My Turn: Yes on Measure 3: Clean elections

By Kate Troll | My Turn

Anyone watching Juneau's Fourth of July parade probably left thinking that the only important initiative facing Alaskans in the Aug. 26 election is Measure 4, the Clean Water Initiative.

This could not be farther from the truth. In just three week's time, Alaskans will have the opportunity to significantly diminish the influence of special interest groups and wealthy donors in Alaska politics. Simply by allowing candidates to voluntarily opt for public financing of campaigns, we can not only restore Alaska's now tarnished image but most importantly the public's confidence in our political processes.

By voting yes on Measure 3, the initiative to bring Clean Elections to Alaska, we can make elections more about ideas, rather than lobbyists and money. A yes vote on Measure 3 will give candidates the option to receive public financing for their campaigns, which leads to elected officials spending more time on the needs of Alaskans and less time beholden to large donors and special interests.

Of course, in a Clean Elections system, candidates would not be forced to accept public financing. Candidates can choose whether or not to participate. Clean Elections have been implemented in seven other states: Maine, Arizona, North Carolina, New Mexico, Vermont, New Jersey and Connecticut. So far, in the states with Clean Elections, more and more candidates each year are voluntarily choosing to apply for public financing so they can focus more on addressing the constituent needs.

What's more, Clean Elections are affecting who gets elected. For example in 1998, 79 percent of the candidates in Arizona with the largest war chests won. In 2002, after implementing Clean Election, this was true for only two percent of elected officials. In just four years, Arizona politics changed dramatically, with a 77 percent reduction in the number of races determined by money. Certainly in today's climate of corruption cases, Alaska could use this type of turnaround. And we can afford it.

The actual costs of the program will depend on the number of candidates that opt for public financing. If participation is widespread it could cost up to $6 million, which is less than a half percent of the state's current budget.

But what's even better is that the experience from other states shows that costs are often offset by reductions in appropriations for pet projects proposed by special interests.

As the executive director of Alaska Conservation Voters, you might it find it surprising that we would be supporting an initiative aimed at lessening the influence of special interest groups.

While that is true, as Alaskans we see the value of a level playing field, of restoring the public faith in our electoral system, as far more important as any advantage we might have in today's system. In fact, we say "Bring it on" and do what's best for Alaska - vote yes on Initiative 3 on Aug. 26 - public financing of elections - perhaps the most important initiative on the August ballot.

Please note: While Clean Elections is not in the title that you'll see on the ballot, Initiative 3 is the same measure. For more information about exactly how this program works go to AlaskansforCleanElections.org.

" Kate Troll is executive director of the Alaska Conservation Alliance and Alaska Conservation Voters. She lives in Juneau.