Miller and Murkowski Trade Halloween Cards

From Lisa Murkowski:

 From Joe Miller:





As I put these up, I thought it would interesting to have a national political ad archive where people could compare what ads are being used in all the states.  (Well, you'd need a a lot of space to fit all the Murkowski mailouts that have been coming every day. The money probably could have funded ten teachers for a school year.) Murkowski's could easily be reused by other campaigns - just replace the word Alaska and put another face on the zombie Miller.   I wonder what the religious right think about this celebration of a pagan holiday by the two Republican candidates.  (Yes, I know that Murkowski isn't the official Republican candidate, but she assures us she's still a Republican and will always be one.)

Frozen Grin's Miller Time

The genius of a good cartoonist is to encapsulate what's happening with a simple picture and a few words. 

Peter Dunlap-Shohl at Frozen Grin manages to portray

Joe Miller's week 

in far fewer words than I could.  Check it out at the link.  (For a cartoonist, the cartoon is the whole post, so it doesn't seem fair for me to post it here.  Besides, I didn't ask permission.  So, you should go there to see it.)

You have 90 Minutes to Be a Write In Candidate for US Senate

After the Superior Court decision NOT allowing the State to hand out a list of names of certified write in candidates to voters who ask for them was blocked by the Supreme Court, it sounds like the list will be available to voters until the Supreme Court gets a further appeal and decides differently.


Sound confusing?  Well, here's the instruction in my voting booth when I voted early yesterday.

Should the election officials tell people the names of the write-in candidates?  Should it be as easy to vote for a write-in candidate as it is for one that has been vetted by the candidate's party?  Why can't voters just bring in a piece of paper with the name of the candidate they want? 

On the other hand, why shouldn't it be made as easy as possible for someone to vote for the candidate they want? 

And what about absentee voters?  Should they be given a list of official write-in candidates?  The names on the ballot are randomized and listed in different order on different ballots so that the first on the list bias is neutralized.  Will that happen on the write in list?  You can see this can get really absurd.  

What I did notice when I voted, was that every office had a list of names and then a space for a write-in.  That made me realize that voters not only have to remember the name of the person they want to write in, but also which office they're running for.  If someone puts in Lisa Murkowski's name for governor, that will be a vote for governor, but won't affect the US Senate race. 

I suspect we're going to have a long wait for all the votes to be counted in the Senate race.  Long.  And then all the write-ins will be challenged. 

An acquaintance checked with the Division of Elections today and found out there is still time to become a certified write-in candidate for US Senate or House of Representatives.  Til 5pm today. 

From: Wilson, Lauri L (GOV) [/src/compose.php?send_to=lauri.wilson@alaska.gov]
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 10:59 AM
To: XXXXXXXX@alaska.com
Subject: Letter of Intent for US Senate

Dear Mr. XXXXXXX:

Here is the Letter of Intent you need to complete and return to our office by 5:00pm Alaska Time today, October 28^th.  You may return the completed form via fax, email or in person to any of our office locations. I have listed additional links below for contact information for each election office location, write-in information from our web site and to the Federal Election Commission. 

Director’s Office

http://www.elections.alaska.gov/csm_contact_do.php

Regional Offices:

http://www.elections.alaska.gov/csm_contact_reo.php

Additional information on write-in candidate’s office:

http://www.elections.alaska.gov/ci_pg_fof_win.php

Web site for Federal Election Commission:

http://www.fec.gov/

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Lauri

Lauri Wilson

Election Coordinator

State of Alaska

Division of Elections

(907) 465-3049

(907) 465-3203 fax

 Here's what that form looks like (My screen isn't large enough to copy the whole thing in a legible way, but you can get your own copy here.  You can get one for the other offices too at the link above for additional information on write-in candidate's office.)

Unlike in other elections, this time your name will be on a list that voters can see.

You have until 5 pm to get it in today.  And don't forget, you'll have some filing requirements like all other candidates. 

Dana Fabe - Vote Yes!

Seeing many sides of any issue makes it hard to take a really strong stand.  You know that there are also good arguments against your position or that the situation isn't black and white.  A person may have some flaw, but there are other parts to him that are worthy.   A policy may solve a number of problems, but it also raises new ones.

Once in a while there comes an issue where there is no other legitimate side.  Where there is only one right and the other is simply wrong.  Voting yes to retain Dana Fabe on the Alaska Supreme Court is one of them. 

I first met Dana Fabe when a student in a class on administrative law, who worked for the court system, was curious about how judges got evaluated.  This was a very smart student who had been raised in a fundamentalist family.  He'd made some accommodations with the world - while he personally felt homosexuality was a sin, as a government employee, he felt he did not have the right to treat gays differently from anyone else. 

So as a class project he dove deep into this issue.  What he discovered, and presented to class, was the complex and thorough system by which judges are evaluated. 

The Judicial Council is directed by law to evaluate the performance of judges due to appear on the ballot. The Council collects evaluations from attorneys, peace and probation officers, jurors, social workers, public hearings, and information from many other sources. The Council then recommends to the public whether each judge should be retained. The recommendations, as well as information about the evaluation of each judge, are sent to each voter in the Official Election Pamphlet.  [from Alaska Judicial Council]

The other students got into this project and Dana Fabe, who then I think was a court administrator or perhaps a superior court judge, was invited to class.  For a couple of hours she talked and answered students' questions.  There are times when you just know - this person is both highly competent and public spirited.  This was a long time ago and I don't remember the details of what she said.  Only that I was left with complete confidence in her abilities. 

What I learned is that Alaska has one of the best systems for selecting judges - a system that favors merit while keeping the political aspects of evaluation judges to a minimum.  And we have a comparatively outstanding set of judges in the state.

Later, when I got a small grant to set up a group of five outstanding women administrators to create a process to pass on their wisdom to public administration students, Dana Fabe was one of the five.   Everyone I asked brought up her name.

Then they set up a class for students where we had panel discussions each week made up of different women administrators talking on different subjects.  There were even a few men that were on some of the panels.  So this was a second chance to work with Dana Fabe and see how remarkable she was. 


To get on the Supreme Court, you submit your name and the paperwork.  Then all the surveys go out to the various groups listed above.  And those that get back scores above a set level are then sent on to the Governor who then selects one who then must be confirmed by the legislature.  That was how Dana Fabe got selected. 

Then every election that includes retention of judges, all the surveying goes on again and the Judicial Council makes a recommendation.  It's in your voter pamphlet for each candidate. 

So, why am I writing all this?  If Judge Fabe is so good, what's the big deal?

Well, this year, a last minute campaign has been made to get people to vote no for Judge Fabe's retention.  Alex Brynner, a retired Supreme Court judge began an Anchorage Daily News editorial on the campaign this way:

Barely two weeks before next Tuesday's election, a special interest group with a nationwide agenda and big pots of Outside funding launched an attack against Alaska Supreme Court Justice Dana Fabe, who is on the ballot for retention. The last-minute attack is timed to prevent any response: As the challengers know, rules of ethics prevent judges from campaigning for retention absent "active opposition." Even then, they can't answer directly but must organize a committee to respond.  [Read more: http://www.adn.com/2010/10/26/1520303/underhanded-attack-pushes-single.html#ixzz13dkBfZn7]

Jim Minnery, the head of the Alaska Family Council wrote an editorial supporting NONretention.  The Alaska Family Council's values and mission are to promote through public policy their fundamentalist Christian views on

• Abstinence
• Christians and Politics
• Defense of Marriage
• Education & School Choice
• Gambling
• Judicial Activism
• Pornography & Obscenity
• Religious Liberty
• Sanctity of Life

The Alaskapride blog, which also favors NON-retention has a set of links to white supremacist websites under the title  "Alternative Media."


OK, I've suggested there aren't two sides to this issue.  Well, yes, there are.  The right side and the wrong side.  But, you might argue, it's just a matter of differing values.  Yes and no. 

Judges are supposed to support one value:  The Rule of Law.  You aren't supposed to have pro-abortion or anti-abortion judges (much of the opposition rests on this issue).  They aren't supposed to go onto the bench with a list of policies they want to forward.  There is only one policy judges should be promoting - the rule of law.  You are just supposed to have pro-law judges, judges who look at the law and determine how a particular case should be decided based on how the facts of the case square with the law, whether it's a statue or the Constitution. 

Yes, there are times when an individual judge's personal life experiences affect a decision. For good judges, that should only happen when the law is unclear and/or there may be contradictory laws.  Only then, should a judge's personal values legitimately have some influence on the decision. 

Justice Fabe introduced in State House

As Wickersham's Conscience points out - Justice Fabe didn't make the kind of decisions that she is being accused of.  The non-retention campaign is twisting the facts.  Essentially, they want to oust a superb jurist who interprets the law as neutrally as it is possible to do.  Then this would give Gov. Parnell the chance to appoint a judge steeped in the same religious view of the world that Minnery and his ilk favor.  Their website says they are against activist judges, yet they favor the judges who have made the Roberts US Supreme Court  activist.  In the direction Minnery wants it to be activist. 

Which Alaska Senate Candidate Feeds Volunteers Best?

While there has a been a lot of attention on this race, most of it has been about the candidates and not about the issues. This post brings that discussion to a new level of triviality. Which candidate has the best volunteer food? I visited all three offices this afternoon and this was what I found.

I started near the Anchorage Campaign Headquarters center - Fairbanks Street near Northern Lights.  Fairbanks houses the McAdams campaign, the Democratic headquarters, Democratic State Legislators headquarters, and the Parnell headquarters.






Down Fairbanks St. is the McAdams office.  Doesn't look like they are wasting any money on rent.  This is decidedly down-scale.


But, what about the food? 

McAdams volunteer food looks pretty good.  

 

Then back to Northern Lights to the Miller headquarters.  But when I got there, I found out there were two different Miller headquarters on Northern Lights.  One for staff and another one - further down - for volunteers. 

So, back on the bike and further down down Northern Lights to this office.  

Hmmmm, there they are right between the Great Alaska Pizza Company and Quiznos.  Plus there is an Indian restaurant and a Korean restaurant just behind me and to the right.  So they should have terrific food.

Not too much here.

Now up Arctic to 36th to the Murkowski headquarters, right next to the European watch repair.

So, I walked into the door straight ahead there, but didn't see much food.  Plus there was a sign for volunteers to go next door.


Next door I found two people at a table that had a jar of hard candies.  That couldn't be all there was.  I told someone what I was doing and she took me back to where I started and found Kristin (I didn't ask her how she spelled her name, sorry if I got it wrong.)  Kristin, when she realized I was really asking about volunteer food for a blog post, was very friendly and showed me what food they had - spread out in different spots. [UPDATE:  Kristin commented to correct the spelling.  I did it two different ways, both wrong, but now I've got it fixed.  Thanks!]

So it looks like I got there at a low point and they have room for more food.  But there wasn't much out. 

She also said sure when I asked to use their restroom, where I found a bit of campaign humor.


Finally, she showed me a Murkowski trend setter - campaign bracelets.  She showed me hers and explained they were to help people remember what to write in.

I asked if they would be allowed into a polling place and she assured me that they had been approved "as long as they are kept under a sleeve" until they get into the voting booth.

That's going to be easy to monitor I'm sure. 




So, if how you feed your volunteers correlates with winning elections, and if what I saw was representative of how the three campaigns feed their volunteers, then McAdams will win hands down.

Constitutional Amendment to Enlarge Alaska Legislature - Ballot Measure #1

[UPDATE: January 2014:  Here's the link to the July 2013 Proclamation Plan that was approved by the courts.  It has maps and other information.  This plan will be in effect until the 2020 census data and the new plan then.  For coverage of the Redistricting Board go to the Redistricting Board tab under the Blog Heading above or click here.]

 [UPDATE January 2013:  Although the current districts (here and linked in the Aug 2012 update) have been rejected by the Alaska Supreme Court, the 2012/2013 districts are in effect now.  There will be new districts for the 2014 election.]


 [UPDATE August 2012:  GO HERE FOR CURRENT - 2012/2013 - DISTRICT MAPS]

[UPDATE JULY 2011:  I blogged the Alaska Redistricting Board's process spring 2011 and an overview of all those posts is available at this redistricting page (or click the Alaska Redistricting Board tab just above this post) and you can find information on the process and the final new maps they created.  And yes, Southeast Alaska lost a seat as predicted.]

In addition to candidates, Alaskan voters will have two bond measures (A and B) and one Ballot Measure.  I sat through some of the committee meetings in Juneau during the legislative session where this proposed constitutional amendment was debated, and while I don't claim to totally understand it, I'll try and convey what I did get.  And I'll try to make it as easy and clear as I can. 

Basically, the change would be from 40 representatives and 20 senators to 44 and 22. 


WHY ENLARGE?

Primary Reasons:

• The 2010 Census will show an increase in population in Anchorage, Matsu, Kenai Peninsula and probably Fairbanks.
  
  
• This will necessitate redistricting to adjust for the increased population in part of the state.
  
  
• With the current number of districts, rural Alaska districts will lose seats to the urban areas.  That may not sound like a problem, however it will mean
  
  
• In rural districts, some of which are already enormous but sparsely populated and often without road access,  representatives and senators will not be physically able travel to many areas in their districts without enormous expenses and time allotments.  This is already a problem and will get worse.   In comparison, many Anchorage legislators can walk across their districts in a several hours. 

To get a sense of this, you can see on the map below how big some of the districts are.

Senate districts have letters (A, B, C, etc.) and two House districts (numbered 1-40) make up each Senate district.    So, House districts 5 and 6 are in Senate District C.  Senate District C is geographically the largest state Senate district in the United States.  To make it easier to see that on the map, I've added more red 6-C (Senate Seat C, House Seat 6) and 5-C symbols so you can see how huge Senate District C is.  You can double click the map to make it bigger or get your own, much larger, pdf of the map from the State Division of Elections.    I'd guess Senate District C is larger than most states.

Just for some perspective I've circled the Anchorage bowl which has 7 Senate districts.

Rep. Peggy Wilson of Sitka (House District 2) who introduced the House version of the bill, said there's one village in her district that costs her $1000 to fly to so she doesn't get there too often.  You get the point.  In some of the rural areas, people are scattered in small, isolated communities.  They are off the road system.  You can't easily get 300 people into a school auditorium like you can in Anchorage.  Or walk door-to-door and hit 200 households in a day.  So, legislators from these areas argue that if their districts get even larger, the quality of representation, of communication with their constituents, will get even harder.

I realize for people outside of Alaska who have never talked to one of their state reps, let alone their US Senators, this might not sound like a big deal.  But in Alaska, we all have access to these folks if we want. 

Primary reasons continued:


Federal Voting Rights Act. Besides the difficulty meeting constituents, visiting and knowing every part of their districts, there are some legal issues as well.  Alaska is one of 16 states monitored under this act.

Section 5 is a special provision of the statute (42 U.S.C. 1973c) that requires state and local governments in certain parts of the country to get federal approval (known as"preclearance") before implementing any changes they want to make in their voting procedures: anything from moving a polling place to changing district lines in the county. [emphasis added]

In Alaska's case, we are in this category because of violations of voting rights for Alaska Natives.  And the districts that would lose votes are in the rural areas with larger Alaska Native populations.  So, any changes in those districts will get special federal scrutiny to be sure that Alaska Native voting rights are not diminished.

Another reason, mentioned, mainly by urban legislators and generally not publicly, is that enlarging the legislature will keep some current legislators from losing their seats.  I can't imagine any legislator would put personal needs over public needs, so let's assume that their personal needs and the public needs overlap.

Redistricting Constraints

Voting Rights Act  - That was already discussed.


Alaska Constitution

The Alaska Constitution, Article 6, spells out requirements for house and senate districts.

[NOTE:  I like these boxes because they highlight key points for people, but they aren't accessible to the blind because they are images but the technology they have can only read text.  For any blind readers, the text of this box and the next are from Article 6, Section 6 of the Alaska Constitution.]

Alaska has, according to a Wikipedia chart based on 2005 population estimates of incorporated cities:

• 26 communities with populations of 1000 or more. 
• 123 communities with populations under 1000 including
• 89 below 500
• 15 with 100 or fewer people.

A lot of these are scattered about far from other populations and off the road system.

What does 'integrated socio-economic area" mean?  The Brennan Center lists the language above from the Alaska Constitution along with language from 23 other states and says they are versions of the idea of "community of interest."

Several redistricting criteria — like following county or municipal lines, or drawing districts that are compact — are in some ways proxies for finding communities of common interest. These are groups of individuals who are likely to have similar legislative concerns, and who might therefore benefit from cohesive representation in the legislature.

 I'm not sure how this criterion can even be met in Anchorage where many different types of communities - ethnically, politically, economically, etc. - live side by side.   Maybe they are united in their urban view of the world.


Other Issues



Cost

The original bills in the legislature called for increases of 8 representatives and 4 senators.  One of the questions that came up was whether there was enough room in each Chamber to house all the new legislators, plus whether additions to the capitol would need to be made to give everyone offices.  Cutting back to only six new legislators seemed to take care of most of the construction questions.  Below is a view of the House chambers.  There's room to squeeze in four more seats.  There's already an empty seat for the speaker who sits up front anyway. 

And the Senate should have no problem moving things slightly to fit in two more desks.

From the Legislative Website's Publication page

After HJR 38 passed the House State Affairs committee, with the change from 12 new legislators to six. I wrote following based on what was said in the committee.

This basically cuts the fiscal note in half. The estimated costs of the original resolution was about $4,470,000 million plus for each year and with the cut, it reduces the annual extra cost to $2,342,000. Also, wouldn't have to do any reconstruction changes.

If there have to be any new buildings, that will be more.  At one session Rep. Carl Gatto offered to build a new Capitol building in Wasilla.  Others suggested evicting the Governor and taking over the 3rd floor of the Capitol



A few more  points (which I haven't verified) made in the bill's Sponsor's Statement include:

• Alaska has the smallest bicameral legislature in the nation. 
  
  
• Since 1960 (Statehood was 1959) to 2006, 29 states have increased the size of their legislatures. 
   
• Of the nine smaller states (509,000 - 1,429,000) the average size of the legislature is 134 (compared to our 60). 
   
• The state budget has gone from $104 million in FY '61 to $7 billion today. 
   
• All redistricting plans, after 1960,  have been successfully challenged in the courts and any reduction in rural districts is likely to make such a challenge a certainty again. 

So, should you vote to enlarge the the legislature?

Urban legislators don't seem to care too much unless they are interested in rural Alaska.

This is an important item for rural Alaska.

No matter what happens, given Gov. Parnell's appointments  to the redistricting board [the only report I could find after ten minutes of googling about the make up of the board - not simply the appointments - is the Alaska Ear], my guess is that the plan will be challenged no matter what.

I believe that the voice of rural Alaska is not well heard in Juneau as most of the legislators are from urban areas.  The ratio will be worse, even with the extra seats.  The size of the rural districts and the expense of traveling to all the towns and villages in those huge, roadless expanses make representing one's district far more difficult than in urban areas.

But if we could allocate the extra $2 plus million a year that the additional seats will cost to rural Alaska projects instead, that might be a better deal all around.  But that would never happen.

According to Article 13 of the Alaska Constitution, it will take a majority vote to pass. (It needed 2/3 vote in both houses of the legislature.)

Tony Hopfinger and Handcuffs on Moore Up North

My eyelids are drooping.  I've just erased what I was writing because it was . . . sooo boring.

(double click the photo to enlarge it)

We went to the old Fly-by-Night Club tonight, now reborn as Taproot, where Shannyn Moore has moved her weekly KYES talk show.  Taping was tonight and it should air Saturday on KYES, Channel 5, and on Shannyn's blog soon.  (The link is to the show two weeks ago with Tom Begich and Scott McAdams.  But you should be able to find tonight's show there too in a few days.)

See, it's still boring.  The show wasn't.  Tony Hopfinger, Joe Miller's first notch on his handcuffs, was on, and then there was a panel of journalists - Tom Brennen of the old Anchorage Times and now the The Anchorage Daily Planet on line; Craig Medred of the Alaska Dispatch now, and formerly an outdoor writer for the ADN;  and attorney and former legislator Eric Croft. 

I found the evening depressing.  Gallows humor was the standard as people discussed the man who handcuffed a reporter trying to ask him serious questions that he seriously doesn't want to answer.  Miller's in a dead heat in the polls with the US Senator he beat in the primaries, while Scott McAdams, the Democrat seems to be trailing badly.  Democrats used to win Alaska elections by having the right split the vote.  Murkowski seems to be trying to fight that history by selling the story that McAdams can't win, and if he did, he's not qualified, and that to save Alaska from Miller, they have to vote Murkowski.  Or not vote at all.

l-r Moore, Brennan, Medred, Croft

Then Medred proudly announces that he never votes because he thinks it's a conflict of interest for journalists to vote.  This is the guy who covered bears and backpacking most of the time he wrote for the Anchorage Daily News.  For crying out loud, this is the United States where everyone has the right and duty to vote.  Even judges.

To be fair to Craig, there are people who take his position as seen in these essays on whether journalists should vote at  Politico.  But I come down with Robert Niles at the Online Journalism Review.   Even if you don't vote, your objectivity is a myth.  Even the emotion free Data would be partisan because he'd rationally tally up the pluses and minuses of each candidate and figure out who would be best. Not voting is like academics using 'we' instead of 'I' to make their articles sound less subjective.  It doesn't really change anything except their myth of objectivity.  Better to simply tell readers your bias, write balanced articles, and let the readers judge for themselves. 

I look at everything that comes out as potentially tainted.  It seems like every webpage I opened today had an ad for Lisa Murkowski.  The narrative that a vote for McAdams is a vote for Miller may or may not be true, but it is also the political message the Murkowski camp is using to get Democrats to vote for her.

I wouldn't take anything for granted.  While corporate Native Alaska has ponied up nearly $1 million to support Murkowski, village Native Alaska may not be as ready to buy into this.  And some Alaskan Native youth see McAdams as their candidate and are speaking out about it.   With people hanging up on robocalls and with cell phones not being called by most pollsters, it seems to me people should vote for the person who best matches their values rather than playing voter roulette in an attempt to outsmart themselves. And if Joe Miller wins?  He's one person out of 100 in the Senate.  The world won't end.  (But it will probably be meaner and harsher.)

But I did meet an interesting couple from Homer who sailed the world for 15 years before picking Kachemak Bay as their home.

"I've been a Democrat my entire life" What does that mean?

This ad in today's newspaper caught my eye.  What exactly does it mean to be a Democrat?

• Does it mean you're registered as a Democrat?
   
• That you give to Democratic candidates?
   
• Or that you vote for Democratic candidates?

To me it means all three, and I'd think the same for Republicans.

There was a time when no one would dispute that Bill Sheffield was a Democrat.  But as governor he went through impeachment proceedings and sometime after that he became less loyal to Democrats and regularly and publicly supported Republicans with fundraisers and funds.

I don't know if he kept his Democratic registration or, obviously, how he voted.  However, since 2000 his campaign contributions, while not completely snubbing Democrats, heavily favored  Republicans.  And Murkowski is a name his checkbook knows well.   


This is no sudden conversion.

To me this ad implies that he's breaking with his life long tradition to now support a Republican in this election.  That is clearly NOT the case as his federal campaign contributions show.  (The state numbers are much harder to get from APOC.  What I saw wasn't as lopsided, but it was clear that there was missing data.)

My quick count reveals the dollar amount of his federal contributions runs 5 to 1 for Republicans.  Not exactly what my vision of a "Democrat my entire life" would do.  It would have been called treason had a Republican funded Democrats 5 to 1. 

The following comes from OpenSecrets.

SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	7/1/10	$250	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	6/5/10	$250	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	3/29/10	$400	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/EXECUTIVE DIRECTO	3/29/10	$500	Begich, Mark (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	3/25/10	$500	Murkowski, Lisa (I)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	3/5/10	$500	Murkowski, Lisa (I)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	1/18/10	$500	Democratic Party of Alaska (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	9/29/09	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	9/19/09	$250	Murkowski, Lisa (I)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ALASKA/DIRECTOR	8/4/09	$500	Inouye, Daniel K (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	6/30/09	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	4/28/09	$1,000	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/EXECUTIVE DIRECTO	3/25/09	$1,000	Begich, Mark (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	RETIRED/RETIRED	11/4/08	$300	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	11/3/08	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	10/16/08	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	RETIRED/RETIRED	9/20/08	$300	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517		8/25/08	$500	Inouye, Daniel K (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/EXECUTIVE DIRECTO	6/12/08	$500	Begich, Mark (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	5/31/08	$300	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	5/31/08	$1,200	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	1/10/08	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	10/12/07	$500	Democratic Party of Alaska (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	9/11/07	$500	Democratic Party of Alaska (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	RETIRED/RETIRED	9/4/07	$300	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	RETIRED/RETIRED	9/4/07	$700	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	8/9/07	$1,000	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	4/12/07	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	12/30/06	$1,000	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/MANAGER	10/23/06	$500	McGavick, Michael (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	7/11/06	$500	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/MANAGER	4/20/06	$250	McGavick, Michael (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	4/19/06	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	1/12/06	$500	Democratic Party of Alaska (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	12/15/05	$1,000	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	11/3/05	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	8/3/05	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE/DIRECTOR	7/15/05	$500	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNICIPALITY OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRE	3/31/05	$1,000	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MURI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	7/16/04	$500	Northern Lights PAC (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	6/30/04	$250	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	6/30/04	$250	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	7/31/03	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MURI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	7/30/03	$250	Northern Lights PAC (R)

SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	5/29/03	$250	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, BILL GOVERNOR ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE	5/28/03	$250	Murkowski, Lisa (R)
SHEFFIELD, BILL GOVERNOR ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE	5/15/03	$250	Murkowski, Lisa (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	4/24/03	$1,000	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	PORT OF ANCHORAGE	2/2/03	$250	Murkowski, Lisa (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MURI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	9/5/02	$500	Northern Lights PAC (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	5/23/02	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	3/31/02	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, BILL MR ANCHORAGE,AK 99509	PRES/CEO	8/29/01	$500	DNC Services Corp (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	8/9/01	$250	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	7/31/01	$500	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MURI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	7/30/01	$500	Northern Lights PAC (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	MUNI OF ANCHORAGE/PORT DIRECTOR	4/18/01	$250	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, BILL MR ANCHORAGE,AK 99509	PRES/CEO	2/8/01	$500	DNC Services Corp (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM ANCHORAGE,AK 99501	ALASKA RAILROAD CORPORATION	11/6/00	$1,000	Young, Don (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517		9/5/00	$-1,000	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517		9/5/00	$-500	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, BILL ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	RETIRED	8/22/00	$1,500	Midnight Sun (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	ALASKA RAILROAD	8/16/00	$500	Gorton, Slade (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	ALASKA RAILROAD	8/15/00	$1,500	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	ALASKA RAILROAD	8/15/00	$500	Stevens, Ted (R)
SHEFFIELD, BILL ANCHORAGE,AK 99509	RETIRED	6/29/00	$1,000	DNC Services Corp (D)
SHEFFIELD, WILLIAM J MR ANCHORAGE,AK 99517	AK RAILROAD/CEO	5/3/00	$500	Gore, Al (D)

Joe Miller Is NOT Dr. Hugh "Bud" Fate's Son-In-Law

Sen. Dyson introducing Joe Miller

At Sunday's 'town hall' meeting at Central Middle School, Sen. Fred Dyson introduced Joe Miller to the audience.  As part of the introduction, Dyson said he knew the Joe Miller was a great guy because he was married to Hugh "Bud" Fate's daughter.  Dr. Fate [a Fairbanks dentist who served on the University of Alaska Board of Regents for years as well as in the legislature], he continued,   wouldn't let any of his daughters marry someone who wasn't first rate.

Hugh Fate son-in-law Dan Sullivan

Well, my brain started whirring at that point.  I'd been in the confirmation hearings last February in Juneau for state Attorney General Dan Sullivan [no, not the Anchorage Mayor of the same name]  and it seemed to me that Bud and Mary Jane Fate were there and introduced as Sullivan's father-in-law.  If Joe Miller was married to the Fate's daughter, then he and AG Sullivan would be brothers-in-law.  Interesting.

Well, I got caught up in writing about Miller's comments on East Germany, and put this on the back burner.  But today as I was getting ready to post this I wanted to see if I could find something that showed that Kathleen Tompkins-Miller was Fate's daughter.

An old legislative site for Fate had a section on family:

Kathleen Tompkins-Miller

Family:
Wife - Mary Jane
Children - Janine, Jennifer, Julie, Al H. Woods
Twelve Grandchildren

No Kathleen.  But, of course, Miller would have corrected the record at the time if it weren't true.  Wouldn't he? 

Now I started scratching my head.  I called Rep. Bob Lynn who had been at the Sunday event.  I'd gotten to know him while I was in Juneau and had talked to him Sunday.  He recalled Sen. Dyson making that introduction, so I hadn't been wrong about that.  He said he thought there was a connection to the Fates but wasn't really sure.  I mentioned the Dan Sullivan connection - Rep. Lynn had been in the confirmation hearings - and he thought, well, maybe that was it.  He wasn't sure.

I called the Miller headquarters on Northern Lights, but I was told no one there had been to the Sunday event and they didn't know.  They recommended I call Fred Dyson.

I left a message on Dyson's answering machine and followed up with an email.  [Update Oct. 20, 9:30am:  Dyson's office called this morning and when I said I'd gotten the answer, the woman said 'good' and hung up before I could ask anything more.][Update later Wednesday:  Email from Fred Dyson said he confused Sullivan and Miller and thought Miller hadn't corrected him so as not to embarrass him.]

I called another legislator who didn't know, but suggested I call Dr. Fate in Fairbanks.

Joe Miller

When I explained to Dr. Fate why I was calling he laughed and said that Sen. Dyson was confused.  No, he was not related to Joe Miller in any way.  In fact he'd asked Dyson whether Miller had refuted him.  (Fate had gotten calls about this immediately after the meeting.)  He asked me if I'd been there and if I'd heard any refutation.  I told him I hadn't heard any correction.

Dr. Hugh "Bud" Fate

Dr. Fate said he was well known in the state, particularly in Fairbanks, and he was a little miffed that Miller hadn't corrected the record about Miller's relationship with Fate.  He made it clear that there was no connection between himself and Joe Miller.


I asked if he was supporting Miller.  He said he'd just made up his mind that he is voting for Lisa Murkowski.

[Dr. Fate's photo is from

his old legislative website.]

So,  I'm wondering if Fred Dyson is changing his assessment since Joe Miller hasn't, in fact, been vetted by Dr. Fate.  Miller just let the folks at Central Middle School think he was Fate's son-in-law without correcting the record.  Or maybe he hadn't been listening to Dyson.

Daily Kos See Comments on Halcro Blog Suggesting Miller is Playing Games with his Taxes

There may be a good explanation for this - like for the East German comments and for having a posse to handcuff aggressive reporters.  But it also might explain why Miller doesn't want people looking at his Fairbanks personnel files. 

A friend sent me to this Daily Kos post, but it comes from Andrew Halcro's blog, and Progressive Alaska  is also connected.

Basically the story, based on review of Miller's campaign disclosure information, says that he's valued his Fairbanks office, which he owns, at $50,000 to $100,000.  He also pays himself rent for the same amount according to the disclosure forms (posted at the link.)  But, Fairbanks assesses the value of the office at only about $25,000.

He also lists his income as an attorney at about $59,000.  So, after paying rent of $50,000, his earned income would only be $9,000.  So, by paying himself rent higher than the value of buying the property outright, the post suggests that he's moving his income from earned income subject to payroll tax to unearned income, not subject to that tax. 

We'll see how this turns out.  But it shows the power of blogs.   Lots of people give each other ideas and can check on lots of things AND they have a place to put their thoughts where others can see them and follow up.  Not like the old days when if it didn't get into the daily newspaper or tv news, there weren't any outlets to get the news out.  

US-Republikaner nimmt Berliner Mauer als Vorbild

[US Republican takes Berlin Wall as Model]

Most of what I post here has a relatively small audience, maybe 300 hits a day, sometimes more, sometimes less.  But the post with audio of Alaska US Senate candidate Joe Miller's using East Germany as a model of how a border can be secured has gotten a lot more attention.  Today, so far,  there have been 2,500 hits from links all over the place.  Not much compared to some of my fellow Alaskan bloggers, but a lot for this modest platform.

This one at Der Spiegel is my favorite.  After all, they know more about the East and West German border than most of the others. 

Tea-Party-Bewegung
US-Republikaner nimmt Berliner Mauer als Vorbild

Joe Miller before Sunday talk at Central Middle School

Joe Miller: "Wenn Ostdeutschland das konnte, dann können wir das auch."
Mit der Berliner Mauer gegen Flüchtlinge aus Mexiko: Joe Miller, erzkonservativer Senatskandidat der Tea-Party-Bewegung in Alaska, hat die Grenzbefestigung der ehemaligen DDR gelobt.

Washington - Sarah Palin behauptete einst, sie könne von Alaska aus Russland sehen. Wie sehr der eiserne Vorhang in dem US-Bundesstaat noch eine Rolle spielt, hat jetzt der Senatskandidat der US-Republikaner gezeigt. Joe Miller, ebenso wie Palin der Tea-Party-Bewegung zugehörig, lobte die Berliner Mauer als Vorbild für die Abwehr illegaler Einwanderer in den USA. Die DDR habe ihre Grenze wirksam gegen Übertritte gesichert, sagte Miller auf einer Wahlkampfkundgebung in Alaska, von der am Dienstag ein Audiomitschnitt im Internet veröffentlicht wurden.

The rest is at this Der Spiegel post.

You can see evidence of this German link in the most recent comments.

Joe Miller: "If East Germany could, we could."

I went to the Joe Miller town hall this afternoon at Central Middle School.  It was an interesting session, about 175 people, and I was impressed with how courteous, for the most part, the audience was with several questions from people who were clearly not Miller supporters.

Most of what he said, he's said before.  I'll try to post more on this later.  But the comment that caught my attention most was one he made was in response to a question on illegal immigration. 

Miller replied:  "The first thing that has to be done is secure the border. . .  East Germany was very, very able to reduce the flow.  Now, obviously, other things were involved.  We have the capacity to, as a great nation, secure the border.  If East Germany could, we could."

Back in 1887, Woodrow Wilson published what many claim to be the seminal article on the field of public administration.  He argued in it that we should borrow the civil service systems of Europe.  But he knew there was a strong anti-Europe sentiment, so he made several references to being able to borrow good ideas from countries without also taking their negative features.  

"We borrowed rice, but we do not eat it with chopsticks."

And, "If we see a murderous fellow sharpening a knife cleverly, I can borrow his way of sharpening the knife without borrowing his probable intention to commit murder with it . . ."

I'm not sure Wilson is one of Joe Miller's heroes.  And despite Wilson's reassurances, I would hope Miller could come up with a better role model than East Germany.  Their guards' orders were shoot to kill.



[Note: I've cut out some after the question because it was about getting out to vote, not answering the question.]

And I have to admit that when I told my neighbor, who has a McAdams sign up, his response was to build a fence too.  For the record,  Wikipedia reports the East German border fence at 1,381 kilometres (858 miles) long and it ran from the Baltic Sea to Czechoslovakia.  That doesn't include the Berlin wall since Berlin is well inside East Germany.

The US border with Mexico, again according to Wikipedia is 3,169 km (1,969 miles).

A fence along the border might slow things down a bit, but it won't stop illegal immigration.  We need to help Mexico build its economy so coming to the US isn't necessary for a decent life.  As it it, people risk their lives to get to the US and that won't stop with a border fence.  And it's not like we don't have a role in Mexico's problems.  Their horrendous drug wars result from our appetite for illegal drugs.

Besides, I'm not sure that the costs of staffing a 2,000 mile border tightly enough to keep out illegal aliens wouldn't come to more than the costs the US bears now - which we don't really know - for schooling and health of illegal aliens.  But maybe we could hire cheap labor from Mexico to make it affordable. Besides, Miller also makes reducing the deficit his main priority.  Building and staffing such a border isn't going to help there. 

It's a long way from the Statue of Liberty as the symbol of the United States to an East German style barbed wire fence with mined no-man's land, guard towers, machine guns, and German shepherds.  I know what that looked like.  When I was a student in Göttingen, Germany, the border was just a few miles east of where I lived and we rode out there now and then.  It wasn't pretty.  But it certainly cut down the flow of people escaping to the West.

Murkowski Courts Jewish Voters on Yom Kippur

Lisa Murkowski stopped by at Temple Beth Sholom at the end of services today as people were breaking the fast.  I took advantage of her presence to talk to her about how US embassies mistreat people applying for visas.  I'd written her a letter about this about five years ago after observing how callously Chinese visa seekers were treated in Beijing.  And two weeks ago the New York Times had a piece about German Opera and Theater director Peter Stein who canceled his planned work on Boris Godunov at New York's Metropolitan Opera because of how he was treated by the US consular officials in Berlin.   As he explained it:

In June he went to the consulate in Berlin for a work visa for the Met job and was forced, he said, to stand for hours in a stifling room with 50 other visa applicants. When he finally reached the consular official, “He said to me, ‘Why don’t you laugh?’ ” Mr. Stein recounted. “I said, ‘I stay here for two and a half hours standing and I am an old man.’ ”

The officer replied, “ ‘In this case you will not have a visa,’ and sent me away,” Mr. Stein said. Mr. Stein said the experience left him humiliated and deeply offended.

The same sort of treatment went on in Beijing - elderly folks had to stand for hours waiting to get visas.   And the officials have this same sort of arbitrary power to capriciously turn people down like this.

Murkowski agreed strongly that this was not a good way to win the hearts and minds of people around the world. 

The people I asked thought it was a little tacky to campaign at the synagogue on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, but thought it was normal for American politics.  They also pointed out that Scott McAdams was there ten days ago for Rosh Hashanah, the beginning of the High Holy Days, which I hadn't noticed.

NOTE:  I did not have my camera with me during services.  It was out in the car though and I got it after services when I found out Murkowski was there.  Maybe this blogging thing is getting to be too much.

More Signs That Lisa Is Running?

I went to the season introduction at Out North Thursday night - more on that later.    I ran into Pico there and he told me he'd been at the campaign sign graveyard near Ship Creek.

I'm not quite sure where this was but he said there were lots of old, large campaign signs for all different candidates. Theaters like Cyranos and Out North sometimes recycle them when they are making sets.

Anyway, he took these pictures of men gathering the Lisa Murkowski signs and putting them into a truck. Is this a clue about what she might announce Friday?

[All the photos in this post courtesy of Pico.]

Is Lisa Going To Run?

APRN's interview with Lisa Murkowski today suggests that Lisa is still thinking about doing a write-in campaign.  (Today's (Sept. 16) news isn't up yet on their website, but you should be able to get it here by tomorrow.)

But one of the signs that says to me that there's a very good chance she'll try is Paul Jenkins.  He's been a Republican Party insider for years.   He's done a couple of opinion pieces in the Anchorage Daily News - one strongly urging Murkowski to run as a write-in and the other vehemently attacking Joe Miller.

On September 4 he did a piece titled  Murkowski Was Classy But Wrong,
(wrong for not attacking Miller)  which included this:

With Miller in the race, and her on the sidelines, Democrats have a real chance against Miller, who too easily is painted a far-right tea party whack-job and a Sarah Palin clone who channels Joe Vogler and tilts at windmills. Many people find him very scary. Miller's malarkey plays well to the GOP's sometimes irrational far right, living in its own fantasy world, but he may be unable to clinch the seat when the rest of Alaska catches on.

Then on a September 11 there was,   Miller is full of whoppers, and they keep getting bigger

In this piece he quotes "a pal" named Izzo:

"The bigger the fib, the better. It's like that Hitler deal, lie and lie large, or something like that. It helps, of course, if your audience is dumber than a wet sock.

"That mook with the Democrats, McWhatshisface, can't even answer questions. My man Miller makes up the questions -- and the answers, too. He's great."

He ends his imaginary conversation with Izzo (and the piece) with:

So, what you are telling me is that not only did he lie about Lisa Murkowski and her stands on the federal stimulus, abortion and Obamacare during the primary, his campaign planks and his promises to voters are shaky, too? I ask.

"I'm just saying," Izzo says. "Ya gotta love this guy.

Why would anybody buy this stuff? I ask. Miller's a guy who, three days into the story, did not even know some preacher was about to burn Qurans in Florida. How could any Alaskan be manipulated into backing him? How long before his supporters get it? Who are these people?

"Suckers," Izzo says with a big smile. "Suckers."

Probably I'm naive,  but I can't see how Jenkins could come out and support Miller after trash talking him like this.  And he's surely not going to support a Democrat. So that leaves Lisa as a candidate.

 [Update:  Someone emailed me a quote from Paul Jenkins saying he had to support Tony Knowles over Sarah Palin for Governor. 

Voice of the Times, 11.3.2006

By PAUL JENKINS

May the Lord have mercy on my soul. I think I have to vote for Tony Knowles. That's right. Tony Knowles. ...

 And remember, Knowles lost to Palin.]