Report reviews funding sources for Measure 2

MAT-SU — The Alaska Public Interest Research Group released a report Friday analyzing contributions in the campaigns for and against Ballot Measure 2, regarding the establishment of an Alaska Coastal Management Program.

“The origin of campaign money can and should be a crucial part of voters’ decisions at the ballot box,” AKPIRG director Matt Wallace said in a press release. “Wealthy corporate interests are often in direct conflict with the public interest, and when massive sums of money are being spent on one side of an issue by a small number of companies and trade groups, voters should ask hard questions about whether those entities are acting in the interest of Alaskans, or just the interests of their profits.”

Using transaction level data from the Alaska Public Offices Commission for all 2012 contributions posted as of 8 a.m., Aug. 23, the research group looked at the amounts, numbers, sources and representative interests of the top contributors to the key groups in support and opposition to this issue.

Key findings include:

• With contributions of more than $1.4 million, the group Vote No on 2 has raised 93 percent of the total funds going into the race.

• More than 99 percent of Vote No on 2 funds came not from individuals, but from groups, largely corporations and trade associations dedicated to resource extraction.

• The AKPIRG analysis indicates that mining-related interests contributed an almost equal role, more than $643,000 to the Vote No on 2 group, and accounted for 44 percent of their total income.

• By contrast, the Yes on 2 campaign (represented by The Alaska Sea Party) received 66 percent of its funding from individual donors, with more than half of contributions in the amount of $100 or less.

A full copy of the report is posted online in PDF form with this story at Frontiersman.com.