A ferry is still a loved way to cross the Kentucky River
LEXINGTON, Ky. (FOX 56) — There's a business in Central Kentucky that flies the flag of Virginia every day. That's because it's been here since before Kentucky was a state.
For most people, the fastest way to cross the Kentucky River is to use the Clays Ferry Bridge on I-75, so named because there was a ferry there two centuries ago.
A ferry is still a loved way to cross the Kentucky River
Texas artist brings art to life in Nicholasville's murals
Kentucky's historical markers ignite curiosity, community
Seventy-five thousand drivers zoom across every day, paying little attention to the water below. But six miles downriver, you can still cross like folks did in the days of horses and wagons.
'It was here in 1785. Kentucky didn't become a state until 1792,' George Dean said.
The Valley View Ferry is the oldest continually operating business in Kentucky. It takes just two minutes to ride back in time 200 years.
'It's cheap, and it's easy to get into Lexington,' a rider said.
Some of the famous people who have crossed on the ferry over the years are Henry Clay, Daniel Boone, and Ulysses S. Grant.
Today, cars cross three at a time.
'Anywhere between 14,000 to 16,000 people use this ferry every month,' a ferry operator said.
Read more Spirit of the Bluegrass stories
The ferry is propelled by a paddle wheel, centered in the river by cables stretched between four towers.
'The deck crew comes to us from the detention centers, and what they're doing, they're making sure the boat's balanced in proper trim and stability,' Capt. Clayton Embly said.
Embly was a merchant marine for 30 years.
'I've sailed literally all the seven seas on all types of ships. You're always looking for what's going to cause you a headache, what could cause an accident,' Embly said.
But this is a lot different than steering a 700-foot tanker in the Pacific Ocean.
'The big joke is: The boat I do not steer, the engines I do not go near; I don't even get to ring the bell. But let this ferry shut down and see who catches,' Embly said.
Starting early: 11-year-old Lexington boy says he's running for Congress
There's no toll on the ferry. The state transportation cabinet and the governments of Fayette, Jessamine, and Madison counties fund it. It's a constant challenge to keep the equipment shipshape.
'Every five years the barge has to be taken out of the water, cleaned, and inspected by the Coast Guard. Anything they see that needs to be corrected or fixed on the barge has to be done at that time,' George Dean, Kentucky River Historian, said.
When the ferry is shut down for maintenance or because of high water, it forces some regular users to go 45 minutes out of their way.
'We actually live in Nicholasville, but we work in Richmond. The house we clean is just across the ferry, so we ride it every Wednesday,' Ashley McDonald, a regular rider, said.
For some people, it's a convenience; for others, a tourist attraction.
'It's awesome. It's old school,' a visitor said.
Sometimes, it's just good to take the road less traveled. And when that road ends at a river, another adventure can begin.
Kentucky's first public school mariachi band fosters cultural pride
'Before we get into a hard day's work, it's nice to kick back and relax and be on the water,' McDonald said.
Valley View Ferry generally operates from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays and from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. But the weather can change that.
To keep up with its operating status, check the Valley View Ferry Facebook page.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
44 minutes ago
- The Hill
Puerto Rico is Trump's perfect partner in reshoring
President Trump recently signed an executive order to bring pharmaceutical manufacturing back to the U.S. by streamlining the process for the Food and Drug Administration to approve pharmaceutical manufacturing plants. This is the latest in the Trump administration's agenda to protect national security and create American jobs by promoting the reshoring of critical supply chains that Americans rely on every day. These efforts are coupled with international tariffs to encourage domestic manufacturing. Reshoring pharmaceutical manufacturing is not only dire for American national security, but it could have resounding economic impacts across the country. One U.S. jurisdiction that is ready and in a perfect position to partner in this effort is Puerto Rico, where pharmaceutical manufacturing is already a more than $50 billion industry. With complementary efforts underway in Congress and on the island, the White House should look to Puerto Rico as America's pharmaceutical powerhouse while not trapping the island in its current territory status by hindering a future transition to statehood that would further boost the island's manufacturing ability. As a territory, the island is part of the U.S. customs zone and is not subject to U.S. tariffs, and everything that is made in Puerto Rico is 'Made in the USA.' Yet, that same territory status has limited Puerto Rico's economic development by creating persistent uncertainty, underinvestment and an unequal playing field for economic competition. The territory status is unpopular on the island, and Puerto Rican voters have voted in favor of statehood four consecutive times, most recently last November. Trump and Congress have the opportunity of a generation to leverage the pharmaceutical infrastructure and workforce in Puerto Rico to achieve their agenda while also turbocharging the economy on the island, and they have the perfect ally in Puerto Rico to do it with — the island's Republican Gov. Jenniffer González-Colón. González-Colón is leading an ambitious agenda to reshape the national narrative about the island and its people — and ultimately achieve statehood for Puerto Rico. Aligning with the Trump administration's vision to reshore advanced manufacturing of critical products, she issued an executive order in late March and reached out to top White House officials to offer Puerto Rico's well-established, yet currently underutilized, manufacturing capacity as an economic engine to help grow American prosperity. González-Colón's executive order promotes the relocation of overseas manufacturing of pharmaceuticals and other products to Puerto Rico. Much like Trump's executive order, it eliminates barriers and streamlines the process for businesses to move to the island. This action is complementary to the Medical Manufacturing, Economic Development and Sustainability Act, which was recently reintroduced and incentivizes pharmaceutical manufacturing on the island and throughout economically distressed zones across the United States. The bill is designed to attract business to the island in a way that invests in the people of Puerto Rico. It does this by providing an incentive for medical manufacturing facilities to relocate to economically distressed zones, with an incentive dependent on the number of jobs created to ensure money is flowing back into communities. The incentive itself is based on economic factors and applies to communities throughout the United States — an appropriately wide scope that comports with Trump's strong desire to reshore large amounts of production in a short time frame. By tethering the tax credits to what manufacturers invest directly into wages, salaries and real middle-class benefits, the proposal creates good-paying, quality American jobs. Reshoring to Puerto Rico would mean that critical pharmaceuticals and medical devices, as well as other products that are currently manufactured overseas in China and other nations, would now be produced in America. This would create thousands of well-paying manufacturing jobs that Puerto Rico needs to turbocharge the modest economic progress it's made in recent years. The increased consumer demand on the island would help boost the approximately $70 billion in annual interstate commerce, resulting in more jobs and profits stateside. Puerto Rico is a natural partner in reshoring the medical and pharmaceutical manufacturing industry within U.S. borders. The island's leaders share in the White House's vision of a more prosperous pharmaceutical manufacturing industry and are working to ensure reshoring efforts do not trap Puerto Rico in its current territory status but instead enable it to reach its full potential as an engine of economic growth and prosperity as a future state of our Union. Manufacturing makes America stronger, especially when it lifts up communities and the hard-working American citizens that make 'Made in the USA' a possibility, including those in Puerto Rico.
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
DOGE started the war on waste —now it's up to Congress to keep it going
As Elon Musk steps back from his role at the Department of Government Efficiency, making the savings his team found stick is now in Congress's hands. DOGE's crack team of mostly young techies shined a light on surreal instances of fraud and waste— from the literal mine where all federal government employee resignations are processed by hand to millions of dollars in fake unemployment claims filed with birth dates 15 years in the future. But for all of the fanfare, outrage, and outright hysteria over DOGE's supposedly drastic measures, the department's actual power was limited to mostly cancelling grants and contracts, which put a major cap on how much in savings could actually be realized. Much of the discretionary spending it lined up for the chopping block was approved by Congress, and Congress alone can decide its fate. Republicans make sure that DOGE's efforts aren't fruitless, and should, as quickly as possible. First, pass the $9.4 billion 'rescissions package' that the White House plans to deliver to the House on Tuesday, which will claw back $8.3 billion in foreign aid from the African Development Foundation and the US Agency for International Development. USAID, which Team Trump has near-totally dismantled, absolutely deserves such a slash: It bankrolled a mess of beyond-parody projects, like sending terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki to college and improving LGBT workplace inclusion in Serbia. The package will also yank $1.1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which oversees PBS and NPR. NPR and PBS long ago abandoned their role as nonpartisan public resources; both should have to rely on the non-government funding they insist dwarfs what the feds now provide. House Speaker Mike Johnson has promised to bring the package to the floor pronto and get it passed; the Senate should follow suit. But $9.4 billion is barely a drop in the bucket of the $1.9 trillion deficit, and far below the $175 billion in savings that DOGE touts on its website — a figure that represents more than $1,000 per US taxpayer if Congress can keep following up. That means the recessions package can only be the start: The next round of federal budgeting must aim to translate the majority of the DOGE savings into law, over the screams of special interests and other feeders at the federal trough, Democratic distortions amplified by the lefty media, and the fears of weaker-willed Republicans. Once agencies get used to their bloated budgets, wrenching money (no matter how ill-spent) back is an exercise in teeth-pulling; expect a lot of kicking and screaming. Though Musk won't be as hands-on at DOGE, the department's work isn't over; much of the team he hired will stick around, battling the fund-sucking bureaucracy. Some DOGE employees have been embedded into permanent roles at other agencies to keep on cutting waste, such as Jeremy Lewin at the State Department, and Stephanie Holmes and Tyler Hassen at the Interior. Musk didn't hit the (always unlikely) $2 trillion-in-savings goal he had on Day 1 of DOGE, but the effort drew crucial attention to Uncle Sam's incomparable talent for misspending taxpayer money. The cat is out of the bag; as voters long suspected, the feds are taking way more money than they need. DOGE started the war on waste; now it's up to Republicans in Congress to finish the job.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump Tariffs Face Threat at Supreme Court — Over Rulings That Blocked Biden
(Bloomberg) -- A legal argument that the US Supreme Court used to foil Joe Biden on climate change and student debt now looms as a threat to President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs. Billionaire Steve Cohen Wants NY to Expand Taxpayer-Backed Ferry Now With Colorful Blocks, Tirana's Pyramid Represents a Changing Albania NYC Congestion Toll Brings In $216 Million in First Four Months The Economic Benefits of Paying Workers to Move Where the Wild Children's Museums Are During Biden's presidency, the court's conservative majority ruled that federal agencies can't decide sweeping political and economic matters without clear congressional authorization. That blocked the Environmental Protection Agency from setting deep limits on power-plant pollution and the Education Department from slashing student loans for 40 million people. The concept — known as the 'major questions doctrine' — is now playing a central role in the case against Trump's unilateral imposition of worldwide import taxes. With Supreme Court review all but inevitable, the justices' willingness to employ the doctrine against Trump may determine the fate of his signature economic initiative. The US Court of International Trade cited the Biden-era rulings and the major questions doctrine when it ruled 3-0 last week that many of Trump's import taxes exceeded the authority Congress had given him. The challenged tariffs would total an estimated $1.4 trillion over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation. Critics say the administration's tariffs would have an even bigger impact than the estimated $400 billion Biden student-loan package, which Chief Justice John Roberts described as having 'staggering' significance in his 2023 opinion invalidating the plan. 'If this is not a major question, then I don't know what is,' said Ilya Somin, a professor at George Mason University's Antonin Scalia Law School and one of the lawyers challenging the tariffs. 'We're talking about the biggest trade war since the Great Depression.' Until they were partly suspended, Trump's April 2 'Liberation Day' tariffs marked the biggest increase in import taxes pushed by the US since the 1930 Smoot-Hawley tariffs and took the US's average applied tariff rate to its highest level in more than a century. The prospect of that massive tax increase and the resulting economic shock roiled financial markets and prompted fears of imminent recessions in the US and other major global economies. Presidential Exception The administration contends the major questions doctrine doesn't apply when Congress gives authority directly to the president, rather than to an administrative agency. The government also says the doctrine is inapt when the subject is national security and foreign affairs – policy areas where the president has long been recognized to have broad powers. 'No one doubts the significance of the challenged tariffs, but significance alone does not implicate the major questions doctrine, otherwise, it would apply to countless government actions, including every emergency statute,' the Justice Department said in a filing at the Court of International Trade. The legal clash centers on Trump's power under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which says the president may 'regulate' the 'importation' of property to address an emergency situation. The Court of International Trade said those words weren't clear enough to legally justify Trump's taxes given that the Constitution gives the tariff power to Congress. In addition to major questions, the panel also invoked the nondelegation doctrine, a related conservative-backed legal theory that says lawmakers can't give away their constitutional legislative and taxing powers. The two doctrines together 'provide useful tools for the court to interpret statutes so as to avoid constitutional problems,' the trade court said. 'These tools indicate that an unlimited delegation of tariff authority would constitute an improper abdication of legislative power to another branch of government.' The ruling is now on temporary hold while a federal appeals court considers whether to keep the tariffs in force as the legal fight continues. Ideological Split So far, the major questions doctrine has divided the Supreme Court cleanly along ideological lines. The six conservative justices were united when the court first used the phrase in a 2022 ruling that said the EPA overstepped its authority with an ambitious emissions-reduction program during Barack Obama's presidency. The majority said it was doing nothing new by subjecting the plan to extra-tough scrutiny. 'We 'typically greet' assertions of 'extravagant statutory power over the national economy' with 'skepticism,'' Roberts wrote, borrowing words from a 2014 ruling. Roberts said the court used similar reasoning, though without the 'major questions' label, when it blocked Biden's pandemic eviction moratorium and his vaccine-or-test mandate for workers. The court's liberals accused their conservative colleagues of creating a convenient exception to their usual laserlike focus on statutory text. 'The current court is textualist only when being so suits it,' Justice Elena Kagan said in dissent in the climate case. 'When that method would frustrate broader goals, special canons like the 'major questions doctrine' magically appear as get-out-of-text-free cards.' The sharp ideological divide masks a more subtle split among the court's conservatives about the purpose of the major questions doctrine. Justice Amy Coney Barrett has described it as a tool for ascertaining the most natural reading of a statute, while Justice Neil Gorsuch has cast it as a means of keeping Congress and the president in their proper constitutional lanes. The key question now is what the court will do with the major questions doctrine when it comes in the context of tariffs and a Republican president who appointed three of the justices. 'The court has not been at all transparent about the grounds on which it will invoke this doctrine,' said Ronald Levin, an administrative law professor at Washington University in St. Louis. 'It's left its options completely open.' --With assistance from Shawn Donnan. YouTube Is Swallowing TV Whole, and It's Coming for the Sitcom Millions of Americans Are Obsessed With This Japanese Barbecue Sauce How Coach Handbags Became a Gen Z Status Symbol Mark Zuckerberg Loves MAGA Now. Will MAGA Ever Love Him Back? AI Is Helping Executives Tackle the Dreaded Post-Vacation Inbox ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Sign in to access your portfolio
