Although I appreciate ADN’s efforts to present a balanced analysis of Ballot Measure 1, I still find myself searching for an honest broker to make sense of the arguments. The recent commentaries by Jason Grenn and Robin Brena leave me at the mercy of selectively chosen data that appears to support each position, but wanting something more that can separate fact from fiction.
Alaska Common Ground recently announced a debate between the supporters and opponents, but my fear is that it will result in more of the same; i.e., both sides will present their positions based on the same selectively chosen “facts and figures,” but voters will still be left wondering where the truth lies.
Ballot Measure 1 admittedly involves complicated tax issues that most of us cannot fully comprehend, but when the supporters ask the public to vote on whether they want a bigger Permanent Fund dividend or not, the outcome is way too predictable. How about if ADN were to research the issues, convene a moderated session to force both sides to confront each other’s arguments, then report the results in an expanded news article, hopefully in as neutral a manner as possible?
Mike Jens
Anchorage
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.