Gun Lobby Example: Here's Why The Public Interest Regularly Gets Sabotaged

It became clear to me, while teaching about ethics and 'the public interest' that there were good explanations why the public interest loses out regularly to special interests.

Single Issue vs. Many Issues
Each special interest is focused narrowly on one topic - developers, airlines, doctors, unions, auto manufacturers, the  mining industry, oil industry, etc - are narrowly focused on lobbying for what is most important to them.

Protecting the public interest against all those many well funded private interests, is more difficult.  It's hard to keep up with all the threats to the public interest because the public interest is much broader and more generalized.  The public has interests in a clean environment, fair treatment of consumers, work place safety, good education, auto safety, and on and on.  Protecting all these against corporations looking for less regulation, higher profits, as well as tax benefits, is hard.  There's just too much to keep up with.

This LA Times article by George Skelton about the gun lobby and the gun control interests of the public illustrates this basic dilemma for those interested in protecting the public interest.

From George Skelton, LA Times:

Sure, voters tell pollsters Congress should pass legislation to toughen up background checks on gun buyers. Most even want to ban military-style assault weapons.
But gun control is far down the list of voters’ priorities. Many other policy issues rank higher: immigration, jobs, schools, climate change.…
So after every shooting massacre, when more innocent people are murdered by some wacko with a firearm designed for mass killing, there’s tough talk, screaming and flailing for a few days. Then everyone calms down and snoozes until the next slaughter.
Politicians — mainly Republicans and moderate Democrats in Congress — don’t feel constant pressure from gun control supporters. These voters have been firing with cap pistols.
But the other side is rigidly committed. The gun zealots — those mesmerized by the power of firearms — tend to be “single-issue” voters who are inspired by the National Rifle Assn. Their No. 1 litmus test for any candidate is the politician’s position on gun rights.
Most Republicans and many moderate Democrats are scared silly and timidly vote against virtually all meaningful gun controls. That is, unless the congressional leader is a Republican, such as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. Then the frightened politicians are spared from voting at all because the leader blocks the bill from the floor.
At least, that’s the way it has always been.

So there it is spelled out - while most people want some form of legislation to curb gun violence, it's one of many issues of interest.  They aren't all focused and ready to lobby hard on that single issue.

But gun lobbyists are focused on that one specific issue at the receipt of an email.


While I think this article makes that point clearly, I find Skelton's style a little loose.  Some examples:

1. " But gun control is far down the list of voters’ priorities. Many other policy issues rank higher: immigration, jobs, schools, climate change.…"
Well here's a summary of issues - first overall, then by different political shades.  The list comes from a Citizens Climate Lobby talk in November 2018 by

Click on image to enlarge and focus

I don't know where Skelton came up with his list of top issues, but this one is more statistically valid I suspect.

2.  "some wacko with a firearm"  - Sorry, this just perpetuates stereotypes of mass shooters as totally crazy folks.  Sure, anyone who mows down a bunch of people is not within the normal range of empathy, moral judgment, personal control, and perhaps other categories.  But given the characteristics of mass shooters listed in the previous post, they've mostly been abused or bullied and didn't have the kind of support most people get.  In that context, their behavior might not seem so irrational or crazy.  We need less clichéd ways of talking about these people so we can come up with effective ways of 1) not letting people get to this stage and 2) having systems in place that intervene when they start showing signs or even talking about shooting up folks.

3.  "mainly Republicans and moderate Democrats in Congress"  - What the hell is a moderate Democrat?  I keep having to remind people that if Richard Nixon was in today's Congress he'd be labeled among the most liberal Democrats.  We got the EPA, the Clean Water Act, the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, and a bunch of other things (Roe v Wade decision came down while he was president and he didn't yell and scream about it)  during his administration.  Yet he was seen in his day as conservative.  Moderate Democrats today are conservatives by 1960s-1970s standards.  Calling them moderates is a huge misnomer.

OK, I'm done.  No wait, I wanted to offer a possible option for the public interest.

The Citizens Climate Lobby is a public interest lobbying group (which I'm a member of) that is focusing very narrowly on one issue - getting a carbon fee and dividend law passed.  They've got chapters in almost every Congressional district so constituents can lobby - regularly, cordially, and with lots of information - their members of congress.  It's a good model.  If we had Citizens  XXXX Lobby for all of those issues on the chart above we could get a long way in blocking special interests whose favored legislation has harmful consequences on the public interest.

"Institutionalized Conflict of Interest" - If You Know The Name Manafort, But Not A Whole Lot More

Then you need to read this Atlantic article, The Plot Against America.  The sleaziness of Paul Manafort is breathtaking, and the story fills in gaps in lots of other stories you probably know.

Early dirty work with Roger Stone and Lee Atwater.

Changing the DC lobby culture.

Profiting off of arms dealers and lobbying Congress for the most repressive regimes in the world.

The only way Trump couldn't know about Manafort was if he willfully ignored what everyone around him knew.

Some brief excerpts:

"Manafort had profited from the sort of excesses that make a country ripe for revolution. And in the early months of 2014, protesters gathered on the Maidan, Kiev’s Independence Square, and swept his patron from power. Fearing for his life, Yanukovych sought protective shelter in Russia. Manafort avoided any harm by keeping a careful distance from the enflamed city. But in his Kiev office, he’d left behind a safe filled with papers that he would not have wanted to fall into public view or the wrong hands."

There's a lot of personal info on Manafort because his daughter's phone was hacked.

"Nine months after the Ukrainian revolution, Manafort’s family life also went into crisis. The nature of his home life can be observed in detail because Andrea’s text messages were obtained last year by a “hacktivist collective”—most likely Ukrainians furious with Manafort’s meddling in their country—which posted the purloined material on the dark web. The texts extend over four years (2012–16) and 6 million words. Manafort has previously confirmed that his daughter’s phone was hacked and acknowledged the authenticity of some texts quoted by Politico and The New York Times."

"When Manafort had arrived in Washington in the 1970s, the place reveled in its shabby glories, most notably a self-satisfied sense of high duty. Wealth came in the form of Georgetown mansions, with their antique imperfections and worn rugs projecting power so certain of itself, it needn’t shout. But that old boarding-school establishment wasn’t Manafort’s style. As he made a name for himself, he began to dress differently than the Brooks Brothers crowd on K Street, more European, with funky, colorful blazers and collarless shirts. If he entertained the notion, say, of moving his backyard swimming pool a few feet, nothing stopped him from the expense. Colleagues, amused by his sartorial quirks and his cosmopolitan lifestyle, referred to him as 'the Count of Monte Cristo.'”

"His acts of rebellion were not merely aesthetic. Manafort rewrote the rules of his adopted city. In the early ’80s, he created a consulting firm that ignored the conventions that had previously governed lobbying. When it came to taking on new clients, he was uninhibited by moral limits. In 2016, his friends might not have known the specifics of his Cyprus accounts, all the alleged off-the-books payments to him captured in Cyrillic ledgers in Kiev. But they knew enough to believe that he could never sustain the exposure that comes with running a presidential campaign in the age of opposition research and aggressive media. “The risks couldn’t have been more obvious,” one friend who attempted to dissuade him from the job told me. But in his frayed state, these warnings failed to register."

"Whereas other firms had operated in specialized niches—lobbying, consulting, public relations—Black, Manafort and Stone bundled all those services under one roof, a deceptively simple move that would eventually help transform Washington. Time magazine deemed the operation “the ultimate supermarket of influence peddling.” Fred Wertheimer, a good-government advocate, described this expansive approach as 'institutionalized conflict of interest.'” 

"All of the money Congress began spending on anti-communist proxies represented a vast opportunity. Iron-fisted dictators and scruffy commandants around the world hoped for a share of the largesse. To get it, they needed help refining their image, so that Congress wouldn’t look too hard at their less-than-liberal tendencies. Other lobbyists sought out authoritarian clients, but none did so with the focused intensity of Black, Manafort, Stone and Kelly. The firm would arrange for image-buffing interviews on American news programs; it would enlist allies in Congress to unleash money. Back home, it would help regimes acquire the whiff of democratic legitimacy that would bolster their standing in Washington."

There's a lot more in the article itself. 

Harry's Crawfish Boil

I was told this was one of the biggest events to see and be seen at. Next Sunday is the last day of the session and committees were meeting this Sunday in both houses as well as both houses having sessions. In the midst of this last leg of the session, where people are trying to get legislation out of committees or projects into the budget, comes the annual crawfish boil.

Rep. Harry Crawford is from Louisiana and for a number of years now has been hosting a crawfish boil with fellow Louisianan Jenny Dawson and her husband Kent.

 The Yacht Club is pretty low brow.

Here's Rep. Crawford cooking up another batch of crawfish.

Politicians of both parties were there to enjoy the food.

I got to talk to Willie Hensley.  His book, Fifty Miles From Tomorrow, he told me, is now out in paperback and will be coming out in Korean. 

Here's Jenny Dawson.  She and her husband Kent  co-hosted this affair.  She said they first did this at their house, but it got too big.    I also learned Jenny and Kent Dawson are registered lobbyists.  Since I have one of the lists of registered lobbyists on my computer, I looked them up.  Here's what it says (the original formating was much nicer than this, sorry.):

Dawson, Jenny
PO Box 20790 Juneau, AK 99802
Kent Dawson Company, Inc.

Contract Lobbyist; monthly fee $1500.00
Legislative and administrative issues regarding the clients of Kent Dawson Company


Dawson, Kent
P.O. Box 20790 Juneau, AK 99802

Alaska Recycling Energy
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $75000.00
Waste to energy and coal to liquids technology; Alaska energy issues

City of Galena
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $40000.00

Utility, energy, and capital projects. City financial matters.

City of Seward
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $77000.00
Regulations and laws impacting municipalities. Capital budget projects.

Council of Alaska Producers
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $75000.00
Laws and regulations pertaining to mining including taxation, and coastal zone management.

Doyon, Limited
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $75000.00
Oil and gas exploration, taxation and tax credits, higher educational/vocational education tax credit legislation.

Galena City School District
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $51750.00
School District finances, capital projects, distance learning and issues relating to the boarding school program.

Kodiak-Kenai Cable Company, LLC
Contract Lobbyist; monthly fee $3000.00
Construction and funding of airport and dock facilities; energy generation projects

NANA/TECK
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $20000.00
Northwest Arctic Borough government/school district support. Capital projects and school funding.

Northwest Arctic Borough School District
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $15000.00
School district finances including capital projects.

Princess Tours
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $78000.00
Legislation relating to the cruise industry initiative; administrative and legislative action as requested

Sequestered Solutions Alaska, LLC
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $72000.00
State of Alaska technology projects and data hosting services

Teck Resources Limited
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $72000.00
Mining and resource development issues.

Usibelli Coal Mine. Inc.
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $84000.00
Legislation and regulations pertaining to coal industry taxation, export, transportation and port development


The other name on the poster is Wendy Chamberlain.  Here's the list of her clients:

Chamberlain, Wendy
224 4th street juneau, AK 99801 PH:

Alaska Association of REALTORS
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $50000.00

All real estate issues incluidng right of way, licensing, eminent domain, registration, fees, land issues

Alaska Auto Dealers Association
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $26000.00
auto industry issues. emissions, frachise laws, fuel tax, booster seats, regulatory oversight

Alaska Cruise Association
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $50000.00
All issues relating to the cruise ship industry

Alaska State Home Building Association
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $37000.00
All building code issues, housing standards, contractor licensing, fire standards, fire sprinklers, AHFC funding, construction academy funding

Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $60000.00
Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center is seeking capital funding for a new health center.

Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc.
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $50000.00
All alcohol related issues, taxes, distribution legislation, underage drinking etc

Calista Corporation
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $125000.00
mining issues, local government issues, native and tribal issues, capital and operating budget

City of Nome
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $75000.00
Local government issues, revenue sharing, capital budget

Geohedral, LLC
Salaried Employee; monthly wage $7000.00
Mining interests

Marathon Oil Company
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $90000.00
Issues relating to oil and gas, land, enviromental issues, taxes, permitting etc.

Matanuska Telephone Association
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $60000.00
All issues relating to telecommunications

NANA/TECK
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $20000.00
All issues relating to mining, mineral taxes, environmental issues, land claims, native resource issues, capital budget, operating budget, regulatory issues, Red Dog mine.

Northwest Arctic Borough
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $15000.00

All issues relating to local and municipal government, taxes, school funding, municipal dividend, mining, capital budget, operating budget

Northwest Arctic Borough School District
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $13333.00
School district funding, capital budget, operating budget, school foundation formula, cost differential, pce, preshcool funding, headstart, local school match requirements

Pebble Limited Partnership
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $120000.00
All issues relating to mining, mining taxes, permitting, environmental, water quality, water rights, mixing zone, etc

Providence Health & Services Alaska
Contract Lobbyist; annual fee $72000.00
All issues relating to health car

People who get paid this much money obviously know what the laws say. So I have no doubt that this event was perfectly legal. I'm also sure that this is not at all unusual. But I can't help but think that this is more than two people from Louisiana throwing a party. But these lobbyists represent a lot of people who are paying them a lot of money. Should legislators be this cosy with the lobbyists?

Emily Nenon from the Cancer Society

There are still lots of people down here pushing legislation that is important to them.  Here's Emily from the American Cancer Society talking about two projects I bet you know nothing about.  

To Think That I Saw it on Seward Street

Every day, I keep thinking about Dr. Seuss as I walk around the Capitol.  But I hadn't read this book for over 50 years. 

When I got it from the library, it was a little different from my experience.  The boy in the book doesn't see anything more exciting than a horse drawn cart. 



So in his imagination, and in his eagerness to have a great story to tell when he gets home, that cart gets embellished a bit. 

And a bit more

 But I go to the Capitol every day and I see things that need no embellishment.   I just need to describe them in words and pictures and video. 

 A few examples:

It turns out that I share my office (the staff/public lounge) with a lot of interesting people including former legendary legislator and now lobbyist Al Adams.  We first talked when he was talking at a nearby table where I was writing on my laptop.  I had to go to a hearing and so packed up and as I got up to leave, he apologized for making too much noise.  I assured him that it wasn't a problem and introduced myself, the blogger.  He looked at me funny and said something about forests and that he isn't doing anything now with logging. 

And here's another legend, Fairbanks native, Anchorage Daily News writer and former editor Michael Carey, on the Capitol steps.  He said he's been coming down during the legislative session for 40 years.  It was great to chat with him about what this all means. 

This chain saw version of former legislator Bettye Fahrenkamp showed up outside the House chambers.  There's a Capitol Mini Golf Championship scheduled in the this week.  Apparently $75,000 was raised at this event in 2002, but it's hard to find much on this event, though Rep. Paul Seaton mentions it in his newsletter in 2008.

And today there were optometrists on the 2nd floor giving eye tests to legislators and staffers.  I talked briefly to Jill Matheson, chair of the Alaska Board of Examiners in Optometry who explained what they were doing. 



You can see HB 245 here.   It looks like this bill has passed on the House Floor and so will replace the Senate version of this.   Passage of this bill is among the BOARD OF EXAMINERS IN OPTOMETRY  GOALS AND OBJECTIVES FOR 2010:

1. Continue regular review of optometry statutes and regulations. This review is necessary to be sure that the laws are adequately protecting the public and properly regulating the modern practice of optometry. Possible examples
1. Consider "standard of care" issues.
2. a. Licensure by endorsement should be restricted to those coming in at the
3. Review the approval of alternate and electronic forms of continuing education such as webinars and virtual grand rounds
4. 12 AAC 48.210(a)(1) and (a)(2) could be improved by removing "contact" and just stating 36 hours continuing education.
2. Develop a list of recommended changes to legislative statutes for the audit committee to take note of. Possible examples:
1. Licensure by endorsement should be restricted to those coming in at the highest level of license. HB245/SB193 was introduced to accomplish this
2. All new licenses should be at the highest level. HB245/SB193 was introduced to accomplish this.
3. All current Alaska licenses to be at the highest level of licensure by 2012. HB 245/SB193 was introduced to accomplish this.
4. Refusal of license: authority for the board to refuse to grant a new license for certain reasons and/or to impose certain stipulations. Include in the division's Omnibus statutes for standardizing licensing, if possible.
3. Make active Alaska licensed optometrists aware of recent amendments to regulation.
4. Continue to meet twice per year.
5. Send a board member to ARBO.
6. Keep informed of and support legislation on the state and federal level concerning patient protection and access to care.
7. Continue to support provider non-discrimination language in state and federal legislation.

State Affairs: More on Personnel Board and Raising Bounty on Underage Drinkers

[I have been trying to report fairly objectively, but now and then I'll add my own questions in at the end. No one in the committee called this a bounty (though Gatto called it an award), but someone I mentioned it to said, "You mean a bounty?" Those comments are at the end.]

(H)STATE AFFAIRS		STANDING COMMITTEE *
Mar 16 Tuesday 8:00 AM		CAPITOL 106
=+	HB 348	PERSONNEL BOARD MEMBERSHIP	TELECONFERENCED
+	SB 194	ALCOHOL VIOLATIONS: PENALTY/CIVIL DAMAGES	TELECONFERENCED

HB 348 PERSONNEL BOARD MEMBERSHIP TELECONFERENCED

Two purposes:  1) Enlarge the committee from 3 to 5  and 2) insulate it from the Governor whose conduct could be reviewed by the Board.  (This bill was inspired by the Personnel Review Board's investigations of former Gov. Palin.)

I got there late.  The sky was blue, the sun was shining, and after a week of mostly clouds, snow, rain, and wind, I was distracted.  Attorney Doug Wooliver of the Court system was testifying as I got in and was saying something like:

"The Court doesn't typically support or oppose bills.  We don't support or oppose this bill. . . But . . . this isn't the kind of bill that the court is real enthusiastic about." 

The bill has the Chief Justice sending three proposed names to the Governor to choose from for Personnel Board appointees.  The idea is to make this less political since the Board might have to review the Governor and the Governor's appointees.

After trying to respond with options that didn't include the Court and playing around with wording about lobbyists for an hour, I think what happened is that they ended up with pretty much the same bill they started with (the Court sending names to the Governor) but they added "political" before the word "group," to clarify that 'group' didn't mean football team.  I did ask a few people if they got the same impression and everyone agreed, though no one was absolutely sure.

And then they passed the bill out of committee to Judiciary.

I was able to sit where I could watch the sun on Mt. Juneau reflected in the windows of the State Court Building across the street. 



The second bill was SB 194.

SB 194 ALCOHOL VIOLATIONS: PENALTY/CIVIL DAMAGES

This bill would increase penalties for minors buying alcohol.  This bill amends an existing law that
1.  fines minors caught trying to buy alcohol by licensed alcohol dealers.
2.  fines adults buying alcohol for minors and
3.  fines kids hanging around liquor stores soliciting adults to buy them liquor.

There's currently a $1000 fine and this bill would raise it to $1500. 


Here's how it works as described by witness Mr. Madden of Brown Jug liquor stores.


1.  It deters minors from coming in, in the first palce, gives us a means to go after them.  We use the penalty to award our employees.  Bonus of $200.  We offer minors the option to waive $750 if they go through an alcohol education program and sexual assault awareness program.  Gets the family involved with the minor.  In many cases they don't know kid was caught.  Now they get letter saying you owe Brown Jug $1000.  We've pursued action against over 2000 kids since 1998 (MOA law) though we haven't collected from all.
2.  Adults buying alcohol for minors.  Adult who has carload of kids outside the store.
3.  Kids outside soliciting adults to buy for them.

There were some question about what other licensees, besides Brown Jug, do. 

Rep. Peggy Wilson:  [This are from my notes, so it's a rough approximation of what was actually said]  Only Brown Jug and not a lot of other businesses doing it.  If they had more incentive to do something, maybe it would be worth it, we could catch more people this way.  For me it is a travesty that people would do something like this.
I'm trying to get other entities involved.  If Brown Jug has caught 2000, you know they are saying, we'll just go somewhere else.  If we could get others involved it would make a big difference.


Sen Kevin Meyers [bill sponsor]:  Yes, Brown Jug and Chilkoots, do have a reputation.  But now, CHARR will do this on your behalf. [CHARR = Cabaret, Restaurants, & Retailer's Association.  Known by some as the liquor lobby.]

Wilson:  Since CHARR has said they would do this, have you seen an increase?

Meyers:  Yes, they have been doing quite a few of these and they have asked us to bump up the price because of the cost of tracking down the kids.

Rep. Gatto:  We have existing fine, actually an award.  The liquor store owner gets $1000 and $750 waived if go to training.  This would just change his $300 to $800. 

Meyers:  That's Brown Jug's policy.  Others will pay employees or bouncers more.  CHARR says it is harder to find where they live.  Each establishment has different policies and costs.

Gatto:  No requirement that cashier share in the bonus?
Meyers:  No

The bill passed out of State Affairs Committee and to Judiciary next.

So, Rep. Gatto figured out that while it may be a penalty for the violators, it is a reward for the licensee who gets the payment.  Rep. Gatto began to ask a line of questions that does raise a good point:  how much are we rewarding liquor stores and CHARR for obeying the law themselves, by not selling to minors?  I think perhaps the committee accepted Sen. Meyers' response too easily.

The idea of using rewards instead of penalties is supported by behavioral psychology.  But we really don't know how much of this increased fine merely pays expenses and how much will enrich CHARR's coffers.  Sen. Meyer said CHARR asked for the increase.  Mr. Madden from Brown Jug didn't talk about the costs of tracking down kids.  He said that they'd pursued over 2000 violators in twelve years.  Say 25% don't pay (he said they didn't get them all), that's still about 125 per year, which now would be $1500 a pop.  That's $187,500 a year.  Say all the violators go to alcohol and sexual abuse awareness training and they waive $750 each, it's still $93,750. And it wasn't clear if that was a Brown Jug option and if CHARR gives the same option.  It's possible they do have to expend considerable monies to track down violators, but I think the legislators should get some accounting data before giving them what some might call a bounty. 




Photos:
 1.  Mt. Juneau from just outside our apartment.
2.  Walking down the steps above Capitol Park.  There's a white building in the middle.  That's the newly remodeled Tom Stewart building that is an annex to the Capitol, and where I'm writing right now.  To the right is a brick building - the Capitol - and behind it is a taller black building - the State Court House.
3.  Mt. Juneau from Capitol Building Room 107 reflected off the State Court Building.
4.  And then the sun even made it into the hearing room.  Representatives, from left to right:  Gatto, Seaton, Lynn, Gruenberg, P. Wilson, and Petersen.
5.  Sen. Meyer and his staffer Christine Marasigan testifying, Reps. Gatto and Seaton listening

Local Food Comes to the Capitol

Ted came by and got me out of the staff/public lounge where I was trying to write up a post on the morning hearing on the Iran Divestiture bill.  (It will be up soon)  There was a must attend lunch being sponsored by the Alaska Farm Bureau.  I didn't know we had one.  But I'm always looking for a good photo op, especially one with free food.  There were people lined up in the hall to get in.  This was not your typical lobbyist lunch and learn sandwiches and chips.  The menu had gone around and had done its job.  

People were here for the Alaska grown prime rib and the elk meatloaf.  Not exactly vegetarian fare, but surely there was more than that.  They promised to hold my place in line while I went in to scout it out with my camera.  Here's Rep. Neal Foster learning about Alaska grown food.

This is a room in the Thomas Stewart Building connected to the Capitol building by a second floor bridge.  The building just opened in January.  

Chef Rob Kineen of Orso slicing the elk meatloaf.  I think he was on the panel after the movie Ingredients was shown at UAA in December, but I'm not 100% sure.



Bernie Karl of the Alaska Farm Bureau tells me what this is all about.  With a little help at the end from Victoria Naegle of Wasilla. 

 

Enjoying lunch.

 


I'm pretty sure this is squash cake with Alaska whipped cream on top. 

 

I didn't starve - there was a potato salad, an apple slaw, and vegie dessert.

Alaska Humanities Forum Pitches In Juneau

This is part of my continuing coverage of the people who come to Juneau to talk to their legislators.  Of course, I'm only you showing a fraction of 1%.  But just to give you an idea.

I ran into Jim MacKenzie in the hall outside the Senate Finance Subcommittee meeting Thursday. Jim, a former student, runs the Leadership Anchorage program at the Alaska Humanities Forum.  He and others from the forum, including his boss, AHF president and CEO Greg Kimura, to tell legislators about what the Humanities Forum is doing.  Fortunately for me, they also were serving lunch (this was the first time I've gone in without breakfast).

So here's Jim and Greg on the video. 

I did ask Greg who they could justify bringing so many people down to Juneau and he said they are doing double duty, visiting with people involved in Humanities Forum programs here in Juneau.  Up til now, he said, they haven't had any state funding, but their funding for the summer history teachers workshops has run out, and this is a really important program to help teachers teach Alaska history.

This is their Alaska history curriculum for high school teachers.  The DVD's have historic Alaska films that they converted.









They also published this statehood anniversary collection, Alaska at 50,  which Greg said was the top seller at the University Press.  That's probably not saying a lot.

Boyd McFail Lobbying Against Mandatory Car Daytime Headlights

I keep being amazed by the number and variety of people walking the halls of the Capitol to make their case to legislators. Alaskans complain that Juneau is far away and isolated and people can't get to see their legislators. It may be hard to get here, but once people get here, I imagine any other state Capitol buildings being more accessible than Alaska's. And people manage to get here.  It's crawling with people from all over the state. And you can walk into a legislator's office and if you can't see the legislator right then, they'll probably offer you another time or a staffer who will take down your story. I've never been in another state's legislative building during a session so I don't know how accessible they are, but here the building is wide open for any and everyone to walk into the building and into most anyone's office. Among the many people in the halls today were a group from Bristol Bay, the Alaska Humanities Forum (I'll try to get a post up on them) dentists, people advocating for public transit, and who knows what all else.

Here's a video Boyd McFail explaining why he's against mandatory daytime headlights on Alaska highways just before talking to Rep. Max Gruenberg.

Alaska Community Services Lobbying for Mentors for Those Aging Out of Foster Care

The hallways of the Capitol are crawling with people lobbying for one thing or another.  While there are professional lobbyists, most seem to be relatively ordinary people with ordinary jobs who only come down here once in a session.   Here are two people talking with a legislative staffer about their program and he's gathering data for his boss.  This is in the new public lounge in the Thomas Stewart Building. 

In my new perch in the staff/public lounge I get to meet a few, but there's a limit to how many I can film and post about.  But I do want to keep putting people up so you don't forget that they are here.  I wanted to get a picture of the stairwell today, packed with people, but I was already late for something.

Here are two people from Alaska Community Services who were lobbying for a program to recruit, train, and coordinate mentors for kids aging out of the foster care program.  I have a soft spot for this sort of work since I did some mentoring for kids like that at Covenant House.


Studies show mentors have a big positive impact on kids like this.  Here's a quote from a former foster kid from their handout about the transition he had from being in the foster care system and then aging out:

"It's just like one day everybody is there for you and the next day, you are on your own.  I didn't understand what my credit score was.  I didn't understand anything about how to find an apartment, or how to buy a car or how not to be taken advantage of."

All the ways that mothers and fathers and older siblings and aunts and uncles and family friends their their young adult relatives, these kids have to figure out on their own, because that network doesn't exist for them at all.  Think what you or your children would have done at that age thrown out into the world with no one to go to for help.  That's why mentors can make such a big difference. 

[In the background in the video, you can see Sen. French come into the Thomas Stewart building from the bridge from the Capitol Building, the try to go up the stairs and see they are blocked off because they are finishing them, then head to the stairs at the other end of the building.]

2009 Disclosures Part 2 - What's the Difference Between Good and Bad Travel?

As a faculty member, I went on state paid trips once or twice and sometimes even three times a year.  I went to conferences to present papers generally.  Those gave me opportunities to get feedback on the work I was doing and to meet and talk with others doing similar research.  I would generally come back from such trips greatly stimulated and with new ideas for research and for teaching.  In some cases I had trips paid for by someone other than the State of Alaska.  For example, I was invited to serve on an international panel studying the ombudsman.  This was sponsored by the International Institute of Administrative Sciences headquartered in Brussels, Belgium.  I went to three, three-day meetings in Brussels paid for by the IIAS over a three year period where we met and discussed research on the Ombudsman and produced a book that was a review of Ombudsman offices and issues around the world.  I had two chapters in that book.

Toward the end of my academic career, I felt it was important that when I went on such trips that I write a travel report.  I thought this would accomplish several goals:

• Force me to take good notes and keep track of the events I participated in (ie what panels I attended at conferences) and people I met with contact information, and references for particularly useful organizations and new ideas.  
• Keep me accountable to my dean and students by documenting how I spent my time and the benefits I got and the university got from the trip.
• Allowed me to share the information I got with other faculty members and students.  

I'm sad to say, not many others followed that model.  But when the University sent me to a conference in Kuala Lumpur, I knew that my travel report would document that I spent my time well and made valuable contacts and leads for further research and relationships for the university and would answer anyone who questioned the trip.  

I say all this because I do believe that travel to conferences and training programs is extremely valuable.  But there are also pitfalls:

• People who use conferences as an excuse to get travel paid for by the state or some other entity.
• People who plan conferences near resorts or relatives or to get mileage.
• People whose travel is paid for by other organizations that will expect something in return from the travelers down the line.  
• People whose travel becomes an opportunity for an interest group to lobby the legislator where others with opposing views have no chance to challenge any misleading facts or interpretations.

I'm sure you can come up with other potential pitfalls.

So, we have good reasons for legislators to travel and we have good reason to be concerned about such travel.  At a minimum, abuse just means that the state pays for travel that has no state benefit.  At the worst, travel leads to legislators being coopted by their patrons and working for the interests of those patrons and not the people of Alaska.  So how might we evaluate such travel?   Let me take a stab at some questions to ask:

If paid for by the State:

• What useful information, contacts, or other benefits for the State of Alaska did the legislator get from the trip?
• To what extent was the purpose of the trip related to issues facing Alaska and the constituents of the legislator?
• Was the meeting or conference one that presented a balanced view of the issue or was it dominated by one perspective?  
• How many trips did a particular legislator take? 
• How has the legislator used what was learned to benefit Alaska?

If paid for by an outside entity:

• All the previous questions are relevant to this as well
• Is the entity one that has a specific private interest in what the legislature does or is it more of a public service type institution that promotes general capacities and knowledge useful to legislators?
• Does the legislator balance viewpoints on different trips?  (If they go to Pebble Mine with the Pebble Limited Partnership, do they also participate in forums from environmental groups?)
• Does the legislator have some expectation of campaign contributions or future work that may be tied to the trip sponsor?  

All of this is difficult to determine.  But ethics laws around the world recognize potential problems and for this reason they require that such travel be disclosed so that the public can scrutinize trips and ask questions of the legislators.

So while I was perusing the 2009 Disclosure Report information that was published last week, I notice one trip that was considerably more costly than other trips.  In fact, it was so expensive that I looked carefully through the list to see if any others were even close to it.  So as I looked through the trips I thought it might be interesting to see how many trips there were which were reported to be over $2000.

At this point, I'll simply list the information as it comes from the Disclosure Report.  I will try to follow up and talk to legislators about their trips and how they share what they learned on the trips with others. 


And I'd warn readers not to assume that any of these trips were not legitimate trips through which the legislator gained valuable experience and knowledge for the State of Alaska.  But also don't assume that everyone on the list went on these trips with the interests of the people of Alaska as their top priority.  Look through the factors above and then if you have questions, call or email the legislator in question so that you don't jump to false conclusions.

OK, so, here's the list.  NOTE:  These trips were NOT paid for by the State of Alaska.  In some cases the influence for those who paid was probably benign.  If they were general public interest organizations with missions to generally improve legislative skills and knowledge, the State probably got a good deal.  But if they were organizations that have some vested interest in the State of Alaska, we probably need to look a bit deeper.  Not assume wrong, but check. (I think I've got all the trips reported that were over $2000, but it is possible I missed some.)

[Note I'm pretty sure the first number (ie 08-28) is the report date and the second number (08-05) is the travel date.  They have 30 days to report.  The Disclosure Report marks the late reports with *.]

08-28 08-05 Sen Wielechowski $2,013.47 CSG [Council of State Governments] West-CSG West Western Legislative Academy; faculty/curriculum expense; Lodging, meals, ground transportation, conference fees; Colorado Springs, CO

*10-01 08-05 Sen Thomas $2,013.47 CSG-West; educational conference on being an effective legislator; leadership team building; decision making, time management, legislative ethics; lodging, meals, ground transportation and conference fees

09-21 09-12 Sharon Kelly  $2,022.48 Rasmusson Foundation; Philanthropy Northwest Annual Meeting; airfare,  lodging, meals, ground transportation, conference fees; Skamia Lodge, OR

06-30 06-22 Rep Joule  $2,069.40 NCSL (National Council of State Legislatures] State Tribal Relations-National Native Issues Conference; airfare, lodging, meals;  San Francisco, CA

01-02 11-17 Sen McGuire $2087.29 CSG [Council of State Governments]; airfare/lodging/meals; teach leg academy classes, host CSG mtgs & Dinners as CSG-West president; Colorado Springs, CO

12-21 12-07 Rep Neuman $2,133.63 Pacific Northwest Economic Region; Energy Horizon Conference #2 to educate Legislators on North American energy infrastructure and delivery system; lodging and webinar credits; San Diego, CA

09-29 08-28 Pete Ecklund  $2,244.50 City of Unalaska; fly-in to visit Unalaska community, meet residents, tour city and view completed projects and project in progress and areas needing improvement; airfare, accommodations and meals [This [and Sharon Kelly] seems to be the only non-legislator[s] on the list with a trip valued at more than $2000. ]

03-17 03-08 Rep Gatto  $2,249.68 Heartland Institute; airfare/meals/hotel; International Climate Change Conf;  New York City, NY

06-29 06-07 Sen Stevens $2,280.03 Republican State Leadership Committee 2009 National Meeting, Nashville, TN; airfare, meals, ground transportation

01-12 01-01 Sen Davis  $2,397.71 Women in Gov’t; airfare/meals/transp/hotel; 15th annual state directors and Biennial first term leg’s conf; Tampa FL

*11-20 09-11 Sen Meyer  $2,500 Council of State Governments; attended Toll Fellowship Program Leadership Training in Lexington, KY; airfare, lodging, meals and conference fees

10-01 09-20 Rep Olson $2,500 National Association of Insurance Commissioners; annual meeting; airfare,  lodging and meals; Maryland/Washington, DC

12-30 12-08 Sen Stedman $2,689.11 PNWER Energy Horizon Institute; webinars, conference and teleconferences in San Diego, CA; educate legislators on the North American energy infrastructure and  delivery system

07-16 06-05 Rep Holmes  $2,700 National Strategy Institute-Bilateral political exchange designed to foster international democracy and understanding; lodging, meals, ground transportation and museum entrance fees; Seoul, Korea

10-26 10-10 Sen Davis $2,982.84 Women In Government; International Legislative Trip-4th Annual Global Partnership on women’s health and women in government; airfare, lodging, meals and ground transportation; Paris, France and Brussels, Belgium

*08-18 07-12  Sen Menard  $3,333.90 State Legislative Leaders Foundation-Emerging Political Leaders Program class tuition; airfare,
lodging, meals, ground transportation, conference fees; Charlotteville, VA

08-04 07-11 Rep Holmes  $3,901.08 State Legislative Leaders Foundation-Emerging Political Leaders Program-designed to Cultivate and enhance leadership skills in future leaders; airfare, lodging, meals, ground transportation, books, reading material, tuition and fees; Charlottesville, VA

07-31 07-08  Sen Stevens  $3,990.39 Senate Presidents Forum-Renewable Energy Summer Forum; airfare, lodging, meals,  ground transportation; Berlin, Germany

06-09 05-16 Rep Holmes  $4,245.63 Aspen Institute-Catto Fellowship meeting on global environmental & energy issues;  airfare, lodging, meals, ground transportation, and conference fees; Wye, Maryland

04-07 03-25 Rep Holmes  $4,435.20 Aspen Institute; airfare/lodging/meals/conference fees; attend the Catto  Fellowship meeting/conference; Aspen CO

11-02 10-04 Sen Stevens  $5,293 Senate President’s Forum; US/Russian Relations: An in-depth discussion on the  politics and economy of Russia; airfare, lodging, ground transportation and  visa/consulate fee; St. Petersburg, Russia

11-20 10-27 Rep. Johnson  $17,974 Saudi Arabian Government; NCSL requested Speaker of House to send an Oil and Gas representative to participate in a study tour. This was a trade mission to Saudi Arabia with the goal of increasing relations between USA and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; airfare, lodging, meals and ground transportation; Riyadh, Damman, and Jeddah in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Carol Comeau in Juneau

Anchorage School Superintendent Carol Comeau was in Juneau lobbying Monday.

Legislative Council on Public Relations, Facebook, and Other Issues

I got to the Capitol at 8am Thursday morning to hear the discussion in the State Affairs Committee over Rep. Gruenberg's bill to apply proportional representation to the Legislative Council and the Legislative Audit and Budget Committee.  You can read about that here with background on these committees.

[Front left, Rep. Stoltze; in blue Rep. Peggy Wilson; at the end of the table Rep. Harris, Chair; I think the next person in Pam Varni, head of Leg. Affairs Office;  Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom;  and on the far right, Sen. Johnny Ellis.]

So I thought I should see a Legislative Council meeting and there was one at 4pm Thursday.  This is the group made up of Senators and Representatives to deal with joint issues and to act for the Legislature during the interim between sessions.  So they should be covering weighty stuff.

There were a lot of housekeeping issues.  You can see all the details below.  They did talk about the Request for Proposal that was characterized in the press a while back as hiring a PR firm to lobby against protections for beluga whales and polar bears.  The best soundbite of the day came from Senator Ellis:   "Scientists doing science is fine if it is professional. Politicians doing science will get us a black eye."

There was also a long discussion about allowing access to Facebook on Legislative computers.  Right now it is blocked.  They postponed the decision.  Details in the rough minutes below.



Below are my rough notes. WARNING:  I typed as fast as I could, but there are gaps, mispellings, and probably paraphrasing as I tried to catch up. As always, I'm offering this to give an overall sense of things, but don't rely on the details completely. I apologize in advance to anyone I've seriously mischaracterized.  Let me know and I'll make  corrections.  I've been something of a perfectionist most of my life, but I know if I go for perfection here, there will be nothing posted.  Notes in [Brackets] are my notes of explanation as I write this now.

I've taken the online agenda and then written my notes between the lines:



LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL JOINT COMMITTEE * Feb 04 Thursday 4:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532 - Legislature


Feb. 4, 2010 4:05 opened
1.  Roll Call: Harris, Chenault, Dahlstrom , Stoltze, Wilson, Guttenberg, Sen Davis, SEn Egan, Sen Ellis, Hoffman, STedman, Stevens. [I didn't catch everyone, and there was someone audio-conferenced in.  I believe it was Senator Lyman Hoffman]
2.  Approve Minutes
3.  FY09 Audit - [ I don't have notes.]

4.  Sanctioning of Charitable Events: 
[One of the waivers for lobbyists giving gifts to legislators is giving tickets to charity events.  So, they can buy tickets to such events and give them to the legislators and their staff.  There is a $250 limit.  But, the charities have to be approved.  And so, if I understood this right, the Leg. Council was approving these charity events.]
Thanksgiving in March;
Legislative Skits;
Neighbors Feeding Neighbors;
Fahrenkamp Classic Events;
Kenai River Classic Event -
Shamrock ???
Approving charitable events approved.

5.  Late Per Diem Requests - Travel & Per Diem Policy Approval
Speaker Chenault and for Rep. Gruenberg-
Stolze - can we have a round contrition from both members?
Chenault - I don’t grovel very well, as you know.
Stolze - I withdraw my objection
Approved.

6.  New per diem policy  [If I were any good, I'd link to it, but I'm way behind on things as it is and I can't find it immediately.  I couldn't bring up the documents for this meeting on my computer, so I don't have the backup.  Sorry.]


7.  Presentation of State Flag Policy - To present a flag flown over the capitol to families of legislators or former legislators when they die.

8.  Fosler Law Group Contract Amendment - Extends Mr. Foster’s contract for one year, not increasing the contract amount. Balance of $28K, offers services to Leg. Council and member. He doesn’t charge if we don’t ask him to do anything.

Item 6 back, [Rep. Stedman came in late and had a comment on Item 6 so it was reopened]  Harris: ... even though we approved it - Per diem policy. Sen Stedman, can you give us your concern.
Stedman: Apologize for being late, was in another meeting. Page 3, about eating allowance. If I leave from Sitka to Anchorage and return the same day, I have to take the 6am flight out and don’t get back until 11pm. [I think the issue was that the new regulations don't allow reimbursement for food you eat on the day you leave home.  And this was what he was questioning.]
Harris: I’ll have Pam give explanation.
Pam: This policy goes along with travel officers guidelines. Not affected during session since you already get a meal allowance. Only for the interim time. Your suggestions don’t go along with the ?? guidelines.
Harris: We’ll leave it in place and come back to it at next meeting.
Not revisiting our vote, just brought it back so member could discuss it.

9.  Revisor's Bill - Kathryn Kurtz, Leg. Affairs Agency. One job is to create bill to to clean up the language (I think). Cleaning up problems with the language and references - ‘and’ or ‘or’ etc. References explaining why the change was made. If approved, can be introduced by the Rules Committee.  [The Legislative Affairs office reviews parts of the statutes each year and then recommends changes which don't change the law, but simply clean up the way it is written - typos, consistency, etc.]
Harris: I remember these things being really thick. Things must be getting better.


10.  90-Day Session Report - [Each House was asked to do a report on how the new 90 day session is going.  The House wrote a report, but the Senate committee sent in three separate 'reports' from the three members.  I don't have copies of these.]
Harris: Sen. Egan says he wants to cut it down to 60 days cause he’s tired of his home town….[Egan represents Juneau]
From the Senate it’s sort of a mixed bag
????: I beg your pardon
I didn’t say you were a bag, just a mixed bag.
And from the House a report that is unanimous.

Stoltze: Thank you, debate ongoing ad naseum, part of the fabric of the session. Just happy with the 90 day session. Reflect there’s no desire on the part of this committee to change, just passing on the report.
Wilson: Process question. So it does take a bill?  Our Constitution says we have 120 days, do we have to do anything?
Harris: You can do anything you want and I’m sure someone will litigate. I think the Constitution is clear that we are not to go over 120 days.
Some of you aren’t speaking into the mikes and you aren’t being picked up.
OK, well, send them [Reports] on.


11.  Building Naming Policy Discussion -
Brought to me by Sen. Stevens.
Stevens: Just seemed to me as ???
Harris: process for naming for someone who isn’t a House or Senate member. And also concerned about naming about someone who is still alive.
Stevens: We could name it after someone who later does something outrageous
OK, take it up and bring it back.
Stolze: I appreciate the level of caution. Concerned about Beltz room, someone said, Who was William Beltz, I take those issues seriously, have a lot respect for the past history. Hasty moving toward people we have emotions and friendship for. Deeper appreciation for the longer history. People who reigned and ruled in this room that staffers know nothing about. I’d like to reserve some of the real lions of this process. We should not forget our richer past.
We’ll bring it back.

12.  IT Subcommittee Recommendations: 
-Web Filtering Authority; [This is about having a joint committee to decide on what sites to block on the Legislative computers.  Now it is done separately by each House.  The proposal, as I understand it, is to have just one authority on this.]
Curtis: Info SErvices manager for Leg. Affairs. Establish who is in charge for web filtering, which sites should be blocked and allowed. This is to consolidate so we have one policy maker and both chairs have worked on this together.
Stedman: Committee action to
Harris: Not sure, brief at ease.
Harris: Motion will be that Leg Council decision making body for blocking sites, and Leg Council chair in charge of making exceptions. I don’t intend to be a dictator, every issue that comes up we don’t need to have a meeting of the whole committee.
Stedman: Clarification. Comm will take positive action on list of websites and chair can override that if brought by particular legislator.
Harris: Yes, probably staff members will do a lot of this. Part of the issue was that the Speaker and Pres may have different policies and they want a uniform policy and this the that body for both.



-Facebook Access - [Facebook is currently blocked on Leg. computers.  People have requested it be accessible.]
Curtis: number of offices ask for access to FB.com to better communicate with constituents. For years we have had different interpretations. Now requesting to lift the block on FB and see if this works, in terms of virus, campaign issues, etc. Let them use it for three months to see if it is something we want to do.
Dahlstrom: If this goes through I suggest it be 30 day, not 90 days because we would be out of session by then. Concerned about virus, but mostly ethics, even if it is unconscious. Everything we do has pitfalls, Need to be cautious. I think FB is great, but should do it on their personal computers, i-Phones. I would be a no vote on this.
Harris: I believe it reads to only be during the session. I think that deals with your time issue.
Wilson: This brings up something. I cannot use my personal computer and get on the network in the building.
Harris: I thought we fixed that.
Wilson: You did, but if we are going to open up, maybe I should go back.
Curtis: Originally we were looking at 90 day session, but yes, that’s what we meant.
Stoltze: Where has been the impetus. I don’t have facebook, my neices and nephews do, I heard one of our former politicians uses it. I don’t understand the boundaries and barriers of this. The public doesn’t see the problems we see. I hear about teenagers and pedophiles. How do we keep that off our system. I’m confessing a total lack of knowledge on this. I don’t know enough to vote other than negatively.
Harris: Any folks on IT subcommittee want to talk.
John: John Bitney, I work in your office and on the committee. When we started this discussion about FBI on legislative systems I was skeptical. I would say the discussion your having common in other legislatures and board rooms. It’s a heavily used system and several offices have come to ask for access with legislative computers. We discussed it with the Ethics committee. If this were a pproved, if your office begins to use it. You can’t start it and ignore it. If you open a site you need to actively manage it, partake and keep and eye on it. Valuable tool, but requires active management and monitoring.
Stoltze: Said social networking, makes me shy about this. Maybe I’m totally off base technologically, What are we opening ourselves up for. If someone decides to be a social networking, while I’m working on the budget, I don’t want to see personnel doing a whole new activity. I’ve heard people spend a whole evening on FBI. I’m really nervous about this. ….
Wilson: Curt, how does security, because I was told if I connected to the network I’d be a security risk. We’re opening up to the whole world.
Curt: FBI is the most popular website on the internet, about 200 million users. When you have lots of usage, it’s a target for hackers. Those are the security related issues. Great way to exchange info and that info could be laden with virus and trojans.
Gatto: If someone asks you to friend them, I just say no if I don’t know them.
Curt: I have a FB account, don’t do much, checking it out for job.  I had someone ask me to be their friend, it turned out to be a cousin I didn’t know. If your constituent asks and you say no….
Gatto: Bitney says if we don’t maintain it we’re in trouble

Harris: move it to next meeting

13. Personal Service Contracts/PERS Waivers -[I didn't understand what they were talking about]
Skiff Lobaugh: Memo from Pam Varni, Jan. 26
Stedman: I think it’s a bad call, impact isn’t so severe on treasury, retire Friday, then get your pension and show up Monday and get your salary and pension.
Need to have continuity amongst ourselves. Employees compensated well, have good benefit package. I understand some after 30 years have to cap out. That’s just embedded in the system. Not good public policy.
Skiff: Differences between executive and legislative employment. Leg. and Exec has differences that makes the comparison different.
Stedman: As legislators we have employees who are hired for a session then terminated, possibly hired for the interim. We have a quirk in the sytem how we operate. But overall, I think it isn’t a good practice. Gun shy with this policy.
harris: What would you like, mull it over a bit?
Stedman: Mull it over, no need for a new committee.
XXXX: I would agree, this is a big policy call and will affect how other employees are treated in the future.
14.  RFP 505 - Public Relations Consultations -[this is about the Request for Proposal that got a lot of attention earlier, when it was characterized in the press as asking for  a PR firm to advertise against protections for beluga whales and polar bears.]
Harris:  In Leg. Council we put money into Leg Council to look at Global Warming and Endangered species. Intended for Execs to spearhead it. What this proposal does, Eddie Grasser has talked to you, requests a proposal for people around the country, what the leg. should do to address this issue. We have belugas and polar bears and we need to see what is out there and help us defend ourselves, work with other states. We have the proposals back. Haven’t seen them, They are all sealed. I would appoint subcommittee to evaluate the proposals. We money in the interim

Break -

Concerned about black eye for Alaska.
Eddie, proposal ended up being a conference and proposal after that from what we find out after that. We want to look for a balanced approach, both sides being invited. If you don’t do that you will have a black eye. My discussions with leg leg. Actions would be things only legal for the governor can do legally.
Ellis: Scientists doing science is fine if it is professional. Politicians doing science will get us a black eye. We need to be mindful that there is great pr damage that could come from this if we do it wrong.
Harris: I agree, you want to sit on this?
Stoltze: I share STedman’s concerns about time. Go in with some concerns as Sen. Ellis. Follow your leadership as always, sometimes with more trepidation than others. I think we have a firebreathing AG working with F&Game my pref is to give him the money to work with other AG’s in the US. Just because we have money, doesn’t mean it is imperative to spend it. The misuse of ESAs affects North slope and ESA’s permeate every part of the state. We had NS borough talking about how ESA’s affect their borough. Appreciate Sen. Ellis’ concerns. I’ve been a skeptic, cautious nature, frugal nature. Model myself after first governor on frugality.

I’ll appoint a subcommittee, not right now, see who wants to be on it.


15.  NOBEL Conference Funding Request.
Davis: Package for Request for Conference to be held in Anchorage, Group black state elected officials. ABout 365 African American elected to state legislature in 48 states. I would like to get 1000, but even 500 would be good. I’m proud of my state. They are going to sightsee and spend money here. I’m requesting $50,000 to cover the conference, Marriot Hotel in Anchroage. I’ve hosted other Womens Conferences. I have reputation in Lower 48 where people think they have to come to my state because they’ve heard about my conferences. $50K would just be a portion, we are getting money from other sources

Stedman: IN support, I was in San Diego, several of her colleagues, they were all excited about coming up, if it weren’t for Sen. Davis, but it’s a good opportunity for the State. Don’t know what the budget has.

Dahlstrom: I support strongly, but I would like to know if I would be able to come if I am not black.?

Davis: This is open to everyone.

?????; I support it….
Motion by Harris.
Passed.

16.  ESA - Executive Session: Legislative Office Space -  [Since this was in executive session, I had to leave.]

17.  Other Business