EMPIRE EDITORIAL: CALIFORNIA DREAMIN'

Don Smith
Juneau, AK
Oct 12, 2003

Recall fever seems to be spreading in the wake of California's historic recall of Gov. Gray Davis. Now it appears that it is the ambition of a dozen people here in Alaska to mimic what happened in California by suggesting the recall of Alaska's governor. To most people across the land, California's recall was a gut-wrenchingly painful process to witness.

Soren Wuerth, an Anchorage activist with a long involvement in the initiative process, is on a mission to discredit Gov. Frank Murkowski by raising the far-fetched possibility of a recall.

The Alaska Constitution includes a tough but fair set of tests necessary to justify a recall. The criteria necessary to recall an elected official in Alaska are lack of fitness, incompetence, neglect of duties or corruption.

As stated in a news story published Friday, Wuerth listed Murkowski's elimination of Longevity Bonus payments to seniors and his decision to appoint his daughter Lisa Murkowski to his vacated U.S. Senate seat last year as two reasons to recall the governor.

Wuerth was quoted as saying, "Neglect of duties is sort of what we're after here."

Wuerth has chosen a couple of hot-button issues to capture the media's attention, but neither reason cited passes muster as "neglect of duties" or even "sort of" neglect on the governor's part. The governor's appointment of his daughter may have raised some eyebrows, but he didn't break any laws or rules in doing so, and Lisa Murkowski arguably was the person best qualified to assume his vacated Senate seat.

Similarly, the governor's plan to phase out the Longevity Bonus is without question a very sensitive and controversial action to consider; however, the effort is a legitimate expression of financial responsibility to the state, and the winding history of the bonus is illustrative of how far a well-intentioned law can stray from its original intent.

The Longevity Bonus Program was originally intended to reward the pioneers over the age of 65 who had been in Alaska for 30 or more years for enduring the hardship of settling Alaska, and serve as an enticement to remain in Alaska after retirement.

On a slow news day, a political activist succeeded in capturing headlines, but it is obvious from Wuerth's "leaked" comments to the press that his recall strategy has no real legal foundation and amounts to little more than an effort to besmirch the Murkowski administration; Alaska politics as usual.

Many valuable lessons can be taken from the California recall experience, but Alaskans should consider a few important distinctions before they put the state's future in jeopardy by considering such a drastic step.

The mostly democratic architects of Alaska's constitution wisely adopted far more stringent criteria for the recall of an elected official than California's law requires. Both states have an initiative process, which at its best serves as an important check in the system of checks and balances necessary for good government.

At its worst, the initiative process can paralyze government and, as was the case in California, can lead to widespread systemic chaos. In some measure grassroot initiatives prevent elected officials from executing the duties they were elected to uphold.

If Gov. Davis had possessed the will and courage to do what was right to head off California's catastrophic financial crisis instead of what was politically popular, he would have remained governor. He was ultimately deemed to be neglectful, irresponsible and unpopular.

By contrast, Gov. Murkowski ran on, and was elected by a wide margin based on, the prescribed course he laid out in his campaign to keep Alaska out of the poorhouse and avoid unduly saddling working Alaskans and businesses with the cost of operating a government that had grown too large for the state's dwindling oil money to support.

The governor of Alaska has the will and courage to do what he promised, even though he is fully aware that along with the resolve to reduce the size of government and balance the collective family checking account would come painful and politically polarized resistance.

The Alaskans entrusted to lead their state into the future would be well served to take a hard look at what led California to the brink of disaster and avoid making the same tragic, politically motivated choices.