REGISTERING ON THIS BLOG WILL ALWAYS BE FREE. Soapblox charges Blue Oasis a monthly fee for the blog platform as well as the yearly charge for the website domain. There are also occasional fees for records gathering activities (CDs of meeting minutes and copying fees for letters and other documents from APOC). If you can support the blog and all of our work towards justice for ALL Alaskans and to hold ex-Governor Palin accountable, please visit the drop- down list above. Any contribution is much-appreciated!
Thank you!
ADVERTISING ON BLUE OASIS
(Click picture to go to Facebook page)
CLICK IMAGE TO PURCHASE
Though many of us suffer from Palin Factor Fatigue, it is irrefutable that there is a nagging curiosity to have the question answered, ?How in the world did Sarah Palin become so popular and why do we still need to hear about her?? My book answers these questions in detail and urges us all to be vigilant. She is one of a small pool of ?rising stars in the republican party? as John McCain stated as recently as January 25, 2009 on Fox News Sunday.
As unbelievable as her meteoric rise was we cannot delude ourselves, turning our backs once again, into thinking that she and those like her are going away. This woman is joined by millions of loyalists whose perception is that she was persecuted in the media, stifled by McCain, and mocked by liberals - and now the theocratic conservatives are regrouping with a vengeance!
"Blue Oasis" began in 2005 in its Blogger format (now an archive) and became possibly the first Alaska Blog on Progressive Politics. At the 2008 Democratic National Convention, Celtic Diva's Blue Oasis was honored to represent Alaska as the state blog.
Transition--Community Blog
In September 2008, Celtic Diva's Blue Oasis moved to a Soapblox Community Blog format. Readers can become full participants by registering on the blog to comment and write "diaries." Diary titles appear on the right sidebar for folks to read and provide comments. Blog editors may choose to move some of these diaries to the front page.
While this Community was formed specifically with Alaska in mind, all "friends of Alaska" are welcome as members!
**Note about registering** Scroll down the right side until you find the link to register. Then, just follow the instructions!
**Note about comments** To comment on a story, click on the heading and then look for the "comment bar" at the bottom (it's light grey, I can't seem to change it). I believe the font color NOW permits you to see the "post comment" text.
YOUR BLOGMISTRESS
My name is Linda Kellen Biegel and I am a former 15-year Federal employee. Thirteen of those years were spent working for the US Army Corps of Engineers. I am also semi-retired from the Alaska music scene (singer, sound tech, stage manager, logistics).
When the blog was chosen to represent Alaska in the DNCC State Blogger Pool at the Denver Convention, I attended with the help of Alaska Real blogmistress, Writing Raven and my daughter Morrigan. On August 29th, one day after Barack Obama's inspiring speech at Invesco Field , my life took another turn as it did for all Alaska bloggers when Gov. Sarah Palin was chosen to be John McCain's VP running mate. Since then, I've either assisted or have been interviewed by media from the UK, Italy, Australia and Germany as well as national media outlets such as Wall Street Journal, NY Times, ABC Good Morning America's Kate Snow, National Journal, Dallas Morning News, LA Times, and NPR.
Presently, I work as a freelance writer, PR, event coordinator, community organizer, wife to computer programmer Josh and mother to 11-year-old Morrigan. Our family especially enjoys our summers in Alaska where we get to subsistence set-net fish Sockeye salmon as well as halibut fish/whalewatch in the family's homemade aluminum boat, "The Neverdone" (when it's working). We reside in Anchorage, Alaska.
Origin of "Celtic Diva"
I've used "Celtic Diva" as a screen name since the early 1990's on Web TV.
"Folks have asked about my Celtic heritage, especially in light of my name. What they don't realize is that I'm adopted. I was born Valerie Morehead of the Clan Muirhead. I was adopted at three-months-old by the Kellens. I always "knew" I was Celt even before really knew. I was drawn to all things Scottish, especially music. That's why my parents eventually told me at age 16."
"Linda is well-known in Alaska & beyond as the prominent progressive political blogger Celtic Diva of Celtic Diva?s Blue Oasis. But back in the day, the early 1990s, I knew her as Linda Kellen, a member of the local folk/rock band Sky is Blu, which amongst other things performed in at least a couple or so of the annual women?s show Celebration of Change, in which I also performed. And if you don?t already know, let me tell you: Linda is one fine damn singer."
I went on after the break-up of "Sky is Blu" to perform with various Alaska musicians and work with national folks like Bo Diddly, Coco Montoya, Debbie Davies, Taj Mahal, The Fabulous Thunderbirds, Bad Company, Creedence Clearwater, Carny Wilson, etc...
USA Women's Olympic Hockey Team Star Kerry Weiland with our friend Isabella and my daughter Morrigan at St. Baldrick's Day
(Scroll down to find posts.)
(Please register to participate in diaries and comments! We'd love for you to join our Community!)
******************************************************************************************
A couple of weeks ago, I did a post on the three bills proposed by members of the Legislature to supposedly "fix" problems with the act. As I discuss in the post, two of the bills, HB 254 (Rep. Bob Lynn) and HB 263 (Rep. Mike Doogan) try to make things more confidential by having complaints dismissed if the complainant exercises his/her free speech rights by even stating that they have filed one. The bills fail to address a much more pressing problem...that the Governor has hiring/firing authority over the very Board that is supposed to hold him/her accountable.
I share a list of reasons why those bills are a bad idea:
1) In Alaska, the general public is not permitted to ask the Attorney General/the Department of Law for an official "decision" on an ethics issue. It can only be done by certain Government Employees, a public officer or their legal representative. The only way the general public can get a LEGAL RULING from the State of Alaska on an issue of ethics is to file a complaint.
2) Ethics complaints from the general public against public officers are based on public information, not employment records, etc...to which the general public does not have access. As there is no airing of information made confidential by Alaska Statute, there is NO REASON for the process not to be completely public.
3) During my experience with the complaint process, I constantly heard the meme from the Palin camp that "If these were ethics complaints against a legislator, mentioning them to the media would have them thrown out."
According to an amendment to the Legislative Code of Ethics, yes that is true...for now...(covered in number 4)
The ethics committee has nine members: two senators, two representatives and five public members. The committee is divided into a House Subcommittee and a Senate Subcommittee for the purpose of considering most complaints. Elected officials, who serve two-year terms, are appointed by the leadership of the appropriate body with the concurrence of two-thirds of the full membership of that house. The public members, who serve a three-year term, are selected by the Chief Justice of the Alaska Supreme Court and ratified by two thirds of the full membership of the legislature.
4) As I read the Attorney General's conclusion, the two House Bills in the Legislature right now could actually violate free speech rights if taken to court. This could even indicate that the Legislative Ethics provision for complaint dismissal could possibly be thrown out if a case ever makes it to court.
5) I mentioned The Alaska Fund Trust earlier. I have checked into it and STILL nothing has happened with the case or it would have been made public. Did anyone notice that if the report had not been leaked to the public, we would never know that THE ALASKA FUND TRUST IS A POTENTIAL ETHICS VIOLATION (if she spends it)?
What's the Personnel Board waiting for, the two-year statute of limitations to be up on ethics violations so Palin can spend the money?
To me, this is the single-largest piece of evidence that there are MORE PRESSING problems that need fixing with the Executive Branch Ethics process than a lack of confidentiality.
Perhaps...maybe...a lack of accountability?
Today, there is Public Testimony regarding the proposed changes to the Executive Branch Ethics Act:
+ (15 AAC 55.280 - 15AAC 55.811) Proposed
Regulations Relating to Oil and Gas Tax
Credit and Heating Value of Gas (TELECONFERENCED)
-- Public Testimony --
Executive Session
Anyone can participate in the teleconference at one of the Legislative Information Offices (LIOs) across the state. Click on the link to find one near you, if you don't live in Anchorage or Fairbanks:
Anchorage Legislative Information Office
716 W 4th Avenue, Suite 200
Anchorage, AK 99501-2133
If you cannot participate in the teleconference, here are the members of the Administrative Regulation Review Joint Committee. Please send your comments to each of them (click the links for their email addresses).
Recently, I posted a culinary tribute to Elvis courtesy of my good friend and musician extraordinaire, Patti Greene. Patti may not know it, but she is one of my primary survival tools during the Alaska winters. Over the 20(?) years I've known her, she frequently shares her philosophy of how to make the best of that long, cold stretch between the New Year and spring:
"Don't make any major decisions and NO BITING!"
I find her wisdom to be inarguable so I try to live by it, as difficult as that can sometimes be.
The last several weeks, it's been extremely difficult because quite frankly, ALL I WANT TO DO IS BITE!
Don't get me started on: Fox News for subjecting us to a steady diet of Palin's special brand of salad-shooter-chopped-stomped-on-then-stray-dog-chewed word salad, or the entire MSM for most of their insipid Palin discussions, or the authors of "Game Changer" for focusing on the shallow foibles of Palin while ignoring her lies, deceit and questionable ethics. Many of my Alaskan blogger friends have covered those issues well and I've surely ranted enough around the house about them.
However, I'm EXTREMELY irritated by a few members of the Alaska Legislature. Why? It's a reaction to the bills being proposed that are touted to "fix the problems" with ethics complaint process. What they really do is ignore the actual problems and aim to make the whole process even MORE secretive and MORE inaccessible when it comes to Alaska's Public Officers!
Let's examine the bills filed so far having to do with the ethics process. There are three:
1) Max Gruenberg filed HB 289:
Authorizing state agencies to pay private legal fees and costs incurred by persons exonerated of alleged Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act violations; allowing certain public officers and former public officers to accept state payments to offset private legal fees and costs related to defending against an Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act complaint; and creating certain exceptions to Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act limitations on the use of state resources to provide or pay for transportation of spouses and children of the governor and the lieutenant governor.
I am actually NOT crabby at Mr. Gruenberg (I'm sure he's relieved)! Looking at this bill and even when AG Sullivan proposed reimbursement for legal fees as a "fix," I didn't have a problem with it for a couple of reasons:
-- The Dept. of Law has previously stated that Thomas Van Flein (Palin's attorney) was already eligible to have some of his bills paid in relation to the Troopergate investigation. So, there is already precedent. (The last I read about it, he never attempted to get reimbursed. The reasons why are up for speculation, but I digress...)
-- If an attorney submits that paperwork for reimbursement by the State, it would then be considered public records accessible by records requests. Thus, we have accountability.
My primary issue regarding elected and appointed officials is in keeping things transparent.
However, not everyone agrees:
2) According to Republican Representative Bob Lynn's House Bill 254:
07 * Sec. 2. AS 39.52.340 is amended by adding a new subsection to read:
08 (d) Except as required by law or permitted by this section, a person filing a
09 complaint under this chapter shall keep confidential the filing of the complaint and the
10 contents of the complaint. If the attorney general determines that a complainant has
11 violated a confidentiality provision of this chapter, the attorney general shall
12 immediately dismiss the complaint. Dismissal of a complaint under this subsection
13 does not affect the right of any person other than the complainant to initiate a
14 complaint based on the same factual allegations.
So...no fix for the fact that the most powerful Governor of all 50 states appoints and fires those who decide the ethics complaints. But it's very important to Mr. Lynn to make the process MORE secretive as this bill will establish that the complaint be dismissed if confidentiality is violated.
3) Then we have Democratic Representative Mike Doogan, who proposed a mostly-similar bill in HB 263:
12 Sec. 39.52.320. Dismissal if confidentiality violated by complainant. If the
13 attorney general determines that a complainant has violated a confidentiality provision
14 of this chapter, the attorney general shall immediately dismiss the complaint. The
01 attorney general shall communicate disposition of the matter promptly to the
02 complainant under AS 39.52.335(c) and to the subject of the complaint. Dismissal of a
03 complaint under this section does not affect the right of any person other than the
04 complainant to initiate a complaint based on the same factual allegations.
Again...no "fix" for the Personnel Board, but a guarantee that a tainted board would get to operate in absolute secrecy. This secrecy applies to a complaint against "any current or former public officer" covered by the Executive Branch Ethics Act.
However, the most interesting part of this is that there is a big contradiction...from Alaska's Attorney General Daniel Sullivan. He addresses confidentiality in his response to inquiries in the wake of the Palin Administration. It seems fairly clear that he believes attempts to "sanction" a complainant for talking about a complaint would be viewed by the courts as a violation of free speech:
Creating safeguards to keep Ethics Act investigations confidential is categorically different than restricting citizens from speaking out about government conduct. Because public dialogue about government actions is speech at the core of the First Amendment, we do not recommend imposing sanctions on a citizen for disclosing information about an ethics complaint he or she has filed. Speech by a citizen charging government officials with breach of a code of official conduct is political speech accorded First Amendment protection. The United States Supreme Court has adhered to the bedrock principle that expression on public issues rests "on the highest rung of the hierarchy of First Amendment values,"19 and thus that "debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open."20 The Supreme Court has also made clear that protected political speech goes far beyond intellectual argument about political theory; it includes vigorous debate about the qualifications and official conduct of public officials.21 Open discussion of official conduct is accorded the broadest protection available in our political system despite the fact "that it may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials."22
Alaska's Ethics Act does not inhibit this type of debate, because it does not impose penalties on individuals who are not engaged in the investigative or decision-making process. As we have considered ways to protect the confidentiality of the ethics investigations, we have been mindful that penalizing public discourse about the actions of government officials might threaten First Amendment rights. Courts have consistently found that confidentiality provisions applicable to ethics complaints restrict the content of speech.23 Because they govern the content of speech, these restrictions will survive scrutiny only if narrowly drawn and necessary to serve a compelling state interest.24 Courts generally have rejected states' interests in ethics code confidentiality provisions as insufficient to justify restrictions on citizens' speech.25
So, to summarize, there are a list of reasons why these amendments as written should be rejected:
1) In Alaska, the general public is not permitted to ask the Attorney General/the Department of Law for an official "decision" on an ethics issue. It can only be done by certain Government Employees, a public officer or their legal representative. The only way the general public can get a LEGAL RULING from the State of Alaska on an issue of ethics is to file a complaint.
2) Ethics complaints from the general public against public officers are based on public information, not employment records, etc...to which the general public does not have access. As there is no airing of information made confidential by Alaska Statute, there is NO REASON for the process not to be completely public.
3) During my experience with the complaint process, I constantly heard the meme from the Palin camp that "If these were ethics complaints against a legislator, mentioning them to the media would have them thrown out."
According to an amendment to the Legislative Code of Ethics, yes that is true...for now...(covered in number 4)
The ethics committee has nine members: two senators, two representatives and five public members. The committee is divided into a House Subcommittee and a Senate Subcommittee for the purpose of considering most complaints. Elected officials, who serve two-year terms, are appointed by the leadership of the appropriate body with the concurrence of two-thirds of the full membership of that house. The public members, who serve a three-year term, are selected by the Chief Justice of the Alaska Supreme Court and ratified by two thirds of the full membership of the legislature.
4) As I read the Attorney General's conclusion, the two House Bills in the Legislature right now could actually violate free speech rights if taken to court. This could even indicate that the Legislative Ethics provision for complaint dismissal could possibly be thrown out if a case ever makes it to court.
5) I mentioned The Alaska Fund Trust earlier. I have checked into it and STILL nothing has happened with the case or it would have been made public. Did anyone notice that if the report had not been leaked to the public, we would never know that THE ALASKA FUND TRUST IS A POTENTIAL ETHICS VIOLATION (if she spends it)?
What's the Personnel Board waiting for, the two-year statute of limitations to be up on ethics violations so Palin can spend the money?
To me, this is the single-largest piece of evidence that there are MORE PRESSING problems that need fixing with the Executive Branch Ethics process than a lack of confidentiality.
The special Legislative Session begins at the Egan Center
Shannyn Moore sits in the press area with writer and future Palin book author Geoffrey Dunn
Yesterday was a crazy day. Between the "Organize for America" presser on health care at the Peterson Towers, Sen. Begich's speech at the Chamber of Commerce, the Legislative Special Session at the Egan Center, and the "teabaggers" running around to all of those, there was an interesting logistical challenge for anyone who wanted to cover it all.
Luckily, Jeanette (our wonderful health care blogger) decided she would attend the health care events. Little did we know that she would become part of the story...read about it in her post. It makes me angry every time I watch the video (linked on her post) of the guys who rip on Jeanette though their collective knowledge of the subject can't fill a teaspoon. When Jeanette tells you she's read a bill...she's really read it. I remember when she'd call in to Cary Carrigan's radio show on Tuesday's during our "Democratic Gabfest." She reads entire budgets, bills...she even read the ENTIRE Recovery and Reinvestment (stimulus) Package!
However, I attended the Legislative Session at the Egan and the 11:00 AM "teabagger" protest.
I ran into Dennis Zaki and friends who recorded a great video:
It sums up very nicely the spewing of ignorance and Fox News talking points by the "Alaska Teabaggers." I especially love the folks who ask if we've "read the bill" when it is VERY obvious that they haven't.
Only an idiot would expose themselves to that kind of deserved ridicule...oh wait...
Eddie Burke saw me and yelled "Where are all the Socialists? Where are all the Progressives? I yelled back, "Progressives work for a living, Eddie, or they are at home taking care of their kids during summer vacation." (I'm lucky enough that my girl is old enough to stay home alone for a little while.) Seriously, anyone who has ever organized a lefty rally knows better than to have it during the week.
It was pretty clear that the vast majority of the "teabaggers" didn't have young kids at home and...errrr...were probably no longer members of the workforce. They were walking back and forth between the Legislative Session and the health care discussions. So, when one of the older women started talking about Medicare during an interview, I snickered remembering an earlier "Tweet" from someone:
Nothing says "I have mine, f*ck you," quite like seniors on Medicare/Medicaid trying to deny healthcare to others.
That seemed to be the general attitude regarding folks who need energy assistance as well.
It was especially interesting to listen to the debate during the Special Session regarding an override of ex-Gov Palin's rejection of the energy "stimulus" funds. Those few legislators who claimed that "strings" or "ropes" did exist when it came to building codes were soundly (but politely) trounced by legislators as diverse as Rep. Gara (D), Sen. McGuire (R) and Rep. Hawker (R) and Sen. Hoffman (D). They provided information from multiple Federal and State agencies.
Probably my favorite line (I tweeted it) came from Rep. Gruenberg--he wondered which was better, having Alaskans...U.S. citizens...getting help from their own Federal Government now, or accepting help later from the President of Venezuela.
Just over 75% of the legislators thought that Federal money was preferrable.
********************************************UPDATE**************************************************
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 6, 2009
Media Advisory
A bi-partisan coalition will hold a rally to thank the State Legislature for holding a Special Session in Anchorage on August 10, 2009. Diverse groups of Alaskans and communities throughout the state are encouraging the legislature to accept the $28.6 million in State Energy Program funds. By accepting the State Energy Program funds, our legislators will be working to make jobs and energy efficiency a priority in Alaska .
Support for the State Energy Program funds has come from: Commonwealth North, SWAMC, Southeast Conference, AARP, Alaska State Homebuilders Association, Renewable Energy Alaska Project, Alaska Municipal League, Haines Borough, City of Ketchikan , City/Borough of Juneau , Municipality of Anchorage , Anchorage Assembly, and the Mat-Su Borough.
WHAT A formal thank you to the Alaska Legislature for their foresight and leadership in reducing energy costs, creating jobs, and saving money for Alaskan families.
WHO Bipartisan members of the labor, business, Alaska Native, and environmental communities concerned about jobs and energy efficiency in Alaska .
WHERE William A. Eagan Center , 555 West 5th Avenue , Anchorage , AK 99501
(Photos from the Anchorage "teabagger" party April 15th at the Federal Building. Photo of Eddie Burke from Anchorage Assembly Mtg testimony courtesy of AKM.)
On Monday, August 10th (9:00 AM for the House, 10:00 AM for the Senate) at the Egan Center in Anchorage, the Legislature will have a "Special Session" in order to take care of several issues:
--to hold confirmation hearings for Craig Campbell as the new Lt. Governor
--to vote on overturning Gov. Palin's high-profile political veto of $28 million in stimulus money specifically targetted for energy efficiency, education and renewable resources. Some of this money is specifically meant to support programs to help Alaskans insulate their homes and lower their energy costs.
The "tea party teabaggers" are planning to show up across the street. Their goal is to support ex-Gov. Palin's politicized veto based on inaccurate information, knowing full-well the majority of Alaskans do NOT support them.
Why is this important?
1) Because their targets are those Republican legislators who are in favor of overturning Palin's veto of the energy stimulus money. If the "teabaggers" are the only voices, they will think that Alaskans don't care if they get the money or not.
2) Because many homes in Rural Alaska do not have any insulation to speak of. Also, at this time it is clear that many along the Yukon will face ANOTHER difficult winter due to the closing of king salmon fishing. With their fuel prices reaching $10.00 a gal last winter, help with insulating their homes could make the difference in getting through this winter.
3) Because everyone from Alaska experts to The Department of Energy have verified that NO FURTHER BUILDING STANDARDS ARE REQUIRED. The only "strings" to this money involve recording and accountability. According to Representative Cherisse Millet (R), "Those are good strings to have."
4) Because this lunatic is their "leader."
I will be there on Monday to show my support of the veto override. I know there will be a number of other people there as well and for those of you who can, I would like to encourage you to come, bring signs, etc... However, it is FAR MORE IMPORTANT that in the time leading up to Monday, you make it a point to CONTACT YOUR STATE LEGISLATORS USING THE OFFICIAL INTERIM LIST. Let them know that they should continue to stand with THE MAJORITY OF ALASKANS and accept that money for the people who most need it...their fellow Alaskans.
As Alaskans, we have now come to know our Governor and her Administration through both word and deed. This greater intimacy has obviously not benefited Palin, as the Governor's poll numbers have plummetted from 89% in summer of 2008 to 55% in the spring of 2009. Some people claim it's a "media barrage" of negativity that has caused this. However, most of the media attention Palin has courted herself.
What people have seen is the lack of honesty and professional behavior coming from the Governor and those in her employ. It seems that this behavior is catching, even spreading to long-time state employees like her Chief-of-Staff and members of the Personnel Board.
"Not one of the complaints actually reached the personnel board for its formal adjudication," noted Bill McAllister, the governor's communications director. "Rather the complaints have fallen short based on just a simple review of the facts and the law."
The Administration conveniently ignores the settlement of the family travel complaint where she shelled out thousands of dollars in reimbursement money in exchange for not having to "admit any wrongdoing"...kinda like the civil version of a plea bargain.
The Governor's Chief of Staff managed a two-fer...his dangerous unprofessionalism encouraged a backlash against citizens exercising their rights under the law and, once again, he joined other members of the Administration in "ignoring" the settled ethics complaint:
In the past several months, we have seen an orchestrated effort by the governor's opponents to make differences of opinion and ideology almost criminal," said Mike Nizich, the governor's chief of staff. "Governor Palin has spent a considerable amount of time and money fighting ethics complaints - and no charge has been substantiated. I hope that the publicity-seekers will face a backlash from Alaskans who have a sense of fair play and proportion.
Michael Geraghty, investigator for the State Personnel Board, concluded that there is no need for a hearing on the complaint filed in March by Andree McLeod, who has been a vocal critic of the governor since being denied employment with the state last year.
Then, of course, we have obfuscation of what was really said regarding an email sent by Andree McLeod (calling their attention to the lack of professional dress in the workplace) to high-level Office of the Governor employees Mike Nizich and Annette Kreitzer:
If you follow the email chain, you'll note that the word "confidential" doesn't show up until Sharon Leighow gets hold of it...right after she sees whatever the Governor wrote. Makes you wonder what incredibly "top secret" comments the Governor could have made about "cleavage." Or, perhaps, I should replace the words "top secret" with "politically damaging."
Of course, who could expect the State of Alaska workforce to understand the concept of "professional attire" when they have this top-level-executive as an example:
photo courtesy of Shannyn Moore
As I briefly discussed in an earlier post, I saw all of this obfuscation and unprofessionalism reflected in yesterday's Personnel Board Meeting. Nowhere was the lack of these ingredients more obvious than in Board Chair, Debra English.
This is significant because English was the only board member physically present at the meeting. The other two, Al Tagmani and Laura Plenert, were on the phone (an issue I'll address further down).
During the meeting, English:
--Didn't bother to ask any of us who'd come to give public testimony what we were testifying about. She assumed we were going to testify about a specific complaint during the Executive Session (i.e. behind closed doors) I explained that I would be testifying publicly on-the-record about confidentiality. When Ms. McLeod stated that she would be testifying about public issues as well, English tried to disuade and intimidate her.
--We were each given only 3 minutes. The microphone where we needed to speak was at a chair right in front of Debra English, next to her at the table. Yet, rather than wait and get up between testifiers (there were only three of us), English excused herself out loud and stepped out to refill her water glass WHILE ANDREE MCLEOD WAS SPEAKING ON THE RECORD. When Ms. McLeod was finished speaking, she requested answers from the Board members to questions she'd asked during her testimony. English bluntly stated that she stepped out so she didn't hear them.
--English asked their board attorney to find out information about changes made to rules of "other boards." The attorney was confused at the general question and attempted to get more detail. English struggled with that and seemed to get even more mysterious until I figured out that she was trying to get the information across to the attorney WITHOUT THE PUBLIC KNOWING WHAT SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT! It was hysterical because I figured it out right away...she wanted to know the procedure by which the legislature was able to make all of their ethics complaints confidential!
Perhaps she was hesitant to discuss that information openly because I'd just testified as to why attempting to make public information (what the citizen ethics complaints are based on) confidential is not in the spirit of the Alaska Statutes. Perhaps she was hesitant because it is now a regular meme of the Administration to use the comparison of the two different ethics laws as an attempt to slam those of us who filed ethics complaints openly (which is legal, by the way, because it isn't illegal). Perhaps they didn't want it to be so obvious that this "neutral body" is getting its marching orders from the Governor.
Ooops, too late! Her attempts at covert conversation were so poor, I was tempted to yell out "She means the legislature" but I restrained myself. He then asked if she was talking about the legislature and she hesitantly acknowledged that she was. However, they managed not to use the word "confidentiality."
Personnel Board Meetings fall under AS 44.62.310 which states that:
All meetings of a governmental body of a public entity of the state are open to the public
Since English was discussing potential legislative action, which does NOT qualify as "executive session" material, the pathetic attempt at obfuscation borders on the unethical.
--During that same conversation, English made a statement to the effect that she understood the legislature to be working some revision/amendment to the ethics complaint procedure. When Ms. McLeod asked about that, she denied saying it. When I asked about it because I heard it quite clearly, she told me that I was "mischaracterizing her remarks." The rest of the observers didn't agree with her. Sean Cockerham gives his (very restrained) version of what happened:
Personnel board members spoke Wednesday about possibly pursuing changes in the law regarding their ethics complaint procedures -- such as changing the "thresholds for investigations."
Ethics complainants in the audience asked board chair Debra English for detail after the meeting, but she curtly brushed them off, saying the meeting was over and she wasn't going to say more.
English also refused to answer when a Daily News reporter asked what the board had in mind. She said the reporter should have come before the board and given public testimony in order to get any questions answered from its members.
What she really told Sean Cockerham was that "the meeting was over" and he should have asked his questions during the public testimony. His response was that he worked for the newspaper and "that's not how it works." (I felt like he should have added the phrase "you idiot" on the end of that but he's a professional.) He then asked her, "Are you refusing to answer my questions?" English, the same way she spat it at me, said "You are mischaracterizing what I said."
Uhhhh...he asked you questions and you said you wouldn't answer. I don't think there's any "mischaracterizing" going on there.
Other signs of unprofessionalism:
--The Personnel Board meets three times a year and not on a set schedule. You would think that since two of the board members live in Anchorage, they could both be at the meeting. Nope. Al was at "a hotel" in some undisclosed location.
--The Personnel Board seems obsessed with confidentiality, yet they had their "executive session" using OPEN PHONE LINES! As a matter-of-fact, the various operators were jumping in and out during the regular part of the session; that "hotel operator" wherever Al was could have listened in to the entire meeting and no one would have been the wiser! Not to mention, that use of the hotel phone was a dollar a minute plus an additional fee. So they were paying extra for a completely unsecure line!
I worked for the Federal Government...the Army...where we have levels of confidentiality. I've never heard or seen anything that was so sloppy from a security standpoint. Also, in my 15-years I went to tons of meetings, including public meetings. I would have been fired from my job or at the very least given a reprimand had I acted towards a member of the public the way that Debra English acted towards us. It was made very clear to me that they consider Alaskan citizens who exercise their legal rights (and those who report on their activities) to be "annoyances." The arrogance from the top is having a trickle-down effect.
However, English is a success in one area: she'll be able to sidle up to Sarah Palin at the next party and whisper to her, "I had your back at the last meeting." In Palin's world, that's really what counts.
Governor Palin finally saw the light (or the oncoming train) and appointed Dennis Egan to Kim Elton's vacant Senate seat today.
Egan was promptly confirmed by Senate Democrats and was sworn in before the Legislature before the Senate and then the House adjourned for the year a short while ago.
Instead, Palin sent Senate Democrats three names -- two of which had already been considered and rejected. When the Senate Democrats refused her submittal of three names, she then resubmitted Gruessendorf. The Senate Democrats rejected that appointment, stating they believed (and were backed by Legislative lawyers) that a resubmittal of an already rejected name went against the laws for filling Legislative vacancies as he was "not a qualified candidate."
The Governor had until Monday, which would have been the 10th day, to submit a new appointment.
As a side note:
I would like to encourage EVERYONE to email/call the offices of ALL of our legislators who voted against Wayne Anthony Ross (the list is on my previous post) and especially the Senate Democrats regarding the Senate appointment and thank them for standing up to the Administration. They need to understand that we support them when they do something right.
**UPDATE** From a comment below:
So what happens? In a closed door meeting the Democrats vote unanimously for Egan. I haven't heard a complaint from the Governor about that. I wonder why? ;)
Also, I forgot to mention that, if she had not appointed someone before the end of the session, there was automatically going to be a special election.
I need to do more research on the above comment. Though I found it in my notes from a conversation from a very good source, I was told it earlier in the session and now there may be extenuating circumstances that could have made it incorrect. (Like, there was already a pending opportunity for the Governor to make an appointment).
I'll get back to you on it! (wait...that sounds familiar...)
For a little background relating to this post, let's go back a few days:
During the Gavel-to-Gavel coverage of the House Judiciary Committee's public testimony regarding Wayne Anthony Ross's Attorney General appointment, I heard testimony in support of WAR from former AIP Senate Candidate Bob Bird (25-year-friend of WAR):
"At a time when our nation and state are being subjected to the most divisive and controversial policies, many of which are not enacted by the Legislative Branch but are coming at us straight between the eyes by the Federal Government we need to start finding someone who will dig in for Alaska.
This one Native leader said that Mr. Ross should be an Attorney General for all Alaskans. But I would suggest that we need to also include the fact that the Native representatives also represent whites. Natives and non-Natives, rural or urban, it's the time to start thinking of ourselves as Alaskans. That's where the real devisiveness comes from. We're supposed to think of ourselves as Alaskans and forget the things that divide us."
This is a common theme among extreme right-wing conservative organizations and (dare I say it?) "white power" organizations as well. It was also a common theme at last week's "tea parties."
They completely ignore the fact that the treatment of Rural Alaska, especially regarding monies for rural infrastructure, support and just about all services, has been far from "fair and equitable" in comparison to the huge quantity of funds allocated to Alaska's urban areas. It was not a surprise that "white" rural leaders, like Bob Heron of Bethel who is a member of the Republican majority caucus, also joined in the "no" vote against Ross. He was representing his constituency.
Bird continued:
He has been a strong advocate for the right to keep and bear arms, a right that is under threat even as we speak from the so-called "protector," the Federal Government. When animal rights activists come to threaten the Native subsistence lifestyle by imposing regulations on our land and seas, it will be Mr. Ross and not the Justice Department of Barack Obama that will fly to their defense.
"the State of Alaska lost its authority to manage subsistence harvest of fish and wildlife on Federal lands. Consequently, the five Federal agencies with land management responsibilities assumed responsibility for subsistence management on 380,900 square miles of land under Federal jurisdiction."
So, it seems, the Feds really ARE the protectors of Rural/Native subsistence rights as opposed to the State of Alaska.
Fast forward to Thursday, April 16th...
The Gavel-to-Gavel coverage of the Joint Legislative session while I was liveblogging the hearing gave me insight into many of the legislators with whom I had not previously been acquainted.
Representative Mike Kelly (R) of Fairbanks was one I knew a little about. However, his testimony gave me more insight on his views, some of which seemed to echo those of Bob Bird:
I don't personally know Wayne Anthony Ross -- just by reputation. But, thousands of pounds of tea is going into the waterways of our nation. Why is that? It hasn't happened for quite a long period of time but we're seeing it on the T.V. every night.
That's because the Federal government is overstepping its bounds and stepping on the 9th and 10th and 2nd Amendment rights and some attempts of our nation. Alaska contracted with the Federal Government when we became a state in certain areas such as access to our lands and the right to manage our navigable waters and use them without "mother may I" to the Fed--managing our Fish and Game or the fact that they promised us our right to our natural resources and then locked up 250 million acres of Alaska--the fact that we only have 2% of our land in private ownership.
The Governor has selected this man, again I do not know him personally. But WAR may be exactly the right person to have at the helm of our judicial system in "tea party times" Mr. President.
Rep. Kelly publicly espouses anti-Federal Government views. This is not particularly bright for a legislator when a good relationship between Alaska and the Feds is vital to both of our interests. Also, the Federal influence he seems to reference was the DIRECT RESULT of past legislators short-sightedness regarding the subsistence issue.
So now, we come to this weekend's end-of-session activity in the Legislature. It seems that long days and stress cause people's true beliefs to rise to the surface. Per the ADN:
Saturday began with a confrontation in the House Finance Committee about what to do in regard to high energy costs in rural Alaska. The Legislature is poised to appropriate $9 million statewide for low-income heating assistance programs to assist. But Fairbanks Rep. Kelly said he thought it was supposed to be a one-time appropriation last year, and state revenues have dropped.
He said there are other programs for people who are needy and "not for any layabouts."
"I'd rather tell the guy, go out there and cut your own wood or do something for yourself. ... I don't know how many of the 200-plus villages have a wood supply within a rock toss, but there's a lot of them because I've been to a lot of them," he said.
Rep. Woodie Salmon, a Democrat from the village of Chalkyitsik, angrily responded that there have been millions of dollars in state subsidies for urban energy needs.
"They spent millions and millions of dollars on a coal plant, transmission lines, then they retire off the system, and then they don't help the rural areas," he said.
Kelly is the retired president of Golden Valley Electric Association in Fairbanks.
Rural Alaskans along the Yukon were making a living off of the King Salmon runs in the Yukon, until the Pacific pollock trawlers were taking them away as "bycatch." Fisheries experts agree this has most likely been a large contributor to the crash of the King Salmon fisheries along the Yukon, which has then thrown the villages along the river into dire poverty. The most recent vote by the pro-industry North Pacific Fisheries Council to allow the present levels of bycatch to continue sentences the villages along the Yukon to more financial instability and uncertainty. Without the necessary infrastructure denied to them by the State over many years, alternatives are few.
Perhaps Representative Kelly's words and actions show a desire for that status quo to continue? After all, if the Alaska Natives leave the rural areas to find jobs in the urban areas, the incorporated Native villages would dissolve. All of the land and resource rights held by those villages would most likely revert back to the State.
I can only hope that Kelly's outrageous accusations towards Rural Alaskans will encourage everyone, especially his Fairbanks constituents, to express their outrage at his behavior.
In a previous post, I explain the saga of the vacant Juneau Democratic Senate seat. When last we visited it, Governor Palin had submitted 3 names without appointing anyone...two of the names were already rejected and the latest one wasn't even a Democrat.
"There is nothing for us to vote on, there is no appointment," said Senate Judiciary Chairman Hollis French, an Anchorage Democrat. "The governor has taken an unusual course which is outside the law and leaves us no choice but to ignore what she's done."
Ross said earlier that he previously approved the Governor sending the three names to the Democratic Senators believing it to be legal. He's sticking to that story.
Ross said he needs to review the legal opinion by Pam Finley, a lawyer for the Legislature. But he said he believes what Palin did was legal and appropriate, given the time he's had to look at it to this point.
It's less than two pages! How hard is that to analyze?
The REALLY interesting comment is here:
Ross said the dispute could impact the vote on his confirmation.
"I get involved in this kind of donnybrook I probably won't get any votes from the people that disagree with me. I may be through tomorrow afternoon, who knows. But I'm hoping I'll get a chance to be confirmed," Ross said.
Let's just say, that comment jives with the frantic scuttlebutt out there.
Does anyone have an asbestos suit Mr. Ross can borrow for Thursday...just in case?
Many of you have been following the WWF fight we like to call "How we fill an empty Democratic State Senate seat in Alaska under the Palin Administration." For those of you who may have missed it, I'll try to present the short version:
- Senator Kim Elton of Juneau joins the Obama team.
- Juneau Democrats nominate the person they want and whom they feel is the most qualified (as they are supposed to do), Juneau Rep. Beth Kertulla. They put her name forward to the Governor.
- Governor said "Nah"...went through an exhaustive search of her own and put together a list of people NOT DESIRED BY JUNEAU DEMS. She nominated one of them...Tim Gruessendorf...a guy who had no experience and, until a few weeks previous, had been a Republican.
- Senate Dems used the "reject" stamp and put forth Kertulla's name plus three others with legislative experience agreed upon, once again, by the Juneau Dems (as they, once again, were supposed to).
- Governor said "Nah" and picked another from her list, a very nice man...Joe Nelson...who had no legislative experience, who had no record of public service and, once again, was NOT DESIRED BY THE JUNEAU DEMS.
- The Senate Dems, once again, used that "reject" stamp.
- Bruce Botelho, Juneau's mayor, had a wise idea. He came up with an excellent compromise to nominate Dennis Egan, the somewhat conservative-leaning Democratic son of our first Governor and another former Mayor of Juneau. The compromise was so good that the Juneau Dems were happy, House Minority Leader Kertulla (D) was happy and even Speaker of the House John Harris (R) recommended that the Governor accept the nomination!
- But no...once again, Governor Narcissist Palin said "Nah." This time, she DIDN'T NOMINATE ANYONE. She sent the Senate Democrats three names: the previously rejected Gruessendorf, the previously rejected Nelson, and...
...a completely new name...Alan Wilson.
So, there are three very serious issues here and one very, very entertaining one. We'll start with the entertaining one and get it out of the way; Alan Wilson's wife is named Sydney Mitchell, the owner of a sweet little store in Juneau named Shoefly Shoefly & Hudson.
Is this sounding familiar yet? Wait...I'll give you a hint...
Yup...the Governor bought that FAMOUS pair of red Double Dare Naughty Monkey shoes at Shoefly...that pair her "niece" (wink, wink) sold on Ebay!
So now you know where the "shopping" part came in! One could have great fun wondering as to how (or why) the husband of the owner of Governor Palin's favorite shoe store came to be a potential nominee for a vacant Alaska State Senate seat. Let's ponder that for a moment...
[...ponder...]
So while that is the "fun" part of this information, the rest of this is not fun at all. Just how "not fun" this is can probably be seen right about now in the capitol halls in Juneau on the faces of Alaska legislators from BOTH parties.
Governor Palin has made several very grave errors. It's best to understand that vacant legislative seats are filled under two important pieces of Alaska Legislation:
--The Alaska Constitution (Article II), which says that "A vacancy in the legislature shall be filled for the unexpired term as provided by law." That law is:
--Alaska Statutes 15.40.320-470. For brevity, I'll pull the applicable information:
AS 15.40.320: When a vacancy occurs in the state legislature, the governor, within 30 days, shall appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy...
AS 15.40.330: (a)The appointee shall meet the qualifications of a member of the legislature as prescribed in Sec. 2, art. II of the state constitution, shall be a member of the same political party as that which nominated the predecessor in office, and shall be subject to confirmation by a majority of the members of the legislature who are members of the same political party which nominated the predecessor in office and of the same house as was the predecessor in office.
(b)A member of a political party is a person who supports the political program of a party.
AS 15.40.350: If an appointment is rejected, the governor, within 10 days, shall appoint another qualified person as provided in AS 15.40.330, who shall also be subject to confirmation, as provided in that section.
So, in order to meet the criteria, the Governor would have to:
1) Appoint someone--she didn't actually "appoint" anyone, she submitted three names to the Democratic Senators. This is very strange because they can't do the "appointing."
That's a possible violation of Alaska Law.
2) The "appointee" must be a qualified Democrat--The Governor DID IT AGAIN--she picked someone who is so new to the Democratic Party that he is NOT LISTED AS A DEMOCRAT ON THE DIVISION OF ELECTION DATABASE!!!! It still has him listed as a Non-partisan! (As a matter-of-fact, the only way we have even heard that he IS a Democrat...registered March 4th...is according to spokesperson Sharon Leighow)
Let's be very clear here...just like Gruessendorf (who switched from "Republican"), Wilson switched from "Non-partisan" to "Democrat" on March 4th.
Senator Kim Elton resigned his post as Senator MARCH 3RD...ONE DAY BEFORE!
(This is only if Governor Palin's Deputy Press Secretary Sharon Leighow's information is accurate...there is no evidence of Wilson's "switch" yet in the Division of Elections database)
Why exactly would someone do that on their own...without encouragement, provocation or perhaps, promises?
*************************************************************************
3) She included two names of people who were ALREADY REJECTED BY THE SENATE DEMOCRATS! Once they are rejected, they cannot be submitted again!
Third possible violation of Alaska Law.
Why this is a big deal? Violations of the law leave a Governor open to all kinds of things:
It's quite flattering to know that members of the Legislature and/or their aides are keeping track of this little blog! I received an email from John Bitney, aide to Representative John Harris, R Valdez, regarding my post from Michelle Meyer (elections and environmental watchdog) on HB 134.
An improved HB134 (cruise ship discharge) has moved onto the Senate thanks to efforts by concerned Alaskans to not allow mobile mixing zones for cruise ships. Your help is needed to call upon the Senate to amend the bill to include a deadline for compliance with Alaska Water Quality Standards.
At this time, some ships are meeting Alaska Water Quality Standards. Last year a full 1/3 of all ships' samples met Alaska 's discharge limits! This means that, in spite of claims otherwise, THEY CAN MEET OUR STANDARDS, they just need to be made to do so. By providing an end date, or sunset, to the extension, we give them a firm time frame to come into compliance.
Hey there Ms. Diva:
I clipped the above language from your web site this morning...
The reason a full 1/3 of ships met Alaska 's standards is NOT TRUE.
Yesterday in Senate Resources, Lynn Kent from DEC testified that there were 31 large cruise ships in Alaska last year. Of these, 12 ships chose NOT to apply themselves to the state permit. In other words...they are simply not discharging in state waters, but rather are using large onboard holding tanks in order to allow for discharge in federal waters (3 miles offshore).
Of the 19 vessels that subjected themselves to the state permit, some are complying because they are limiting certain discharges (IE treated greywater) into state waters. That means they use holding tanks for all other discharges (IE black water) once they get into federal water.
My concern is that arguments for the sunset provision are based on a false notion that "we're getting close to compliance". Just because ships are dumping in federal waters doesn't seem like a solution.
Glad to know the legislators' offices are paying attention!
I have to correct Mr. Bitney's "correction" - the March 2, 2009 DEC report says that approximately 1/3 of the samples from the ships (not individual ships) that were tested in 2008 (i.e., the ships WITH permitted discharges) met the long term standards for the four pollutants of concern (ammonia, copper , zinc and nickel.) DEC says that 68% of the samples didn't meet the long term standards. In my book, that means about 2/3 of sample didn't. One-third (1/3) of them are meeting the Water Quality Standard (WQS) at point of discharge.
For the record, this has nothing to do with holding tanks or not being permitted to discharge, although the lobbyists are working hard to convince legislators (and their staff) otherwise. The number is about the percentage of samples, not the percentage of ships, because some ships were meeting the copper stds in one test and then not in the next. But the number of samples overall that met the standards are indeed as has been stated.
The bottom line is ... it can't be said that meeting Alaska's standards is impossible. If some ships can do it, or one ship can meet the standards on some days, then all ships can do it with half an effort. The ships samples are meeting the standards a good portion of the time - the real question is, why didn't some of the cruise lines put their money into MEETING the standards instead of paying cruise associations and lobbyists hundreds of thousands of dollars to say they can't? From the DEC report, it doesn't look like some of them even tried. A sunset provision to the Senate Bill means they still have to try, but now they have a serious deadline. No more whining behind closed doors, it's time to meet the standard.
Yes, Michelle, I think that clears it up just fine!
The bottom line is the larger cruise ship companies don't want to make some of the modifications the smaller companies have (i.e. switching out their metal pipes for plastic, thus eliminating the problem of leeching too much copper into the ocean). They would rather spend the money on perks for the legislators, hiring high-powered lobbyists and paying for expensive PR campaigns.
Here's an email I got from Clean Elections' Michelle Meyer, who is working hard on very important legislation, HB 134 (version CSHB 134)--Cruise Ship Wastewater Discharge Permits. We cannot allow the Cruise Ship Industry to regulate themselves. Ask any Alaska shore community how well THAT works!
Please email Senators today - help protect our traditional food gathering areas and our fisheries!
An improved HB134 (cruise ship discharge) has moved onto the Senate thanks to efforts by concerned Alaskans to not allow mobile mixing zones for cruise ships. Your help is needed to call upon the Senate to amend the bill to include a deadline for compliance with Alaska Water Quality Standards.
At this time, some ships are meeting Alaska Water Quality Standards. Last year a full 1/3 of all ships' samples met Alaska's discharge limits! This means that, in spite of claims otherwise, THEY CAN MEET OUR STANDARDS, they just need to be made to do so. By providing an end date, or sunset, to the extension, we give them a firm time frame to come into compliance. In its own assessment, DEC said the following about each cruise line's compliance:
Carnival Cruise lines - Met limits
Silver Shadow V-Ship - Met required limits of Ammonia and Zinc due to fine-tuning its existing wastewater treatment, making operational changes and replacing some piping and valves.
Norwegian Cruise Lines - Completing metal pipe replacement that may reduce the levels of metal and ammonia.
Seven Seas Mariner - Met limits for nickel, failed levels for zinc. Replaced corroded metal piping and valves, then passed long term limits for zinc. Currently working on means to reduce copper and ammonia.
Celebrity/Royal Caribbean Cruises - didn't consistently discharge in Alaska waters during the 2008 season, is replacing metal portions of water pipes with non-metallic piping to reduce metals discharges.
Princess Cruises - Six of their ships consistently exceeded the long term limits for ammonia and metals. One ship met the nickel limits. Ship-produced drinking water is corrosive, causing metals to leach metals from ship's piping. Company is looking into additives to reduce the problem, but Princess hasn't provided any details as to how they'll solve the problem.
Holland America - Five ships consistently failed limits for metals and ammonia discharges. Company has concentrated its efforts on evaluating the chemicals used onboard and evaluating the levels of metals in drinking water, however the chemicals onboard don't appear to be a significant source of either of these problems. Company hasn't indicated what steps it'll take to correct the problem or that they'll have a plan in place by this summer.
DEC believes there is existing technology, developing technology or other actions that can be used to resolve the ships' compliance problems with the limits. DEC also thinks it reasonable to give them more time.
Alaskans know, however, that this industry will take a mile if you give them an inch. Therefore it is prudent and reasonable for Alaskans to demand a sunset provision to any time extension.
Adding a deadline is VERY important.
See below for a simple message and Senate committee contacts. Please send your message today and pass this message along to your email lists.
The current form of HB134 is an improvement over the bill's initial language, but a deadline MUST be set to protect traditional food gathering areas and our fisheries as well as the intent of Alaskans who voted for the initiative in 2006.
Please amend CSHB134 to sunset provision (e) and bring closure to the present waivers that allow mixing zones.
So the Palin Administration hasn't had a very good couple of weeks.
--Andree McLeod filed two ethics complaints, one against her Press Secretary Bill McAllister and one on Palin's closest aide, Kris Perry.
--CNN has been doing regular broadcasts of Dennis Zaki's videos from his trip to Rural Alaska...a trip the Governor has yet to make...causing questions about the Governor's inaction to go national. Dennis's trip was a result of grass-roots fundraising by bloggers and "community organizers."
--The Alaska Legislature reminded the 10 folks subpeonaed during the Branchflower Investigation that they were in contempt when they decided not to show up. However, they put much of the blame on Attorney General Talis Colberg in advising them that they had the option not to show up, so the Legislature decided not to punish them. (I heard from sources over the weekend that the Legislature "may not be done" with Colberg.)
Governor Palin is claiming that Talis "resigned" because it's a "harsh political environment." Even the Daily News headline states that "Colberg resigns amid legislative pressure over 'Troopergate'"
Let's all be clear about where that "pressure" has come from.
When Alaska Governor Sarah Palin gave her innaugural speech in 2006, she made many promises of "protecting and defending the Alaska Constitution," supporting "free market and competition" and yes, this is the part where she asks us all to "hold her accountable." However, she also says this (at 7:50 on the video):
I'll insist on ethics in your government. **applause**
That all changed after she became a VP candidate and the McCain/Palin campaign decided not to cooperate with the investigation AND to smear and attack Walt Monegan and anyone who dared asked questions:
The Repubublicans also declared war on "Community Organizers."
Since no one else seemed to be standing up against the McCain Campaign people who were taking over the Alaska Government, in rode the community organizers:
-- Alaskans for Truth pushed a "Call to Action" called "Countdown to Truth" where for 10 days, everyone was encouraged to repeatedly contact the members of the Legislative Council, pushing for them to release the Branchflower Report. 2000 emails were sent out and the voice mail and email boxes of the legislators were flooded.
-- Alaskans for Truth had another major "Call to Action" leading up to the legislative session where hundreds of supporters contacted members of the Legislature through the holidays demanding that action be taken against Talis Colberg, the folks who ignored the subpeonas and that the results of the Branchflower Report not be forgotten. Before the "call" there were a number of legislators who had already stated they were "over" Troopergate. After a few weeks of emails, several legislator responses changed from less favorable to more favorable towards action on the Branchflower Investigation.
So, thanks to community organizers, Alaskan bloggers (wearing pajamas or not), and most of all, the passionate public out there who has supported the efforts, two of the things Alaskans for Truth wanted to get done were finished this week.
I encourage Governor Palin to continue to insult, laugh-at and try to discredit bloggers, community organizers, and civic-minded constituents. Believe me, it just makes us all more determined. And it appears that the Palin Administration really can't afford for us to get any more "determined" than we already are.
Let's get one thing straight...I am NOT a fan of PETA. I support PETA in their quest to spay and neuter to reduce the pet population but I think that's as far as the organization and I go together. I'm a carnivore, I wear fur and I like fishing.
That being said, Bill McAllister's emails actually made me feel a twinge of empathy for PETA. Being on the receiving end of the Palin Administration's bizarre, crazy-making behavior is...well...bizarre and crazy-making! While it can be argued that both Ingrid from PETA and Bill from Alaska acted like junior-high students, it could also be argued that Bill McAllister is the spokesperson for the Governor of Alaska. He should be on the high-road at all times, not diving into the depths of snarkiness and insults.
That's the territory of a campaign spokesperson, or does that mean that McAllister is once again wearing two hats and our Governor Sarah really is campaigning already? Hmmmmm...
The very same day that story came out, my in-box filled-up with back-and-forth email traffic between Alaskans for Truth supporters and Representative Mike Doogan. I was stunned! The AFT supporters were responding to the email Doogan sent out to about 30 of them at once, which can be found on the Alaskans for Truth website. It's hard to get beyond the first few paragraphs:
"Sorry this response took so long, but I wanted to make sure that all of your often-identical emails had reached me, and to do a little research on a couple of points you made.
First, let me thank you for writing. Citizen participation is important to this process, and I'm glad you took the time to make your views known.
Second, there is not much that can be done to satisfy your requests or demands or whatever they are. More on that in a moment."
Mudflats has done excellent reviews of the Doogan email process, starting with that initial response. Then there was the Mudflats story on the email chain started by that response...the same emails that filled my in-box. (and a number of other Alaskan bloggers).
There were several things about McAllister and Doogan's seperate email wars that blew me out of the water:
1) Both men are long-time journalists who worked for professional media outlets for many years. Of all people who should know how to control themselves and act appropriately with the public, it should be them.
2) Both men have jobs where they are supposed to be spokesmen or statesmen...either putting someone else or themselves in a positive light with the public.
3) Both men are answerable to the public either directly or indirectly. McAllister is indirectly responsible to the public as his boss, the Governor, is supposed to be answerable directly. Doogan is an elected legislator and theoretically is directly answerable.
4) Both men have shown repeatedly (and I suspect, will continue to show) that they don't care if they are answerable or not.
Sadly, among all of that disrespect and snark, Doogan actually showed potential for generating some decent legislation during the session:
"...I intend to move forward with legislation to prevent a re-occurrence of some of the problematic behavior that has arisen from the mess commonly called Troopergate. That legislation will define more closely what is a public document and seek to prevent public officials from shielding their communications by using private email accounts, and the state from stifling public access by charging an arm and a leg."
(I'd ask him more about it, but others have reported that he's now refusing to discuss issues with people who are not in his district. I find that facinating as whatever legislation he proposes effects ALL Alaskans quite directly.)
I've watched all of these developing McAllister and Doogan stories on the blogs and/or on the ADN. I've discovered that each one inevitably contain comments from the lower-48, where the commenter is disgusted by either or both McAllister's and Doogan's email behavior. The commenter goes on to explain that if either gentleman were in the same positions in the commenter's state, folks would have drummed them out of their jobs long ago.
I thought long-and-hard about those comments and realized that lack-of-respect may be the result of a pattern in Alaska. There was so much vehemence reflected in both men's reponses it was clear they believed they would not be held accountable for their juvenile behavior. It was also clear that they were unused to a group of people actively calling them on it. Doogan showed so much resentment for what he called an "organized campaign," he actually called Alaskans for Truth supporters "coreligionists."
Wow.
So I thought about what group of Alaskans ARE ALWAYS vocal and ARE taken more seriously and I came up with one group we hear from incessantly...
...those who pay property taxes!
Property taxpayers are invested in what happens to the money they pay directly to the city/municipality. Taxpayers have voted as a block very effectively for or against various Anchorage proposals, bonds, for or against Municipal candidates, etc... Property tax payers always make their Assembly representatives...and their Mayor...aware of their presence every time their taxes go up.
Property taxpayers directly write checks so they have a tangible dog in the fight.
Not so with our state legislature...while the oil money that funds our state does technically belong to each Alaskan, it's not like we ever take posession of it and then pay it back for state expenses. The only time we DO take posession is when we get to keep it...once a year at dividend time.
And then we're so busy spending it, we ignore everything else.
This year, the oil money has taken a nose dive. The Alaska budget is facing a crisis (no matter what fantasy land Gov. Palin may be living in) and those suggestions of various state taxes have come up once again in discussion. There are many who lean on the side of a sales tax which would take one of various forms. However, the tax I believe to be the most fair and may also solve a number of our problems is an Alaska State Income Tax.
1) An AK State Income Tax would be a write-off on Federal Income Tax,
2) AK State Income Tax would be fair, as it is usually on a sliding scale based on income,
3) AK State Income Tax would finally hit those folks who come to Alaska to work and then take all of that income out of the state to spend
4) AK State Income Tax would make us less dependent on oil for our state budget,
And the reason that motivated this post:
5) AK State Income Tax would make every Alaskan more motivated to pay attention to their Governor, their legislators, the budget, new legislation, state spending habits, etc...
I don't believe it's a coincidence that those "comments" questioning the lack-of-respect from our politicians are from folks who reside in states where they pay state income tax.
So this is my proposal to bring accountability back into government--forcing politicians to respect their constituents as those same constituents demand more from them.
Oh yeah...it will also reduce Alaska's dependence on oil money.
Establishing an income tax may actually have a prayer; I think it's going to be hard for the legislature NOT to pass SOME kind of tax this time, as the economy shows every sign of getting worse rather than better.
Back in November, when Governor Palin was stumping for Saxby Chambliss, the Democratic Party had a press availability where Chairwoman Patti Higgins expressed concern over the amount of time Palin seemed to be absent since the end of the VP Campaign, during which she was missing from the state for two months:
Patti Higgins, chairwoman for the Alaska Democratic Party, said this morning that the governor needs to spend more time at home tackling problems like the state's high dropout rate and the migration from villages to cities.
"Governing is more than creating photo ops. We'd like a commitment that the governor is working," she said.
In response, the Governor's press secretary, Bill McAllister, called a last-minute "press availability" and said this:
"It sounds like the Democrats are seizing on a what is a normal lull in external activity in the administration to make it seem as though the governor is not working -- knowing full well this is the period when all the decisions are being made and they are unveiled in December," McAllister said.
Also, when reporter Kyle Hopkins asked, "How much of this are we going to see from here? Going out into the future, how frequently are we going to see her out fundraising, stumping for Republican Candidates?" Bill McAllister deflected the question:
"Well, she's spending half the day in Georgia doing that..."
Later on, another question from an unidentified female reporter:
"What do you anticipate the legislative session looking like as far as her schedule."
McAllister responds:
"Well, it's going to be very busy, as I've indicated, she's got a tough budget she's going to have to roll out; we have the long-range energy plan; she has various legislative initiatives which are still being finalized..."
Just got off the phone with Lisa DePasquale, director of the Conservative Political Action Conference, who tells me that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is confirmed as a speaker at CPAC 2009, Feb. 26-28 at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Washington, DC.
Seems that the "turkey pardoning" managed to usurp this news in Alaska.)
Most importantly: If you note the dates...February 26-28...allow a full day of travel before and a full day afterwards, as D.C. takes hours to fly to from Alaska, you'll see the outrageous truth:
That's FIVE FULL DAYS!!!
This is not during a "lull" in "external activity," this is smack-dab in the middle of the time that the Governor is supposed to show up...the 90-day Legislative Session! This is the same session in which Bill McAllister declared that Governor Palin would be "very busy" and then listed the State issues she would have to cover!!!
Register Today for the Largest Annual Gathering of Conservative Students, Activists and Policymakers!
So there is no pretense that this is anything other than partisan politics. This isn't Governor Palin pushing any Alaska agenda, this is candidate Sarah Palin running for future office. She's already confirmed with CPAC that she'll be there. I wonder what kind of other trip they are desperately searching for right now that they can paint as "vital to Alaska" to coincide with this partisan one?
Of course, that would take her out of Alaska even longer.
Back to that November interview...Bill McAllister stated in answer to a question about the Governor's absences:
"In these days of Blackberries and everything else, it's very easy to stay in touch."
I don't see her effectively being able to do business on all of those issues on her Blackberry and I would hope that the Legislature WILL NOT put up with it.
State House finance co-chair Mike Hawker told Gov. Palin today in a hand delivered letter that she's based her budget on an unrealistically high expectation for state revenue. He wants her to rework the numbers to reflect a possible $2 to $3 billion deficit.
Palin's budget proposal is based on her revenue department's projection that oil will average $74.41 a barrel over the next budget year, which starts in July. "Many, if not most, professional economic analysts believe that the actual average prices will be significantly less than that," Hawker wrote.
I believe that this may be good news for those of us who have been afraid that the Legislature is just going to roll over and die for her.
Republican Representative Hawker is in essence requesting that Palin lay more realistic cards on the table up front, rather than rely on her typical modus operendi...lay back and let the Legislature take the hits for the unpopular decisions while she takes the credit for those choices that are popular with the public. If the fantasy budget she's proposed is allowed to stand unchallenged, she'll simply say that she's "forced" to go along with the tough budget cuts ahead because Alaska's income didn't live up to Revenue's expectations.
That...once again...it's not HER fault...
Of course, this year she has much stronger motivation to follow that tried-and-true formula...the presidential election in 2012. She has quite a tightrope to walk since the national media is watching her every step. While a budget full of red ink would make the fiscal conservatives happy, it would also provide fodder to her critics who would analyze every area she slashed.
Quite the sticky-wicket, wouldn't you say?
So while some are giving her the benefit of the doubt regarding this budget submission, I have NO doubt that it was a calculated CYA move.
Rep. Hawker's letter states it in language that sounds vaguely familiar (emphasis mine):
"No one can accurately predict the future of these markets. However, the consensus of opinion among the best economic minds in the country indicates that basing the state budget for 2010 on $74.41 a barrel is certainly aggressive. I am concerned that it may also be imprudent. It is important the budget process be open and transparent to the Alaska public. Introducing budget bills founded on the unlikely hope of a rapid return to high oil prices is contrary to that principle and inconsistent with a responsible and productive budget dialogue between the branches of government and with the Alaska people."
My interpretation: You are NOT going to make us the bad guy THIS time!
I may disagree with Hawker and the other Republicans this session on some of the individual budget items, but I'll definitely support them in making sure that EVERYONE is held accountable for those decisions they will have to make...not just the Legislators but the Governor as well.
However folks don't seem to notice the condition she put on the refusal:
Palin says she didn't ask for a pay raise and won't accept one during her current term.
Sarah Palin went through a vetting in the two months of the VP campaign that she managed to dodge in the rest of the 10 years of her political career in Wasilla and the State of Alaska.
It would be likely that her accepting a raise at this time would further motivate many of her Alaskan constituents to pressure the Legislature to tighten the rules, thus cutting off her ability to dip into the state per diem and travel trough.
Looking at the numbers:
PROPOSED RAISE: $25,000.
- 312 nights spent in her own house--per diem $18,720
- State money used for family travel--$21,012
TOTAL STATE MONEY: $39,732
So, if Palin accepted the raise and this motivated the Legislature to tighten per diem and travel rules...
MONEY PALIN WOULD LOSE: $14,732
RECOMMENDATION TO THE LEGISLATURE: Take the raises...you guys haven't had one since the 90s...plus it is offset because it replaces the per diem you guys get and makes everything more transparent.
Then, tighten the per diem and travel rules so that the Governor...as a state employee...has those same limits. We'll see if she still refuses the raise.
Yes, a month after the election, Democrats Reggie Joule of Kotzebue, Unalaska's Bryce Edgmon and newly-elected Bob Herron of Bethel have decided to join the majority coalition.
This means that we go from a 23-17 breakdown to a 26-14 split in the Alaska house. This also means that the minority loses a seat on the House Finance Committee, which writes the budget and deals with any bills involving money. This also means that getting any kind of progressive legislation through the House might be "challenging" at best, "impossible" at worst.
Why have these lawmakers made this choice?
Joining the majority will put Edgmon as co-chair of the Special Committee on Energy, and Herron becomes the co-chairman of the Health and Social Services Committee. Joule keeps his seat on the finance committee. He said in a statement that being a part of the majority is "an opportunity for us to highlight issues effecting rural Alaska."
Huh? Because up till now, Republican legislators have shown more sensitivity on Rural Alaskan issues? (see: subsistence)
Beth Kertula, D-Juneau, spoke to the effect on the House Democrats:
...the three lawmakers would have been part of a strong minority if they had stayed. She called it a short-sighted decision and a hurtful one to their former colleagues.
"It's a tough day but we're going to keep going and do the right thing by Alaskans," she said.
"Do the right thing by Alaskans" is the operative phrase here. I can't imagine that those constituents, especially Blue-leaning Bethel who just elected Bob Herron for the first time, are happy about this sudden reversal. While it does allow their legislator to have chairmanships and co-chairmanships that they may want, it also requires faith that the rest of the coalition will follow their lead in these committees...or even allow them to lead.
My question: what were the motivations for the Republicans? I spoke with a Legislator just before the election and they said the R's were clear they wanted to split in the House to remain along partisan lines. They had a majority and were not interested in a coalition.
Being a part of the majority can mean more power to obtain state money and get bills passed. Incoming House Speaker Mike Chenault, R-Nikiski, who recruited the rural legislators, said they broaden the views of the majority.
"Broaden the views of the majority"...perhaps... In the House, they need 22 united legislators to even "bang the gavel." At 23, that was cutting it a little close so those additional 3 give them more of a comfort zone against defectors. However, perhaps the recruitment had more to do with pulling Dems away from the minority and squelching anything that might be particularly divisive...like holding the Governor accountable, perhaps?
Another unsubstantiated theory mentioned yesterday was derived from the scuttlebutt floating around the last few months claiming that several candidates for the Alaska Legislature were running as Democrats just to win...that they weren't truly Democrats. Since House members...especially Rural Alaskan representatives frequently run unopposed, it wouldn't be impossible to do.
Meyer works for Conoco but believed that giving AGIA to TransCanada was the only way to keep the producers involved in the process once oil/gas prices dipped. His input into the process in the Senate on the side of the coalition will be interesting.
The third legislative issue is the proposed payraise for our lawmakers, but I'll leave that for a post later today!
An indicator that a) the election is really over and b) the Legislative session is right around the corner is the plethora of Legislative newsletters hitting Alaskan emailboxes around the state.
Some of the highlights:
Sen. Johnny Ellis
SENATE ORGANIZATION COMES TOGETHER
While there are still many ballots from Tuesday's election to be counted from around the state, the Senate moved yesterday to put in place its leadership team for the next legislative session. I am pleased to report that I will once again serve as Senate Majority Leader, a position which I feel has allowed me to effectively advocate for the needs and interests of my constituents.
Yesterday I joined members of the Bipartisan Working Group for a press conference to announce the Senate leadership for the upcoming 26th Alaska Legislature.
With 10 Democrats and 10 Republicans in the Senate a bipartisan sharing of power was necessary as we organized. There are currently 13 members of the Bipartisan Working Group, 12 of whom were members of last session's Majority, plus Senator-elect Joe Paskvan of Fairbanks . Senator Gary Stevens of Kodiak will serve as Senate President. At this time, only the leadership positions have been decided. Specific committee chairmanships and memberships are still being worked out, and I will update you on my other responsibilities as decisions are made.
Sen. Kim Elton
Like it or not, the taproot of Alaska's future is D.C. The feds apply subsistence rules, issue gas pipeline certificates, manage offshore fisheries, develop EPA recipes, determine endangered species, protect marine mammals, run the National Parks/Tongass/BLM lands, fund the Denali Commission, allow and regulate offshore drilling, change No Child Left Behind rules, reform health care, decide on (military) base realignments, and have their finger-thumb-fist on a host of other issues. Our economic future is more tightly tied up by the feds than Gulliver was by the Lilliputians.
Not only was the governor's 'campaign speak' harsh, during this election season we drifted back into the 'bridges to nowhere' whitewater. Our federal relationships also are changing as Sen. Ted Stevens' role is being redefined. If re-elected, Ted Stevens' policy coattails may look more like Joe the Plumber's t-shirt hanging out the back of his Carhartts than an emperor's cloak. Uncle Ted, if the election results stand, returns to a much smaller Senate minority. If it's Sen. Begich, the clout he is imbued with by being in the majority is tempered by the Senate's tenure system.
I'm scared. I'm scared by Sen. Stevens' changed circumstances and I'm scared some members of the new administration will find it difficult to remove some of the filters that arose because of campaign rhetoric by our governor.
Much as I hate to suggest this, it's time for a change in the governor's Washington, D.C. office. John Katz is a remarkable public servant who has served each and every governor since Jay Hammond. He's gracious, he's kind, he's smart, he's hardworking. His partnership with Sen. Stevens, Sen. Murkowski, and Rep. Young during their majority years has been especially productive and extremely beneficial for each and every Alaskan.
Circumstances, though, have changed dramatically. We need partnerships with senators and representatives on the other side of the aisle and we need partnerships with new cabinet and subcabinet policy makers. That's more easily done with a new, different, voice for two reasons: it's a clear sign the governor is serious about building bridges to somewhere with the new power brokers; and a person with better Democratic credentials gets better access (wish it weren't so but that's the Washington reality and we need a reality-based approach to protect our future).
Rep. Les Gara
I could be wrong about this. But it seems that Republican-leaning voters voted in much bigger numbers than Democratic-leaning voters. Poll leads for Ethan Berkowitz and Mark Begich disappeared, and a projected 15 - 20 point margin for the McCain-Palin ticket over President Obama turned out to be a rout - by 35 points. We can only speculate, but I think that many voters on the Republican side were excited to see a home state candidate on a presidential ticket - and voted. Many on the democratic side skipped voting because the national election was over by the time mid afternoon came around. This issue's started to receive some national attention too, e.g. http://www.fivethirtyeight.com... .
Regardless of whether I'm wrong - the
state's politics are in the balance because of a very low voter turnout - and 5 races that hang in the balance right now. We get this lesson in Alaska every two years, with lots of closer races. Voting in Alaska matters.
Closest to home - I need to announce that I beat no one. Don't worry (or celebrate, depending on your views). I didn't lose. It's just that no one ran against me (I did have an opponent in the August Primary). The good news - or at least what I've emphasized for my mother - is that I got something like 95% of the vote. The bad news is that 5% either didn't feel like filling out their ovals, or decided, um... Maybe it's better if I don't think about that.
In the Legislature, there will be something close to bi-partisan balance in a state that's had a heavily Republican legislature for 20 years. That could be good. Or the wrangling the next few days or weeks could be ugly. Democrats picked up 1 seat in the Senate, where we now have a 10 - 10 split between Democrats and Republicans, and Democrats appear to have picked up one seat in the House, with 5 races with results that could change that in both directions. Currently that leaves a 22 - 18 Republican edge.
As stated above, a bi-partisan Senate Coalition has been formed, and in the House Republicans have stated they'll organize along party lines - a decision many of us are working to try to change.
In a district-by-district analysis, it seems that most of the incumbents were the ones who did well last night...Democratic or Republican. However, much to my surprise, the Dems were the ones who gained in both the House AND the Senate!
The ADN does more of a summary of the whole Legislature. For my purposes, I'll just discuss the open seats and incumbents who lost
SENATE:
**District E (Fairbanks):
If this stands after the absentee ballot counting, this is a big one because it signifies the "blueing" of Fairbanks, a traditionally ultra-conservative town. Incumbent Republican Senator Gary Wilken went down to Democrat Joe Paskvan.
District G (Wasilla):
This was a seat in the Valley opened up by the retirement of Senate President Lyda Green. My friend, Eric Cordero (who has one helluva future in Alaska Politics!) lost to Palinbot Linda Menard, wife of Valley Mayor Curt Menard. Linda actually switched from Dem to Repub at the request of Sarah so she could run.
District O (Anchorage):
Convicted (awaiting sentencing) Senator John Cowdery is "retiring" from the Legislature. Republican House member Kevin Meyer won decisively in that district over Doug Van Etten.
Sen. Johnny Ellis
Sen. Kim Elton
Rep. Les Gara
