The letter signed by Sen. Lisa Murkowski and distributed to hundreds of thousands of Alaskans is no ordinary piece of mail, but she forgot to include something.

She didn’t pay for it with campaign funds, personal funds or federal funds. It came in an envelope claiming to be “A message from Lisa Murkowski.”

But it should have been labeled “A message from Sen. Lisa Murkowski paid for and approved by BP, Hilcorp, ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips.”

The Murkowski message is actually an ad from OneAlaska, the group nearly 100 percent funded by those four companies. Murkowski’s message has a return address of the OneAlaska PO box in Anchorage.

It is only in the fine print buried in light type at the bottom of the second page that OneAlaska admits it paid for the letter and approved its contents.

Did the oil companies or their campaign workers draft the letter for her? Probably.

Murkowski has not reported making a campaign contribution to OneAlaska, but she should do so, as lending her name to this ad has some value.

The four oil companies have reported that hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of staff time has been contributed to oppose the tax increase. Murkowski should at least account for the time it took her to write, “Please join me in voting NO on 1” after her signature.

When was the last time that a U.S. senator had the oil industry pay for a so-called "letter" distributed to all Alaska voters with her name on it?

Murkowski forgot to mention in her message that, “This letter is part of the $20 million propaganda campaign against Ballot Measure No. 1.”

Murkowski will say that since the letter does not mention that she is a U.S. senator, this is a personal contribution she has made to OneAlaska.

What she should have done in “A message from Lisa Murkowski,” is reveal who asked her to sign her name to this document, who wrote it and why did she neglect to make it clear to Alaskans that it was a paid ad?

In her letter, Murkowski says she believes “raising taxes on oil or any industry now would cause substantial additional job loss and weaken our already fragile economy.”

OK. What is the Murkowski plan to deal with the enormous Alaska budget deficit if it doesn’t include any taxes?

It would have to include a reduction in the Permanent Fund Dividend, a reduction in state services and an unsustainable withdrawal from the Permanent Fund. All three of those steps will be needed regardless of whether the oil tax initiative passes.

If the measure passes, the cuts in the PFD and state services and the size of the withdrawal from the Permanent Fund will be reduced. The complex interplay of these forces is worthy of Murkowski’s attention and analysis.

Ballot Measure No. 1, at today’s oil prices, will have a limited impact on taxes. Its most important feature, given current conditions, is to raise the minimum tax from 4 percent to 10 percent. That is a reasonable increase. And any fiscal plan that works for Alaska has to include an oil tax increase.

Too bad the oil companies won’t pay for and approve a message like that from Lisa Murkowski.

Your contributions help support independent analysis and political commentary by Alaska reporter and author Dermot Cole. Thank you for reading and for your support. Either click here to use PayPal or send checks to: Dermot Cole, Box 10673, Fairbanks, AK 99710-0673.

Comments? Write to me at dermotmcole@gmail.com