The wisdom of the Alaska Constitution a half-century later shows the forward thinking of its framers

In thinking about the Alaska constitution and how it came to be, it’s essential to remember the context in which it was written. Fifty-five delegates elected from across the Territory — in imitation of the number at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 — met for 75 days, spanning the Christmas holiday of 1955-56. Statehood was on everyone’s mind; it was the deep background for every discussion. There was no guarantee statehood would be achieved, and many factors weighed heavily against it. What would help?

A lot of people at the time did many things they hoped would help. In 1946, the territorial Legislature had authorized a territory-wide vote on the question of whether Alaskans wanted statehood. A referendum on the issue passed handily, and the Legislature and territorial leaders established organizations to pursue it. Among boosters advocating for statehood, which included territorial Gov. Ernest Gruening, Ted Stevens, who was working in the Interior legislative counsel’s office in Washington, D.C., and many others, especially Bob and Evangeline Atwood, publishers and editors of the Anchorage Daily Times, then the largest circulating news organ in the territory.

In strategizing the campaign, boosters decided early on that describing Alaskans as rebels, mavericks, as more jealous of their independence and, well, different from folks in the contiguous states, was not going to convince the people who needed to be persuaded that statehood was a good idea for Alaska. That included members of the U.S. Congress, which has the sole power to create states. Rather, Alaska advocates determined that presenting Alaskans as just the same sort of folks as their fellow citizens elsewhere in the country would work best. Then the argument could be made that there was no reason to deny them the same level of self-government, statehood, as U.S. citizens had everywhere else.

Mrs. Atwood underscored this argument in a report she and others compiled as part of an application to the National Civic League in 1956 for their annual award for “All America City.” She later expanded and published the report as a history of Anchorage. Anchorage had, she wrote, the appropriate character of All America cities elsewhere. It had a good tax base, opportunities for business, the right number of elementary and high schools for the population, and good ones, city parks and playgrounds, a good relationship with the military, churches of many denominations, a low crime rate, a forward-looking municipal council, in fact, all the marks of a good, clean American city, just like in the “Lower 48.”

The constitutional convention was conceived in the same mode. At the time, the mid-1950s, there was interest nationally in revising older state constitutions that encumbered rather than facilitated efficient state government. Missouri and New Jersey had refashioned their constitutions, and Hawaii, also hoping for statehood, had written a new one. The National Municipal League had produced a “model” state constitution for study, and planners and delegates in Alaska consulted all of these and other sources. They decided to produce a general document, not one laden with voluminous details that might soon be out-of-date and become a burden to future generations. So, they wrote a general document, establishing principal guidelines, and giving significant power to the Legislature to adjust state administration to future conditions, whatever those might be. They wanted nothing in the document that would raise the hackles of members of Congress, from whichever states they might come.

Two enlightened features particularly stood out. The Legislature is prevented from committing funding to any state agency for more than one year at a time; agency budgets must be reviewed and approved annually. And potential judges are vetted by an independent body comprised of citizens and attorneys, the Alaska Judicial Council. And the delegates decided on an appointed rather than elected Attorney General, to eliminate electoral competition between the governor and attorney general.

The Alaska Constitution has been celebrated as a model achievement, Though there have been several suggestions for revision over the years, until now none have seemed worth the risk of holding a new convention. But protection of the Alaska Permanent Fund is a large challenge, now that the Legislature has opened an avenue to raiding it. An amendment to do that needs serious consideration.

Steve Haycox is a professor emeritus of history at the University of Alaska Anchorage.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.