Legislature(1995 - 1996)
1995-06-27 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1995-06-27 House Journal Page 2292 HB 44 The following letter dated June 16, 1995, was received: "Dear Speaker Phillips: Under the authority of art. II, sec. 15 of the Alaska Constitution, I have vetoed the following bill: 1995-06-27 House Journal Page 2293 HB 44 SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 44(FIN) "An Act relating to reporting by permittees, licensees, and vendors; relating to municipal regulation of charitable gaming; providing that a political group is not a qualified organization for purposes of charitable gaming, other than raffles, and relating to those raffles; relating to identification to the public of each permittee that will benefit from the sale of each pull-tab series and each bingo session; providing that the proceeds from charitable gaming, other than certain raffles conducted by a political organization, may not be contributed to a political party or other political group; and providing for an effective date." Although this Administration applauds efforts to reform campaign financing, the method proposed in this bill is flawed and off the mark. The bill would have prohibited contributions to political organizations, such as campaign committees or political parties, from the proceeds of charitable gaming, but would have permitted contributions to an individual candidate from these sources. This confusing provision invites abuse and illegal actions, intentional or unintentional, because of its interplay with current campaign finance requirements. This provision would have been virtually impossible to police because establishing a violation would have required proof of the contributor's degree of knowledge regarding the ultimate disposition of funds. Additionally, the policing of campaigns and contributions to political candidates and organizations comes under the aegis of the Alaska Public Offices Commission. This bill would have placed enforcement in the hands of the Department of Revenue, which has neither expertise nor experience in the administration of campaign and political organization monitoring. Further, the legislature did not fund the Department of Revenue to administer and enforce the bill. The reforms the bill sought to achieve were aimed at charitable and civic organizations that wish to contribute to political causes, not at candidates or organizations themselves. Moreover, in reality the bill would not have prevented campaign contributions from these organizations, but would have simply dictated that funds used for contributions be generated from some source other than charitable 1995-06-27 House Journal Page 2294 HB 44 gaming. A contributing organization, thus, would merely have had to allocate funds ordinarily used for other purposes, e.g., operating funds, to political contributions and make up the shortfall in that area from the proceeds of charitable gaming. This sort of shell game effects no real reforms on campaign financing. I am also troubled by the fact that the bill, in somewhat inconsistent fashion, appeared to advance the notion that money raised through gaming is tainted, yet it did not aim at all gaming. The bill would have permitted political organizations to conduct raffles, while denying them the ability to conduct any other sort of gaming operation. There is little really gained simply by barring some types of games, yet leaving the door open to a considerable opportunity to raise funds through another type of gaming. If money raised through gaming by political organizations is considered inappropriate, all sources of gaming proceeds should have been deleted. My administration stands ready to support reasonable, effective reforms that increase public confidence in campaign financing. Sincerely, /s/ Tony Knowles Governor"