Gov. Sarah Palin fumbled badly with the sudden and clumsy way she fired Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. The 30-year veteran officer and former Anchorage police chief was quite popular in his ranks and said he'd never been told the governor had concerns about his performance.
The governor's explanation? She wants to go in a different direction with the Public Safety department. But she can't articulate what that direction is.
Since the governor's stated rationale doesn't hold up to scrutiny, it leaves room for more nefarious explanations -- which staunch foes of the governor, like Andrew Halcro, are more than happy to supply.
Gov. Palin admits she has concerns about a particular trooper who was embroiled in a bitter divorce from the governor's sister. She says the trooper threatened her father before she took office and she mentioned that threat to Monegan when they met early in her term to discuss her security detail.
That trooper was disciplined by supervisors for Tasering his 11-year old stepson (supposedly to show him what it was like) and for illegally shooting a moose, but he remains on the force. Troopers investigated other claims against the officer from the Palin family but did not substantiate them.
The officer in question doesn't sound like trooper material, but as governor, Palin, along with her husband, should have avoided any entanglement in the case. Now she's facing rumors she fired Commissioner Monegan because he wouldn't fire the trooper who is the governor's ex-brother-in-law.
If it wasn't that, what was it? What was the "change in direction" Palin wanted by replacing Monegan?
Well, spokeswoman Sharon Leighow told the Daily News, let's just say "She's got high expectations," and "I don't know if the governor will get down in weeds and speak to specifics about why she made the change."
Apparently that "different direction" talk was just a polite way of saying, we have our reasons; we just don't want to say anything that would embarrass him.
Still, Alaskans were left wondering if Commissioner Monegan was saying things that embarrassed her.
His strategic plan for the troopers, completed in December, talked bluntly about getting more resources for the chronically short-staffed force. Meanwhile the governor's budget people were seeking $2.5 million worth of savings from his department.
Palin spokeswoman Leighow mentioned only one specific concern about the department Monegan left behind: the 56 vacancies at the state troopers.
But is it Monegan's fault they aren't filled? Many of the hiring challenges are beyond a commissioner's control. He can't unilaterally boost their pay. He can't appropriate more money to give troopers better training and better equipment. He can't subsidize the cost of housing in remote Bush outposts.
On the other hand, Monegan served as Anchorage police chief under Mayor Mark Begich and Begich asked him to leave too. Mayor Begich is a pragmatic, results-oriented manager, so maybe there are legitimate performance issues with Monegan's tenure.
When a governor fires someone, it's more tactful not to publicly air detailed criticisms. But this abrupt firing, and the implausible rationale offered to the public, have left a vacuum that's being filled by rumors and innuendo. If she wants to stem the damage she's inflicted on herself, she needs to give Alaskans a full and candid explanation for dropping Commissioner Monegan.
BOTTOM LINE: If Gov. Palin had a good reason to fire him, Alaskans haven't heard it.
Debate? Yes
Stevens, Begich should meet
They won't debate until after the primary election, and that's fine. But unless lightning strikes, Sen. Ted Stevens and challenger Mark Begich will win their respective primaries in August. Their race for the U.S. Senate will be the main Alaska event in this election, with far-reaching consequences for both state and nation.
Mayor Begich of Anchorage has challenged Sen. Stevens to debate before the primary. The incumbent senator has declined. Fair enough. Both candidates will get a chance to hone their skills in debates with opponents in their own party before the Aug. 26 primary.
After that, the line will be drawn: Begich versus Stevens.
Voters need to see and hear them lay out their policies and goals, grill each other and respond to tough questions. There should be time enough for more than sound bites and slogans.
Let the League of Women Voters set it up. The league's reputation for neutrality is solid.
Let's have at least three debates, maybe a week to 10 days apart, similar to a presidential debate schedule.
Each debate would focus on one of three big issues in the campaign: health care; energy and the economy; and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with military and veterans issues and international relations.
Hold one of the debates in Fairbanks, one in Anchorage, and one somewhere off the road system. The latter might be a logistical headache, but it would remind the candidates and voters that there's more to Alaska than the Railbelt.
Come fall, Stevens and Begich need to be on the stage together, in front of the state, making their case directly to the people who will choose between them.
BOTTOM LINE: Begich-Stevens debates should be a sure thing for the general election campaign.