If approved by voters, the Clean Elections Act would create a program to provide public funding for state elections. Candidates for state offices may get funds to run a campaign from the state, as long as they pledge to forego private campaign contributions from themselves or others.

Supporters claim the clean elections initiative is designed to drive out the big money that has corrupted government in Alaska.

Those opposing the reform say the initiative takes away individual citizens' right to choose which candidate to support and would create more problems than it would solve.

Alaska Public Interest Research Group Executive Director Steve Cleary, who helped craft the clean elections initiative, said it would bring an end to the corruption in Alaska politics.

“Alaska needs clean elections now. This isn't just a few bad apples, the whole systems needs to change,” Cleary said, referring to the recent bribery and corruption scandals rocking state politics.

Clean elections are publicly funded elections in which candidates gather a required number of signatures and small donations to qualify for campaign funding from the state. Candidates agree to strict spending limits in exchange for the funding.

Clean elections laws are in place in other states, including Maine and Arizona, which served as models for the ballot initiative.

According to Cleary, after four election cycles in Arizona that used clean elections, 83 percent of voters supported the system. The current governor of Arizona was elected using clean elections financing, as were the secretary of state, attorney general and 38 of the state's legislators.

“If passed, clean elections will be a breath of fresh air. No longer will special-interest donors be able to call in favors for the big campaign contributions they made,” Cleary said. “Clean Elections really puts people back in charge of their democracy, and it puts the people's trust back in the political process. That's exactly what Alaska needs — right now.”

But Dick Randolph, chairman of the Committee to Stop Corruption, which opposes the initiative, says it will not accomplish what its supporters claim.

“The Alaska clean elections initiative will create more problems than it solves,” Randolph said. “They claim it will take the influence of special interests' out of the political election process by funding candidates using public funds and limiting private contributions. But in doing so, it takes grassroots politics out of the hands of citizens.”

According to Randolph, if passed, the initiative would create a system where the state, or “big brother,” levels the playing field by giving everyone the same amount of money to use, and supervises candidates like preschoolers at a T-ball tournament.

Those opposing also bring up the issue of a new state bureaucracy, which would be created to administrator the regulations. Also, they say non-participating candidates would be labeled as not running a “clean election,” when all they did was chose not to accept public money.

Randolph rebuffs the argument that the initiative would clean up corruption.“Taxpayer-funded campaigns will not reduce corruption in Alaska,” he said. “It will not reduce the influence of special interest groups and it will not make legislators more accountable to the voters. What it will do is cost taxpayers millions of additional dollars each year.”

Randolph doesn't want to see government involved in the election process anymore than it already is.

“Let's keep political campaigns of the people, by the people and for the people,” he said. “A campaign should be a grass-roots, independent activity, not a government-sponsored charade.”

This article published in The Alaska Star on Thursday, August 14, 2008.