In 2006 Alaskans "took a stand" against the political establishment and elected the largely untested and inexperienced Sarah Palin as governor.
To the delight of Alaska Democrats, Palin's agenda began with targeting Republicans, winning her the adoration of the Alaska press who assisted her in soaring to a 70 percent approval rating and beyond. That caught the attention of D.C. power brokers and in the blink of an eye, Palin was a 2008 vice presidential candidate.
Suddenly, the very same Democrats who had fawned over Sarah became her mortal enemies. Palin spent the rest of her governorship under vicious attack and was out of office by July 2009.
In 2008, American voters elected President Barack "change you can believe in" Obama, many of them sincerely believing that he would heal our political polarization and unify the country. It's safe to say he hasn't.
In 2014, Palin endorsed an undefined but new-feeling gubernatorial "unity" ticket. Alaskans followed her lead and the press dutifully fed the carefully crafted narrative that this was something special and, like Obama, somehow historic and transformational.
Voters are naturally attracted to personable candidates who promise to rise above politics. But history shows that it's far easier to promise than to deliver.
Most Alaskans probably agree that Palin and Obama fell short of expectations and haven't turned out quite as advertised. I would submit that like Palin and Obama, Gov, Bill Walker is shaping up to be another disappointment. Also like Palin and Obama, he displays a temperament very unsuited and unbecoming to political office (especially the chief executive office), and a petulant refusal to play the hand he was dealt instead of the one he believes he deserves.
Walker's feckless, conflicted actions against oil companies and his efforts to undo his predecessor's progress on Alaska LNG, in favor of his personal fantasy to get a gas line to his hometown of Valdez, is more likely to bankrupt the state he says he is putting first than to get us a better deal.
But Walker can't seem to accept a project without a sufficient number of his own fingerprints on it.
Cold hard fact: 100 percent of zero is still zero. Scrapping a gas line deal that isn't 100 percent good enough for Walker's idea of "owner state" does not mean we will wind up with anything better. It looks more likely that we'll wind up with nothing. There are many more cliches available to describe this classic error. It's letting "perfect" become the enemy of "good." It's a case of forgetting that a bird in the hand is as good as two in the bush.
A true "unity" administration would begin and stick with genuinely unifying efforts, which substantial percentages of both parties support. In Alaska this would probably be access to federal lands and getting a gas pipeline. The vote in the 60-member Alaska Legislature on SB 138 to move forward with the Alaska LNG project was 51-8. Would not that have been a great place for a "unity" governor to start?
Instead, what did Walker do, just like Palin and Obama? He came in picking fights with huge, important constituencies. He's made controversial firings and appointments. He dismisses and/or demeans critics, calling them "un-Alaskan," rather than listening to them. How is this different than the most partisan of partisans?
It's not different. This is a partisan administration. Bill Walker picked a political side the day his deal was coined. His administration came in on the false premise that they were something else; that they'd rise above all those ugly political trappings. But their special interests turn out to be no more or less special than anyone else's. And their agendas are no less extreme or offensive or unsustainable. The bait was all the same, the only variance was the switch.
The liberal Democrats manipulating Walker cannot believe their good fortune. All they have ever wanted -- an income tax, an end to the dividend and access to the Alaska Permanent Fund to pay for all the government they can possibly get -- is at hand. Will anyone be left to pay the bill in the next generation? At this rate, I doubt it.
That would leave Alaska with nobody but a few park rangers and other government-subsidized office dwellers to keep the lights on. Again, this version of our state is something that environmentalists and liberals have long dreamed of. But it probably is not what Walker understands he's careening toward, and it's certainly not what he advertised.
Frank McQueary is vice chair of the Alaska Republican Party.
The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com