News-Miner Editorial
Four strikes
Ballot measures don’t measure up
Published Monday, August 25, 2008
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!The state ballot Tuesday features four significant proposed changes in Alaska law, a convergence that elevates the interest in and importance of the primary election. The ballot measures are the culmination of a vast amount of work from enthusiastic and engaged Alaskans, many of them volunteers. Unfortunately, we must reiterate our recommendation for a “no” vote on all four measures.
Ballot Measure 1 would create a new state entity, the Alaska Gaming Commission, to regulate the large and diverse gambling industry in Alaska. The commission would also have the power to expand the types of gambling in Alaska, a decision that should rest with the Legislature. Supporters of the measure say they need the commission because the Legislature won’t act. That’s a judgment in itself, and one best left with the Legislature.
Ballot Measure 2 would stop the state’s licensing of private pilots to shoot predators while using aircraft and prohibit any airborne predator control unless an irreversible decline in a moose or caribou herd is imminent.
The measure would make it much more expensive and legally tenuous, if not impossible, for the state to moderate fluctuations in predator and prey populations using aerial control. If done efficiently and effectively, such actions are occasionally worthwhile to provide a steadier supply of high-quality, local food for Alaskans. Reduced wolf populations will recover as the moose and caribou do.
This is a control effort, and so complaints that it is is “unfair” to the wolves shouldn’t enter the equation — fairness faded after gunpowder arrived. If it’s to be done, it should be done efficiently
Ballot Measure 3 would offer public funding to candidates for state office. This measure seems like expensive overkill with its own potential for abuses.
Finally, Ballot Measure 4 would inappropriately exploit fear of large mine disasters to impose, potentially, impossible limits on the day-to-day operation of large mines in Alaska. The state’s water quality regulations are already extremely cautious. The measure may or may not make them more strict — it depends on how courts and agencies interpret its sometimes conflicting language. We shouldn’t inflict that uncertainty on the industry.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Vote YES on ballot measures 2 and 4.
Ballot Measure 1 would create a new state entity, the Alaska Gaming Commission, to regulate the large and diverse gambling industry in Alaska
Are you kidding?? We have a paltry "industry" in gaming that is tiny and not diverse! We should have had this commission years ago. The legislature has done a disservice to the people of Alaska for all these years, and it needs to change immediately! Vote YES on 1.
John, I agree the State needs a gaming commission, but as written the commission would be heavily loaded with "industry professionals" and have way too much authority for an appointed body. It's like handing the keys to your brand new 'vette to your 16 year old kid.
Of course, if the legislature was more responsive to the issues Alaskans consider important rather than what their special interest employers deem useful, it would be a non-issue.
Increased legal gaming in Alaska with a healthy chunk going into the State's general fund is a good idea, but this particular initiative is not.
JUST VOTE 'NO' ON ALL FOUR MEASURES. We need less government in our lives not more!!
Ballot #4 needs to pass to protect the world's largest wild salmon runs in the world. Red Dog and Pogo mines were permitted prior to 2002 when environmental and water quality standards were tougher. Anyone who says that our water quality standards are sufficient to protect our waters, land, and air need to remember that mixing zones standards were weakened and the Coastal Zone Management program was gutted between 2002 and 2006.
Please vote YES on Ballot #4. Thousands of people depend on the Bristol Bay salmon runs for their Subsistence, Commercial, and Sport, and Personal Use needs. The Pebble mine owners say that IF a single salmon will be harmed, there will be no mine. IF that is true, then why aren't they supporting passage of Ballot #4 which ensures that salmon are not harmed? We need the Interior's support and a YES vote on Ballot #4.
Vote Yes on Ballot Measure 3. It is cheap in comparison to the cost of special interest earmarks and legislation and has been proven to work in other states. The News-Miner does not specify what kind of abuses can occur with Clean Elections because there is no evidence of abuse in states that have used it.
The News-Miner editorial board has never been especially concerned with corruption in government. They were a strong supporter of Ralph Seekins and his attacks on government accountability, they still endorse indicted Ted Stevens and Don Young and his million dollar legal bills, and they opposed Sarah Palin. Looking to the News-Miner for guidance on getting good government is a little like asking Frank Murkowski how to avoid nepotism.
No on 1
Yes on 2
Yes on 3
Yes on 4, especially 4!
I have to laugh at the people who vote no on 2 while claiming that they want less government intrusion. Voting no on 2 results in MORE government intrusion as the State hires folks to fly around and kill animals.
If you are having such a hard time finding moose to eat, either learn to eat wolf, or better yet, MOVE TO WHERE THE FOOD IS and stop waiting for the government to help you put food on your table!
Sheesh!
And yeah, let's vote no on 4 so we can destroy 5 fishing jobs while creating 1 mining job. That's a real good plan.
So much stupid, so little time.
I've read the pamphlet and studied the issues; I still believe Alaska is someplace different, that we enjoy a life here that is no longer available elsewhere in the US, that we are a free people responsible enough to make our own decisions without government interference.
Yes on 1.
One of the limited responsibilities of the state to its people includes management of resources; the difference between a management tool and sport is management does not and should not include private concerns.
Yes on 2.
State funding of election campaigns can only broaden the field of choice and lessen special interests ability to influence which candidates are chosen to run, and the decisions of those elected.
Yes on 3.
Clean water is one of Alaska's biggest resources, and as such, the impacts of any industry should be a topic deeply debated in the legislature after long and careful research; not a referendum vote driven by supposition, deceit, and propaganda.
No on 4.
Another good reason to vote yes on 1 is so that when the Okies and Texans show up to build the gas line, we can take their money away from em legally :)
Is it just me, or is it rather ironic that "pokerdork" doesn't want a gaming commission that could possibly bring in wide spread POKER?
*lol*
I'll be voting yes on #1 FOR SURE...
"The Pebble mine owners say that IF a single salmon will be harmed, there will be no mine."
Similar promises made by the oil industry were made concerning Prince William Sound in the early 70's. Time erases promises made by industries whose bottom line are not the wild stocks of salmon. THE bottom line is this: Industry will say and do anything in order to extract as much resource as possible with the absolute minimum of safeguards they feel they can get away with. These decisions are made in the boardrooms and not out in the field. If government doesn't hold them to their word then who will?
Yes, No, Yes, No...
just my personal opinion
This is one wise bunch - NO on 1, YES ON 2, YES, YES on 3 and YES on 4.
akbearable,
I agree with your comments. I will vote yes on 4. I am not against mining. The mining industry simply needs to change the way they extract the gold from the minerals. With that being said, the change will cost more money but be easier on the environment. Big industry is greedy and will not want to pay the increased cost to change the way they do business, that's the big bottom line $$$$$$$$$$$.
Promises will made just like politicians. They will say whatever it takes to get what they want. Once they get what they want, then their "real" agendas come out.
God Bless America, & God Bless Our Troops!!!!!
Excuse me being a little uneducated in this matter, but will someone please explain to me what the role of a Gaming Commission is?
I'm betting under 10% vote in the primaries tomorrow. Isn't it wonderful to know that a small percentage of the voters are able to control what happens in the majority of peoples' lives. Want to do something to change--- Get Out and Vote.
Agree fully with Woodman. His last comment, at any rate. Vote tomorrow. Whoever and whatever you vote for, it is the most powerful weapon we as citizens have against percieved wrongs.
Unless, of course, you disagree with the things I support. In that case, don't bother voting. ;)
Seriously, I support the idea behind measure 1, but not the specific wording. I believe the authority over gambling laws should rest ultimately with the Legislature, not with an appointed board. No on 1.
I think predator control (note that I didn't say hunting) has its place and purpose, but I believe it is best done by trained professional biologists, and should be carried out by the State. You don't leave the management of other resources to private citizens, you lay that responsibility on the State. Yes on 2.
I think the Clean Elections measure is an excellent idea. It isn't socialism, communism, a restriction on free speech or association or anything of the sort. Think about it this way. You (those opposed to 3) object to funding the campaign of a (usually) democratic candidate. Fair enough. Don't sign their petition. However, if they are elected, you had better be the first one to complain about the unconstitutionality of your public funds being used to pay their salary. It's essentially the same thing. Measure 3 will save Alaska lots of heartache in years to come by helping us clean house. Yes on 3.
Measure 4... Here I'm not so sure. On the one hand, I think the Pebble Project is a disaster waiting to happen. Dig the biggest hole in the world and fill it with toxic chemicals, shore it up with the largest earthen dam in the world, and, just for fun, do it in the headwaters of the largest salmon fishery in the world. Sounds like a recipe for success. If, at least, your idea of success involves destroying one of our State's most valuable resources. Yes on 4.
On the other hand, this measure does seem to go far beyond what its stated purpose is. It does seem to create additional problems for other mining projects that are more sensible in scale and more productive and beneficial for the State. As a side note, I think its a shame how little the citizens (and yes, I do call myself a citizen of Alaska) of the State benefit from most of our mining projects. Measure 4 would limit the ability of other mining projects to get off the ground in a reasonable fashion. No on 4.
Can I vote twice?
Due to heavy metal concentrations, it is unsafe to eat fish from San Francisco Bay. This is a result of historical mining practices and current industrial discharges. In contrast, one wonderful thing about Alaska is the current abundance of salmon, and how they benefit all members of this region. Whether you fish professionally, fish for subsistence, visit from out of state to catch them or buy fish from the store, they are still here for us. Salmon also benefit ecosystems during their life and after death by cycling nutrients.
Measure 4 will allow a way to protect one of Alaska’s most important legacies. So, to allow Anglo American Corporation, based in the London, to bully voters with fear mongering tactics into not passing this protection would be sheer folly. Recent history suggests that multinational corporations and CEOs may not truly care enough about local economies, citizens and their environment.
No on 4....
No on ALL 4!
Andorra – Did Art Hackney provide you with the verbiage you used? Or are you sincere and just confused by the propaganda? The sad part is there are good people who may vote for this very flawed measure for all the right reasons and honestly have no clue how devastating the unintended consequences will be. Besides providing a living for a sea of lawyers, it could stifle or shutdown mining development statewide while they figure it out. And those who think 'well just pass it, flaws and all', don’t really understand the process that would lie ahead.
Pebble is a long long way from being anything but exploration. We are a resource development state. It is in our constitution and funds roads, schools and every other government function here in Alaska. This Ballot Measure 4 is the brainchild of a rich Anchorage businessman, Bob Gillam, who has a 10,000 s.f. cabin 30 miles from Pebble. He personally contributed over $500,000 that we know of to keep his playground private. He also formed the Renewable Resources Coalition which received $1.6 million from a shady money bundling operation out of Virginia, Americans for Job Security, that won't reveal where they got this money. But golly guess what? Art Hackney is the mouthpiece for the Gillam formed ‘Renewable Resources Coalition’ and is the treasurer for Americans for Job Security. Gillam is also an investor in the company, Anglo American, who is doing the exploration, so he can funnel more of his bucks on the down low into AJS, then Hackney just writes himself a check, to the tune of over $240,000. AJS is normally a pro-business, anti-regulation group that fought for things like chopping off the tops of mountains back east to get at the coal; fought against removing dams from the Snake River. That’s how much they give a damn [pardon the pun] about salmon.
Really, Kelly Newman? And just how is it BM4 will protect anything? Other than the incomes of a plethora of attorneys who will battle this out in court for years to come. BM4 doesn’t give any standards at all. And really, it takes a bit of nerve to talk about Anglo bullying voters with fear mongering tactics. Here is what I think fear mongering tactics are: Having the rich boy’s henchmen go to Teck Cominco’s offices in Vancouver and say get on board or we’re going to attack Red Dog. When they didn’t buckle, they went to Nana with the same threats. Again, no buckle because the truth is this debacle of an initiative risks great damage to Alaska’s economy. What happened next? An anti-Red Dog advertising blitz. Not to mention stirring up the fears of Alaskans talking about ‘huge toxic waste lakes’ when in reality the water would be of drinking water quality. Unfortunately, we the people don’t do our homework before we vote and buy in to the whatever the best and most recent ad is.
Wow. At least use your real name in attack-like responses. Unfortunately, because this state (as well as your 49 partner states in the US) do not have strigent protection against monsterous multinational projects like Pebble. That is where attorneys, who have the skill and intelligence to fight in a court of law, do help the people protect their livelihood, waters backyard, jobs, and children. By the way "laws", often written by lawyers, help protect many facets of society. So blaming lawyers for a bigger problem, in this case environental contamination, is not much more than shooting a possible future messenger. Sure, lawyers make money. But compare that to the huge profits versus the relatively small benefit a few Alaskans may enjoy from a foreign owned mine.
As for an Anti Red dog "blitz" you refer to I have seen nothing compared to what the "No on 4" people have paid for with a lot of mysterious money sources. The fact is, due to the successful fear mongering regarding supposed "jobs" (what about the fishing jobs? do those count?)...measure 4 may have a hard time passing. Too bad for the fish and jobs and the environment. Great news for another outside company to come and pilfer the land. But maybe they too will give a "gold" dividend that also breaks down to about five dollars a day per year on a good year. Woohoo! Maybe the working conditions will resmemble the other mines in developing countries. What fun.
No
No
No
No
Voting for gaming doesn't mean YOU have to gamble. We should have been into gaming 25 years ago. Might use that to offset always increasing education expenses.
F & G have their heads BURIED! Offer a bounty on wolves and let the trappers in on some of the cash. How much does it REALLY take to run/own/rent a plane, pay a pilot, a state scorekeeper, and a sniper? Pay the trappers/hunters for each pelt, and make it good.
Young uses his coffers any way he wants. None deserve public funds.
Last week a poll on 4 on ADN had it going down to the tune of 89%. Pogo has made an impact on the Goodpaster River, check w/ those who have cabins. Looks like more of the same.
Yes, NO, NO, NO. The only initiative that makes any sense is Measure 1, creating a commission to manage legal gambling in Alaska. Measure 2 won't help with preditor management, Measure 3 won't reduce corruption, and Measure 4 won't keep the water any cleaner than it already is.
Denaliguy, who do you thing provides the imperical data for the biologists to do their studies and modeling? Private citizens. There are not enough biologists on staff in Alaska to hunt wolves and put a dent in their numbers while studying all the other wildlife data. What is Alaska going to do, put ads in the paper: "wanted: wildlife biologists to hunt and kill wolves".
Agreed with woodman: VOTE, VOTE, VOTE, VOTE, VOTE. If you don't, don't moan about "your rights" - you abdicated them by staying home and not making a choice.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.