Given the anguish accompanying Alaska's economic crisis and the national buzz on what has become the Clinton-Trump contest, it's hardly been noticed that we have two important votes in November in addition to state legislative offices. News accounts quote the legislative leadership as saying they will spend savings rather than tax, and what's Bill Walker doing by pushing us around, sending us messages with his remedies? Who does he think he is, a governor or something?
In their defense, those legislators usually know what their average constituent is thinking, which legislators have always told them: All problems can be solved by cutting the budget. It's OK to spend the money that supports the Permanent Fund Dividend. Cutting the PFD is not a tax. (Hmm.) These legislators know that if they vote for a tax this year, they might be defeated in November. Next year, they won't be facing an election so constituents can then only complain. Conclusion: holding my job is more important than the State Interest. How's that for statesmanship?
We do have two important national votes in November beyond Trump-Clinton. On these, there is near silence. If someone viable has declared against Rep. Don Young, that candidate still lacks visibility. It's not that Young doesn't have vulnerabilities. Congressman Young's national influence has long since crashed as a result of his getting caught in serious ethical violations. Why, to take one example, is Eric Croft running for Assembly instead of taking on Old Don?
Sen. Lisa Murkowski has declared her candidacy for re-election. Alaskans will recall she had to run as an independent write-in after Joe Miller stunned her with his attack from the "Far Right" (maybe now the "Alaskan Trumpit?"). She retained her seat because Democrats, excited by her daring move, abandoned their candidate to re-elect her. But politics is about now, not then, so the Dems got no reward. Retired colonel, West Point professor and "Genius Award" Alaska lawyer Margaret Stock looks like a strong challenger.
Murkowski started her campaign by announcing her reason for seeking re-election. She sees the economic future of Alaska as being "uncertain," notably because "the pipeline is less than a third full" and "increasing (federal) regulations threaten our economic opportunities" as the "federal government continues to block and dismantle the promises that Alaskans received at statehood." She doesn't mention the oil price drop.
So, the senator is running on the usual La-La Land issue of unspecified "federal overreach." The most recent complaint about federal overreach was the blocking of Pebble Mine. The senator maybe objected to this federal "overreach," but Bristol Bay's fishers didn't. Alaska's present economic situation owes nothing to the negative effects of federal regulation. It's the price of oil.
Pending federal "under-reach" is more of an Alaskan problem than overreach. From statehood on, Alaska has always depended on federal expenditure. Many non-Native Alaskans complained, citing the "promise of statehood," when the federal government gave millions of acres to Native corporations. These organizations have received a steady flow of federal cash that has created jobs and passed billions of dollars through the Alaska economy.
More Alaskans shouted that the promise of statehood had not been kept when Congress, (Sen. Ted Stevens voting "yes") adopted the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act?. By that time, the state had exercised most of its generous allocation of land selection rights. ANILCA established a system of federal land reserves that feed the Alaska tourist trade. The federal government spends millions in Alaska in management of these lands. The job of the state's federal representatives is to make the government spend more. This money, like federal support for expanded health and medical services, fortunately netted by Walker, is critical as Alaska moves to counter the coming recession.
What we need from Alaska's representatives is not complaints about overreach, but a share of offshore oil; expanded ANILCA staffing; a strengthening of military forces, including National Guard and Reserves and veterans' programs; a strengthened Coast Guard, including a major facility north of the Aleutians; federal education funding; more money for rural infrastructure through the Denali Commission, full funding of national highway programs with access by the ferry system and a new infrastructure replacement and repair program, as proposed by the president.
Alaska's federal representatives have one task, after overseeing the national interest, and that is to see that federal programs that pour money into Alaska not only continue to pour but pour more.
John Havelock is a former Alaska attorney general and former White House Fellow. He lives in Anchorage.
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@alaskadispatch.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@alaskadispatch.com or click here to submit via any web browser.