Facebook, You Wag… March 8, 2009
Posted by roothogreport in Legislature.Tags: Abramoff, ADN, aide, Don Young, Facebook, scandal, U.S. House
add a comment
The “People You May Know” tool on Facebook keeps telling me to add Don Young as a friend.
I’m not sure about that. Don Young’s friends aren’t always a group of which I want to be a part.
Houston, We Have A Stimulus February 14, 2009
Posted by roothogreport in Executive, Legislature.Tags: ADN, AP, BATF, NRA, Sarah Palin, stimulus
1 comment so far
I’m feeling pretty sick right now (head cold), but I doubt I feel as sick as Sarah Palin. You see, the stimulus just passed the Senate, and now she gets to choose whether or not to eat her anti-stimulus rhetoric and take the money allocated to Alaska. And she’d better make up her mind quickly, or at least within 45 days…
I also ran across a rumor going about that there is some secret clause in the stimulus requiring registration for all guns. This is patently untrue, from what I was able to find out – the one major gun-related item in the package appears to be enforcement money for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to attempt to stem the flow of illegal guns into Mexico. Which doesn’t sound like universal registration to me, but then I just belong to the regular NRA and not the tinfoil-hat NRA. As most of the residents of Alaska carry their tinfoil-hat NRA badge with pride, however, I expect to see this rumor spread like wildfire.
Disclosure: UA Advocacy February 9, 2009
Posted by roothogreport in Legislature.Tags: advocacy, budget, disclosure, funding, house, senate, UA
3 comments
I really should have mentioned this before, especially in the light of the Anna Fairclough story, but somehow I didn’t think to.
I have been selected by UAF’s student government (of which I am not a member) to take part in the University of Alaska’s advocacy efforts in Juneau.
The trip will take place later this month, and I plan to report on the process both here and for UAF’s weekly student newspaper, the Sun Star. It should be an interesting trip for me, as I’ve never been to Juneau before. It’s one thing to talk to legislators on the phone, and entirely another to talk to them in person. I’ve heard it’s beautiful down there, and that they’ve been getting a ton of snow. I’m excited.
In case you’re wondering what exactly we’re advocating for, the short answer is full funding for the university. To expand a bit, we’ll be asking for increases in maintenance allocations (the governor’s budget only allocated $10 million of a requested $50 million for upkeep of existing facilities), funding for a life science research and teaching facility at UAF (which has been UA’s number one capital funding priority for at least five years and has thus far received no funding), funding for K-12 outreach programs (did you know that Alaska has the worst high-school-to-college matriculation rate of any state in the nation?), and a host of other budget issues related to education.
I don’t expect that this trip (for which the university will foot the bill) to substantially change my opinion on education issues- I’m already a pretty strong proponent of education funding, which is probably why I was selected to go- but I did think that anyone who reads this blog deserves to know about the trip.
The Fairclough Flap, And Why It Matters February 8, 2009
Posted by roothogreport in Legislature.Tags: Anna Fairclough, development, house, Mark Hamilton, UA
add a comment
I spent quite a bit of time chasing down the story on Rep. Anna Fairclough’s remarks about the University of Alaska and some of the views its students and faculty express. I actually ended up speaking to all of the principal figures (except UA President, who is notoriously difficult to get ahold of… I guess there’s a reason he’s the highest-paid person in the state who has to disclose their salary), which is a testament to the accessibility of Alaska’s legislators.
Along the way, I found myself explaining the story many times in very simple terms to people who didn’t know the particulars, which was just about everybody. What I found is that different people had different reactions, but there were a few common threads:
- Just about every voting-age Alaskan, contrary to Rep. Fairclough’s assertion, is acutely aware of the role that resource development plays in the state economy.
- A lot of people, particularly conservative people, agree with Rep. Fairclough- not just about university students/faculty, but in general. In some conservative circles, there’s a definite “love-it-or-get-out” sentiment with regard to development- that is, anyone who doesn’t support oil, gas, mining, and timber development shouldn’t get to share in the proceeds.
- Many people I talked to seemed to focus on the development at the expense of the actual heart of the matter, which I see as being this: the reason this story blew up the way it did is that no matter how students feel or vote, there is something deeply wrong with making a link- even a speculative one- between political beliefs and education funding.
Anna Fairclough touched that third rail, and although she probably won’t suffer much political consequence from it, she brought a dangerous idea out into the open: why not stifle your political enemies by cutting, or threatening to cut, their funding?
The issue is deeper than Fairclough on both sides of the political spectrum, and I feel like we’ll see more of it before we see less. The trick is recognizing it when you see it, because it’s not always as obvious as, “So help me here in understanding how I should advocate funding more for an entire group that really doesn’t want to see development go forward?”
Are UA personnel anti-development? Should it matter? February 7, 2009
Posted by roothogreport in Legislature.Tags: Anna Fairclough, Finance, house, Mark Hamilton, UA, University of Alaska
1 comment so far
In Tuesday’s State House Finance Committee meeting, Rep. Anna Fairclough (R-Eagle River) caused a stir when she asked University of Alaska President Mark Hamilton for help understanding why she should advocate funding the University when many students and staff oppose the development that provides the lion’s share of state revenue.
Fairclough is the chair of the UA Funding subcommittee, so many observers interpreted this as a sort of shot across the bow. Fairclough denies that she meant the comments as a threat in any way. I’ll write more on this soon, but for now, here’s a transcript of what Fairclough asked Hamilton:
Last year I had many passionate students come to my door and ask for support for the scholarship program that was out there- to support that. And I had many passionate university instructors and staff from across the university. And I found it amazing that there was a large disconnect in where the dollars from the state of Alaska comes from on a regular basis as far as the production of oil on the North Slope and how that is turned into revenue for the state of Alaska and in turn is invested in the university system.
President Hamilton, if I asked university staff, the people who are educating our future leaders, if they support the Chukchi Sea development, Red Dog Mine, Pebble Mine, or any type of industry along those lines, a stereotypical response is that they are in opposition. If I asked- or I did ask- I asked them when they came through the door, each different group- the students that were passionate- the same questions. Whether they supported it, whether they thought their friends supported it.
Predominantly, each of the student groups that came through said they opposed all the things that I just said- oil exploration, expansion… and they were concerned, in a very idealistic way, about our environment, which I greatly appreciated, but the question I ask you, is when you come to us asking for more dollars for the university and the system itself is creating- those that are engaged in the system may be creating an inability for us to provide those resources to you- what can I do to help clarify inside of that population that if you want more money, you can either choose- because I asked them if they wanted to tax themselves, too, and that wasn’t a good solution either.
So help me here in understanding how I should advocate funding more for an entire group that really doesn’t want to see development go forward?
-Representative Anna Fairclough, 2/3/09
Alaska Briefs December 20, 2008
Posted by roothogreport in Executive, Legislature.Tags: Bristol Palin, Don Young, Energy & Natural Resources, Katie Couric, Levi Johnston, oxycontin, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, U.S. House
add a comment
Here’s a recap of news of the past several days in Alaska politics:
-Sarah Palin’s church was damaged in a “suspicious” fire. Firefighters are treating it as an arson. Members of my family were in Eagle River for the state high school wrestling tournament, but they insist that their proximity to the fire was coincidental.
-Don Young stepped down from his seat as ranking member on the House Natural Resources Committee. He stated that it’s a temporary move for the good of the party. Question: If it’s for the good of the party (that is, if they want him to have a lower profile in the event he gets indicted for something), how is it going to be a temporary move? Good luck getting that seat back, Don.
-Levi Johnston’s mother was arrested on six felony drug possession charges. In case you forgot, Levi Johnston is Bristol Palin’s betrothed. Word from the ADN is that the drug in question was oxycontin, a.k.a. “hillbilly heroin,” which gained notoriety as Rush Limbaugh’s painkiller of choice. I have to say that with Bristol’s unplanned pregnancy, the Katie Couric interview, the $150,000 $180,000 clothes debacle, the turkey interview, and now this, the Palin clan is really making Alaska look like a classy, forward-looking state.
North to the Future, indeed.
UA Board of Regents Meeting: Highlights December 3, 2008
Posted by roothogreport in Executive, Legislature.Tags: Appropriations, Board of Regents, Coconut Road, Commerce, Committee, Daniel Inouye, Don Young, Energy & Natural Resources, Great Alaska Shootout, Lisa Murkowski, Mark Begich, Mark Hamilton, Martha Stewart, Sarah Palin, Ted Stevens, U.S. Senate, UA
add a comment
I went to the UA Board of Regents meeting on non-political business, but it was a long meeting, and I had the opportunity to hear what Martha Stewart (no, not that Martha Stewart), the university’s Director of Federal Relations, had to say about the new political reality for Alaska in Washington, D.C. Here are the high points:
- She thinks that Alaska won’t be badly damaged with regard to appropriations: although Stevens is gone from the appropriations committee, his best friend Dan Inouye (D-HI) is the chairman, and Inouye knows what it’s like for Alaska due to his friendship with Stevens and his experience as a senator from a non-lower-48 state. Inouye is likely to remain friendly to Alaska.
- With regard to our existing Senate committee appointments, she said that having Lisa Murkowski on the Energy & Natural Resources committee is going to prove very beneficial to Alaska as we work to restructure the U.S.A.’s energy economy. She also mentioned that Mark Begich has put in for a variety of appointments, including Appropriations and Commerce. She thinks it’s unlikely he’ll get Appropriations but Commerce is a definite possibility.
- She characterized Stevens’ staff as “still in shock” after the defeat, and unsure of their future. She’s not sure how many, if any, will be picked up by Begich for his staff, but that Stevens’ office on the Hill will close December 22.
- Of Don Young, she said, “This is probably his last term in office.” I didn’t have a chance to ask why she thinks that. Young’s challengers have certainly improved in terms of credibility and posing a legitimate threat, but he won this past race pretty handily even if it wasn’t the 40% thrashing he usually delivers. Perhaps Stewart is expecting that Coconut Road earmark to catch up to him in court?
That was basically it. There were other highlights to the meeting, but for the most part they were university-related, not politics-related. Enjoy your Wednesday.
Oh wait- I just remembered I have one other quote to relate. University President Mark Hamilton apparently met with Governor Palin at the Great Alaska Shootout basketball tournament in Anchorage last weekend- just prior to her trip to Georgia to campaign for Saxby Chambliss- and Hamilton had this to say:
“I reminded her that we [the University] have no money… she was very happy and very upbeat, and what that means in a political setting I have no idea.”
Sounds like politics as usual.
Remembering Bob Bartlett December 2, 2008
Posted by roothogreport in Legislature.Tags: Board of Regents, Bob Bartlett, Claus-M. Naske, Dermot Cole, Jack Coghill, Katie Hurley, Mark Hamilton, statehood, Ted Stevens, Terrence Cole, U.S. Senate, UA, UAF, Vic Fischer
add a comment
Constitutional delegate Vic Fischer (center) talks to Bob Bartlett's grandson (left) and historian Terrence Cole (right) at the Bartlett reception Monday night.
I’ve been busy for the last couple of days, with some assignments and otherwise, and yesterday I attended the University of Alaska’s Board of Regents meeting on the UAF campus. It was an interesting meeting for a variety of reasons, and there were a few political tidbits I gleaned, but this post isn’t about that. While I was there, I talked to UA public relations officer Kate Ripley (a former Alaska newspaper reporter), who was kind enough to let me know about a semi-exclusive reception in honor of E.L. “Bob” Bartlett yesterday evening at the UAF Museum. My interest in history predates my interest in politics, so I jumped at the chance to attend. (more…)
Ballots Will Be Hand-Counted In District 7 Recount November 28, 2008
Posted by roothogreport in Legislature.Tags: absentee, ballots, district 7, Division of Elections, house, Karl Kassel, Mike Kelly, recount, Shannyn Moore, Shelly Growden
2 comments
I got a call Wednesday afternoon from Shannyn Moore, a fellow Alaska political blogger who is particularly concerned with election accountability and transparency. We talked about a few different twists and turns in this year’s election, and ended up talking most about the still-unresolved race between Mike Kelly (R) and Karl Kassel (D) in House District 7.
As you may remember, Kelly leads Kassel by a single vote. This one-vote advantage had somehow been maintained through a variety of improbable circumstances, and Shannyn wanted to know if I had any insight as to what exactly was going on. The Division of Elections had posted a press release on their website in an attempt to explain the state of the race, but the document wasn’t exactly easy to follow.
After talking with Shannyn, I decided to head down to the Division of Elections to see if someone there could explain it more clearly. I ended up talking to Shelly Growden, the state Election Systems Manager. She was able to shed a little more light on the subject- here’s the timeline she gave me:
- After almost all votes were counted, Mike Kelly had a one-vote lead over Karl Kassel.
- After the final 49 absentee ballots were counted, Karl Kassel had a two-vote lead over Kelly- a three-vote swing.
- After all the ballots were counted, election officials in Juneau went about verifying the number of ballots cast in District 7 precincts, and found that in two cases, the number of ballots cast did not match the number of signatures in the election book. The State Ballot Review Board recounted the ballots in these precincts (Farmer’s Loop and Goldstream #1) and found that there was no actual discrepancy between the number of ballots and the number of signatures, meaning that a few ballots were improperly fed to the machines in the initial count and were either counted twice or not counted at all. The net result of the State Review Board’s limited recount was that Kelly netted a three-vote gain on Kassel, thus shifting the race back to its original one-vote margin in Kelly’s favor.
We’re obviously headed for a recount in this race, and the somewhat questionable accuracy of the machines (what with the double-counting and undercounting in the two precincts in question) led me to ask Growden if the Division of Elections is planning to do a hand count of the ballots come recount time. She reassured me that the ballots will be recounted both by machine and by hand, and that despite the hand counting taking a while, they expect the recount to be completed in one day. Needless to say, I was very happy to hear that they’ll be doing a hand count.
She also said that the recount will likely take place on the 5th of December, as it has to be 30 days after the election itself. Mark your calendars, because that might be the day this year’s election finally ends.
