Legislature(2001 - 2002)
2002-06-21 Senate Journal
Full Journal pdf2002-06-21 Senate Journal Page 3750 SB 363 Message dated and received June 19, stating: Dear President Halford: Under the authority of art. II, sec. 15, of the Alaska Constitution, I have vetoed the following bill: CONFERENCE CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 363 "An Act relating to communications and elections, to reporting of contributions and expenditures, and to campaign misconduct in the second degree; relating to disclosure by individuals of contributions to candidates; and providing for an effective date." 2002-06-21 Senate Journal Page 3751 This legislation purporting to fine tune Alaska's campaign finance law was introduced on April 18, barely a month before the end of the regular 121-day legislative session. While it makes some modest worthwhile improvements, overall the bill falls far short of providing Alaskans the progressive regulation of campaign finance they desire. The most important provision of the bill is designed to give the appearance of regulating so-called "soft money." These difficult-to- trace and rarely disclosed funds are contributed by special interests below the radar of conventional campaign finance laws. Soft money has had an insidious impact on political campaigns across our country. Front groups, who apparently are accountable to no one, finance and produce some of the most vicious television advertisements ever witnessed. Fortunately, at least until this year, Alaska has been largely immune from such soft money negative campaigns. In the spirit of the national McCain-Feingold campaign reform law and our own 1996 campaign finance act measure, Senate Bill 363 could have constituted genuine political reform. Instead, it was watered down in the last two days of the legislative session to dupe the public into believing it reduces soft money advertising in Alaska elections. In early versions, this measure adopted strict language from a 1987 Ninth Circuit Court decision (Federal Election Commission v. Furgatch, 807 F.2d 857) which said that when read as a whole, advertisements urging a vote for or against a particular candidate were subject to regulation. That language was diluted on the second to last day of the regular session in the House Rules Committee to require that ads must "explicitly advocate election or defeat of a candidate" to be subject to regulation. Within days after this weakened and overly permissive bill passed the Legislature, an out-of-state group generously funded with unaccounted-for money, "Americans for Job Security," launched an onslaught of negative television advertising across Alaska that conveniently would not be subject to regulation under Senate Bill 363. By targeting the Knowles-Ulmer Administration, these ads are clearly designed to benefit one gubernatorial candidate over another. 2002-06-21 Senate Journal Page 3752 We Alaskans pride ourselves on our independence, preferring our way instead of blindly following outside practices. I believe most Alaskans are offended by the sleazy, gutless and inaccurate soft money ads now blanketing our airwaves. The Twenty-Second Alaska Legislature had an opportunity to set high standards for Alaska political campaigns. It failed. By vetoing this bill, I am giving a future Legislature the opportunity to do it right. Sincerely, /s/ Tony Knowles Governor