Palin is mishandling this critical state office

There are many public benefits to having the governor appoint the attorney general, as provided in Alaska's constitution. But if a pattern or practice of abuse in the appointment relationship develops, then the arrangement must regretfully be reconsidered.

For the most part, Attorneys General have, since 1959, shown determined independence, even including an attorney general recommending the impeachment of a sitting governor.

Much later, Governor Murkowski first infringed on this tradition of independence by appointing an attorney general who had been on his Senatorial staff, where loyalty is the prime virtue, all but guaranteeing that the wall of independence would be breached. Governor Murkowski's appointment of an unqualified person and his attorney general's misunderstanding of the function of his office led to serious trouble for both.

The Attorney General is the servant of the law and the institutional interests of the state, not merely an extension of gubernatorial power. Just as you wouldn't want doctor who is a yes man, a governor should not want the government's lawyer to be giving anything but objective advice. Lawyering is a profession governed by a code requiring both independence and ethical oversight by a bar association and the courts.

Alaska's Attorney General is also in charge of the prosecutorial system, so the Attorney General is the watchdog on law-breaking behavior within the political system. A governor never wants to appear to be interfering in any way with the prosecutorial function. Attempting to obstruct justice is a crime.

We are drifting toward another crisis with Governor Palin's management of the office. The early resignation of her first appointee is some evidence she misunderstands the attorney general's role. Her second appointee, though qualified for the job, stumbled in his relations with the legislature during the confirmation process.

A prolonged vacancy has followed. Rather than starting a search for another attorney general, the governor has designated an acting attorney general from the existing department staff.

It takes nothing away from the qualities of this individual to suggest that an acting status should be carried for a short time only. After the governor, the Attorney General is easily the most important officer of state government. It is particularly important that an independent attorney general of exceptional reputation be in place while fallout from the federal investigation into official misconduct in Alaska continues.

Alaska laws are also in play with the corruption scandal. A person designated as "acting" acts only in a holding capacity waiting for his successor to make the important decisions. As a whole, the department's role in government is weakened.

This problem has been compounded by Gov. Palin's decision to appoint her communications director, not a lawyer, to take on a similar role in the Department of Law. The Attorney General is the only appropriate spokesperson for the Department of Law.

This appointment also violates the wise tradition that the Attorney General picks his or her own staff. The governor's designated spokesperson will inevitably be perceived as having a rank equal to or even independent of the acting attorney general.

This spokesperson is not bound by the codes of accountability that apply to lawyers working for the state. He will be perceived, whatever the real circumstances, as playing a special role for the governor, to assure loyalty of line administrative officers.

Enough said. Governor Palin should appoint an Attorney General now and the Attorney General should arrange to move the new "communications director" from the department immediately.