Anchorage Daily News

Does Attorney General Talis Colberg's performance in Troopergate make a compelling case for electing Alaska's attorney general?

Some of his critics think so.

But while there is plenty of reason to criticize Colberg, electing the attorney general would only trade one set of problems for another.

Critics charge that in Troopergate, Attorney General Colberg operated like a hired gun for the governor, rather than an officer of the court whose first obligation is to uphold the law.

Colberg began an investigation on the governor's behalf before the investigator chosen by the Legislature could even start to work. That raised questions about whether the attorney general had, in effect, engaged in witness tampering.

After starting work on the governor's behalf, Colberg then had the Department of Law hire a private lawyer to handle the case for the governor's office because the attorney general had a potential conflict of interest. Later, Attorney General Colberg jumped back into the case, without explaining how any potential conflict of interest had been resolved.

Colberg initially said the private lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, was being paid by the state. After questions were raised about why the state should pay a private lawyer to represent Sarah and Todd Palin, Colberg told a press conference that Van Flein was no longer a state contractor. The same day, Van Flein said he still was getting paid by the state.

When the Legislature's investigator wanted to talk to employees of the administration, Colberg questioned some of the legal grounds for the investigation.

The Legislature and its lawyers agreed with Colberg's point and offered concessions in writing to address them. Colberg then agreed that the state employee witnesses would cooperate and his office began arranging interviews. But with Gov. Palin running for vice president, national attention on Troopergate grew more intense, and Colberg soon reneged on his agreement.

That lack of cooperation led the Legislature to subpoena several of the governor's appointees. Colberg suggested those employees were free to choose whether they'd comply with the subpoena.

He said the state employees were put "in the difficult position of either choosing to support the governor's decision to cooperate only with the Personnel Board or to voluntarily comply with the subpoenas." At the time, he offered no legal analysis to support the claim that compliance was voluntary.

Neither the workers nor Colberg made any effort to challenge the subpoenas in court until after the workers were supposed to testify. Once the issue got into court, Colberg's claim -- that subpoena compliance was optional -- was swiftly rejected.

As Sen. Kim Elton wrote afterwards, "if the AG doesn't understand the law that governs subpoenas, what else doesn't he understand? Can he do a job that requires far more complex legal analysis in other matters of law?"

So there's no question Attorney General Colberg has stumbled and fumbled his way through Troopergate's legal controversies thus far.

But would electing the attorney general prevent such a legal fiasco?

Maybe, maybe not. An elected attorney general would have to get elected, which means he or she would have to be a politician first and a lawyer second. Voters might elect an ally of the governor -- or they could elect a rival who becomes a knee-jerk adversary. Advice to a governor from an elected attorney general could be every bit as political as the advice from an appointed one -- it's just that the political spin would be different.

Alaska's constitutional founders gave us an appointed attorney general for a reason. They thought the governor should be held accountable for the entire executive branch. No diffusing authority among elected officials. No competition among rivals with their own power base in the electorate. Plus a responsible governor might actually pick someone for the post based on administrative abilities and integrity, rather than a lap dog who gives the answer the governor wants to hear.

The founders wanted authority and responsibility to rest in one place -- with the governor. And so it is with Sarah Palin and Talis Colberg.

Alaskans don't need an elected attorney general. They just need to hold the governor accountable for appointing an attorney general of questionable competence and integrity.

BOTTOM LINE: There's no way to remove politics from the attorney general's office. Electing the AG would just cause different problems.

ADVERTISEMENT