Primary: ‘No’ forMeasure 1

When it comes to Ballot Measure 1, we’re for free speech.

Frankly, we are for free speech — a whole First Amendment’s worth — in virtually all applications. In this case, a vote for Ballot Measure 1 would not only squelch free speech, it does so while failing to do what it purports to do — reduce corruption in state government.

We like that concept. We don’t like the notion of executives, like VECO’s Bill Allen, out there buying votes. We don’t agree this is the mechanism to try to protect Alaska from the unscrupulous.

Measure 1’s ballot language says the bill would ban use of public funds for political campaigns and lobbying by state and local government agencies, including school districts.

On the surface that sounds fine, but the line between information and lobbying can be thin. If a school district needs money for capital improvements, is it lobbying to send the superintendent to Juneau? For example, the measure allows communication, but specifically prohibits “… promoting, or distributing studies … calculated to induce support.”

Public funds could also not be used to support or oppose ballot measures, like this one.

Here’s an idea that has merit. We’ve seen measures on the ballot actively opposed by state government and shamelessly shanghaied with paid media advertisements.

But according to the Alaska Public Offices Commission: “It is unclear whether or not it will ban all state employees from participating in the legislative process as part of their official duties.”

That could be problematic.

A third part of the initiative would ban political contributions by government contractors and members of their families.

Here’s where the First Amendment comes in and where it gets really sticky. According to the wording of the initiative, these government contractors include independent contractors or consultants hired by the state or a borough, city or school district. This government contract could be for as little as $501. So people providing a one-time service that did not go out for bid — such as a catered meal or a fix-it project — could find themselves barred from contributing financially to any candidate. And not only the contractor, but his or her spouse, child, spouse’s child, in-law, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, domestic partner and others.

Supporters of the measure say it won’t be as drastic as opponents allege.

“Family members are NOT prevented from contributing, they are only prevented from being USED AS CONDUITS for making political contributions,” writes Jason Cline, Clean Team Alaska, in the measure’s statement in support.

Who is going to decide which is which?

We applaud the proactive efforts to keep the halls of Juneau free of corrupting influence, but the reality may be the only way to do that is to send men and women to serve in the Alaska Legislature who have the moral fiber to just say “no.”

And no is what we are voting on Ballot Measure 1.