Anchorage Daily News

Tuesday, Alaska media received an e-mail press release from Rep. Don Young headlined "Rep. Young Pledges to Put Partisan Bickering Aside." The release touted his decision to sign the "Divided We Fail" pledge, which is a national group's call for members of Congress to work in a bipartisan way on health care reform.

The release was meant to show a kinder, gentler side of the sometimes combative Alaska congressman. (It's an election year and he expects a tough race.)

Unlike many politicians' press releases, his actually said something new and noteworthy. The headline on the resulting story might have read "Don Young decides to be nice for a change."

Unfortunately for Rep. Young, the very same day that release went out, his inner bully was on full display during a congressional hearing. He berated a witness whose apparent offense was being too cozy with environmentalists.

The exchange was aired in a report by the Alaska Public Radio Network.

Rep. Young's target was the president of the American Hunters and Shooters Association. Ray Schoenke dared to speak in favor of a bill aimed at protecting bears from illegal hunting for their gallbladders and bile.

Rep. Young noted Schoenke's group "has ties to conservation groups and questioned its membership and motivation," according to the radio story. Then Rep. Young asked him, "Where do you come off supporting this bill?"

In reply, the witness began by describing his group as "responsible" hunters, and Rep. Young jumped all over him. "Are you saying the other (hunter) groups aren't responsible?" Repeatedly interrupting Schoenke, Young accused him of representing "a fringe group."

Schoenke, a former pro football player, tried to hold his ground, but Rep. Young continued his verbal bullying. (We'd run quotes here, but both are talking at once, so it's hard to make out exactly who is saying what.)

Schoenke did manage to suggest that Young was trying to intimidate him.

Young defended his badgering, saying "Mr. Chairman, he's the witness and I can ask whatever I want to ask."

That arrogance -- "I'm a member of Congress and I get to do what I want, whether you like it or not" -- is classic Don Young.

It's the same arrogance that leads him to say you're not his constituent if you didn't vote for him. It's what leads him to hand out congressional funding earmarks to Outside contractors who shower him with campaign contributions. It's what leads him to stonewall any questions about why he has spent almost $1 million on lawyers.

That same arrogance is what could well produce Rep. Young's downfall in November's election.

BOTTOM LINE: Young foreswears partisan bickering on health care, but continues abusing suspected greenies.

Earmarks

Pork with a sense of proportion

Sen. Ted Stevens complains that Gov. Palin's anti-earmark rhetoric is hurting Alaska's cause in Congress. It's harder for him to get federal funding for Alaska projects, he says, when critics can say your own state doesn't like earmarks.

Maybe so. But the Palin administration hasn't said all earmarks are evil. It has merely scaled back the state's list of funding requests, using some sensible criteria, like whether the project involves any federal responsibility and has strong public support.

The governor recognizes that legitimate federal funding requests may come from other sources, like local governments and the university.

In short, when it comes to federal pork, Gov. Palin is talking about reduced portions, not going without. That's the reality these days, thanks to past earmarking excesses. Cutting the list of earmark requests and using tighter criteria to screen them should make it easier to defend the Alaska projects that do get federal funding.

Enough

Janet Brand failed to list her Permanent Fund dividend on her Alaska Public Offices Commission report.

Bill Starr failed to list some 2007 expenditures on one of his APOC reports.

So what?

This is no slam on APOC. The people there have done their jobs, followed the law, required both the Eagle River Assembly candidates to amend their reports.

But as an Eagle River voter, APOC issues aren't going to sway me either way. The dividend omission? That's trivia.

As for Bill Starr's $315 fine, he's appealing it. Fair enough. If he wins, he's clear. If he loses, he should pay the fine and drive on. He was cleared of the serious matters. So was Ms. Brand -- of issues raised by Mr. Starr.

As an Eagle River voter, I want the candidates to do their APOC work right as a matter of course. Those reports of where candidates draw their support tell me something about them. But I don't want APOC complaints cluttering the campaign.

Argue your differences on issues and track record. Ms. Brand is a legitimate write-in candidate; Mr. Starr says his integrity is under attack. Take it to the voters.

-- Frank Gerjevic

ADVERTISEMENT