anchorage. Mr. McCain and other critics of pet projects in Congress used the term “Bridge to Nowhere” to attack the project. McCain has made a habit of ridiculing the bridge project during his presidential campaign, saying he would eliminate all earmarks.

On Fox News Sunday, McCain touted Palin’s opposition to the bridge as a key reason for his selection of her as his vice president. “Yes, the pork barrel project, a $233 million bridge in Alaska to an island with 50 people on it,” McCain said. “She, as governor, stood up and said, we don’t need it, and if we need it, we’ll pay for it ourselves. Now, that’s guts. I saw that, and I said, this, this is what we need in Washington.”

He also claimed that Congress couldn’t remove the earmark for funding of the bridge:

In her speech in Dayton, Ohio, August 29, 2008, after being announced as the vice presidential candidate, Palin put the Bridge at the heart of her record:

“And I championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. In fact, I told Congress — I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that bridge to nowhere. If our state wanted a bridge, I said we’d build it ourselves. Well, it’s always, though, safer in politics to avoid risk, to just kind of go along with the status quo. But I didn’t get into government to do the safe and easy things. A ship in harbor is safe, but that’s not why the ship is built. Politics isn’t just a game of competing interests and clashing parties. The people of America expect us to seek public office and to serve for the right reasons. And the right reason is to challenge the status quo and to serve the common good. Now, no one expects us to agree on everything, whether in Juneau or in Washington. But we are expected to govern with integrity, and goodwill, and clear convictions, and a servant’s heart.”

Since then, Palin has repeated the claim two dozen times at rallies.

In August 2006, while running for governor, Palin said the bridge should be defended and accused “spinmeisters” of turning the project into something negative:

“We need to come to the defense of southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge, and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative,”

According to the Ketchikan Daily News on August 8, 2006, Palin said: “People across the nation struggle with the idea of building a bridge because they’ve been under these misperceptions about the bridge and the purpose.”

The Ketchikan Daily News reported in its Sept. 21, 2006 edition that Palin told residents at a candidates forum on Sept. 20, 2006: “I think we’re going to make a good team as we progress that bridge project.”

According to the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein said he was there in September 2006 when Palin visited the city for the candidates forum. “She was asked about the bridge and she supported it,” he said.

Palin said the bridge was a key to the town’s prosperity.

According to the Fairbank Daily News-Miner, Palin’s ongoing support of the earmark for the bridge was applauded by the late Lew Williams Jr., the retired Ketchikan Daily News publisher who wrote several columns about it. On Oct. 29, 2006, he wrote that Palin was the only candidate that year who consistently supported the Gravina Island Bridge (the Bridge to Nowhere).

On October 22, 2006, Palin told the Anchorage Daily News in their candidates’ questionnaire:

5. Would you continue state funding for the proposed Knik Arm and Gravina Island bridges?

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.

When asked about the bridge and another in an October 2006 television debate while campaigning for governor, she said: “I do support the infrastructure projects that are on tap here in the State of Alaska that our Congressional delegations worked hard for.”

Ketchikan has two percent of the state’s population. The U.S. equivalent would be the state of Missouri, which has approximately two percent of the population.

In the Ketchikan candidates forum, she criticized use of the term “Bridge to Nowhere,” saying she sympathized with residents that people referred to their island as “nowhere.”

She compared the insulting use of the term to state Sen. Ben Stevens’ slap at Mat-Su valley residents, where Palin lives, as “Valley trash.”

“OK, you’ve got Valley trash standing in the middle of nowhere,” she told residents as reported in the Ketchikan Daily News on Sept. 21, 2006.

Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, a Democrat, and Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin’s campaign coordinator in Ketchikan, also stated she criticized use of the phrase.

“People are learning that she pandered to us by saying, I’m for this’ … and then when she found it was politically advantageous for her nationally, abruptly she starts using the very term that she said was insulting,” Weinstein said.

Bert Stedman, a Sitka Republican who represents Ketchikan in the state Senate, told the Ketchikan Daily News he was proud to see Palin picked for the vice president’s role but disheartened by her reference to the bridge.

“In the role of governor, she should be pursuing a transportation policy that benefits the state of Alaska, (rather than) pandering to the southern 48,” he said.

After a national uproar over funding of the bridge, Congress cut its support for the project and eliminated the earmark before Palin entered office and while she actively supported it.

As the Washington Post reported:

After some parliamentary skirmishes, congressional leaders agreed to kill earmarked funding for the Ketchikan bridge and another bridge near Anchorage, instead giving the state a lump sum of $454 million to spend as it saw fit.

In this statement Sept. 19, 2007, she said in a regretful tone that lack of funding support by Congress was the reason for her decision. She said the American public’s negative view of projects like the Bridge to Nowhere came in part from inaccurate portrayals:

“Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer,” said governor Palin. “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,” governor Palin added. “Much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened.”

Bill McAllister, Palin’s spokesperson, said Palin changed her mind when “she saw that Alaska was being perceived as taking from the country and not giving, and that impression bothered her and she wants to change it.”

Still, Palin has repeated over 2 dozen times that she rejected Congress’s offer of the money, when the record clearly shows the complete opposite. She changed her mind after Congress removed the earmark and showed it had “little interest in spending any more money” on the bridge.

Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein said Palin didn’t call him or anyone else in Ketchikan to tell them she was canceling the earmark. “We read it in the press,” he said.

According to the Juneau Empire newspaper in Alaska:

The man who coordinated the Ketchikan campaign to get her elected governor in 2006 said he’s sorry now. “She hasn’t communicated with us or spent any time with us. The people who helped get her elected are shocked,” said Mike Elerding. “She’s alienated a lot of the Republican base here in Ketchikan.”

The paper said not everyone in Ketchikan feels abandoned:

Councilman and former Republican district chairman Dick Coos continues to hold out hope for the bridge. He didn’t feel abandoned, and thought Palin did a rousing job in that acceptance speech.

“There’s always tomorrow, and the state has a huge amount of money,” he said.

Palin’s press release announcing her change of course came just a month after McCain slammed the bridge for taking money that could have been used to fix bridges like one that collapsed in Minnesota.

Andrew Halcro, who ran against Palin in 2006, told The Associated Press on Saturday that Palin changed her views after she was elected to make a national splash.

Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein, who campaigned for Palin’s opponent Tony Knowles in the gubernatorial campaign, said Palin “absolutely” used the issue for political purposes, saying the announcement was sent to the media at 5 a.m. ET in order to increase coverage by the national media.

Leighow said she had no record of what time she sent out the press release, but does not recall being told to send it out early for East Coast media.

“I think that’s when the campaign for national office began,” Ketchikan Mayor Bob Weinstein told the Anchorage Daily News.

“Look at how she communicated the decision to the community. It went east at 5 a.m. (Alaska time). That was the beginning of her effort to promote herself as a candidate for national office,” he said.

McAllister, said Palin did not use the issue in hopes of becoming vice president. “How could she have foreseen that she would be at this point now? Everybody is surprised by this development,” he said.

Weinstein, though, said there was talk at the time that Palin might challenge Stevens in this year’s GOP primary for the U.S. Senate.

“She said ‘thanks but no thanks,’ but they kept the money,” Mike Elerding, a Republican who was Palin’s campaign coordinator in Ketchikan, said about the applause line in her speech.

Palin consistently states she said “Thanks but no thanks to Congress” on the bridge. Since Congress had already removed the earmark, however, it would have been impossible to say no thanks. Under strong national opposition to the bridge, Congress removed the earmark, saying the money could be spent on other projects. Instead of saying “no thanks,” Palin did use the money for other projects.

In addition, the Anchorage Daily News wrote: “The state is continuing to build a road on Gravina Island to an empty beach where the bridge would have gone because federal money for the access road, unlike the bridge money, would have otherwise been returned to the federal government.”

Alaska under Palin will spend $25 million on the 3-mile road rather than return the money to the federal government. Palin spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said the road will help increase development on the island, which has only 50 people and no bridge.