Campaign cash another piece of puzzle

You hear a lot about campaign finance reform these days. Ethics, too.

Without question, they are the buzzwords of this election cycle.

While some candidates and elected officials have talked about these issues before, the ongoing FBI investigation into oil field services company VECO and its ties to legislators has heightened awareness of the potentially devastating effect of large campaign contributions to both the public process and the public trust. With that increased awareness has come the predictable pandering to the electorate by previously uninterested public officials. Everyone, it seems, is all for more laws, more detailed disclosure, tighter restrictions, tougher penalties.

That's where the Alaska Public Offices Commission comes in.

In a recent Frontiersman survey of local candidates for the Legislature, each expressed varying degrees of support for the agency that monitors the electoral process, and upholds and enforces state laws about political contributions and influence-peddling.

The agency's mission, according to its Web site, is &#8220to encourage the public's confidence in their elected and appointed officials by administering Alaska's disclosure statutes and publishing financial information regarding the activities of election campaigns, public officials, lobbyists and lobbyist employers.”

It's hardly glamorous or high-profile work. But it is essential to the process.

Sadly, in recent years, the legislative majority, perhaps in an effort to minimize oversight, has brought APOC nearly to its knees. A series of budget cuts and law changes has removed both the teeth and enforceability of some disclosure laws.

There is no more funding, for example, for staff to investigate complaints of violations. Fines, in some cases, are laughably tiny and, consequently, are not sufficient deterrents to the ethically challenged.

Once Tuesday's election is in the rear-view mirror and a new Legislature is seated, voters will find out who among the elected is truly serious about the promises made on the campaign trail.

In the meantime, some of APOC's work can be found on page A11 of this newspaper. Excerpts from the campaign disclosure reports of candidates for Senate District H and House districts 15 and 16 are highlighted. On Sunday, we'll do the same for candidates in House districts 13 and 14.

By themselves, individual contributions do not paint a complete picture of any candidate. Taken as a whole - especially in the case of incumbents, where there is a voting record to put alongside it - the report may reflect deeper truths that should be factored into the thinking process before voters go to the polls.

Why do some candidates have more contributions than others from political action committees and other special interest groups? If a candidate is representing the Valley, how come he or she has contributions from Anchorage and out of state? How come some candidates have large-increment contributions and others have smaller donations?

These all are valid questions that often can answered by &#8220following the money.” Of course, the best bet is to simply ask the candidate about his or her own report. Contact information is listed for each under the &#8220registration” link in each candidate's online report, which can be found at www.state.ak.us/apoc under the link to &#8220campaign disclosure reports and forms.”