Dunleavy's political distancing reinforces the need for the recall

The leaders of the Alaska Republican Party hope that Alaskans have forgotten all about the Recall Dunleavy campaign.

The pandemic brought an end to mass gatherings and made it much harder to collect the 71,252 signatures needed to force a recall election later this year, but it didn’t kill the campaign or erase the lack of leadership that brought the movement about.

According to Cynthia Henry, head of “Keep Dunleavy” and the Alaska GOP national committeewoman, “Yes, old news as it is, there are some hangers-on who, for partisan reasons, want to recall our governor.”

“Let’s put politics aside,” she says. And let’s recognize that “largely because of great leadership from our governor,” there have been few cases of COVID-19 in Alaska.

Whenever someone in politics says, “Let’s put politics aside,” it means that they want the “hangers-on” to put their politics aside. A partisan is anyone who disagrees with you.

I agree that the travel restrictions, the business shutdown, the social distancing rules and the health orders have worked in Alaska so far and Dunleavy deserves credit for listening to Alaska health experts and taking much of their advice. Our heavy use of air travel—a means of transportation that was easy to curtail—has certainly worked to our advantage in limiting the spread of disease. I hope that the cases remain few and far between.

In a March press release, Henry suggested that the recall and its backers were evil and “We need the help of good men and women” to fight back.

She claimed that Dunleavy’s “actions when he took office were completely in line with what he talked about on the campaign trail.”

What he really talked about on the campaign trail was a fiscal fantasy featuring no new taxes, no real service cuts and bigger Permanent Fund dividends. It never penciled out.

In her latest misguided press release for Alaska newspapers, Henry says the “angst has dissipated” from the Dunleavy budget cuts proposed and rejected a year ago and it’s time to move on.

Speaking of angst, she included a veiled threat, asking Alaskans to “please do not go on record” promoting a recall election.

Does this mean that Henry and the others who want to “Put politics aside,” see an opportunity to try and use the names for political purposes? I don’t see any other reason why she would feel compelled to mention it in both press releases.

“Paid signature gatherers may tell you that your name will not be on the public record if you sign the recall petition, but that is not true,” she said.

The names are on the public record. Everyone should understand that.

And understand that the reasons for the recall remain.

“During this legislative session, the governor has listened to his constituents and stakeholders in our various industries and attempted to fund essential services with a close eye on deficit spending. Who can argue with that?” Henry wrote.

Let’s argue.

The University of Alaska, the ferry system and local governments across the state have been hit hardest by the Dunleavy disaster.

The university is in a dire situation, not just because of COVID-19, but also because of the so-called compact, a destructive agreement forced upon the institution by Dunleavy last summer.. The downward spiral is a grave threat to the future of higher education in Alaska. And the consequences of the governor’s negligence have yet to be fully examined or understood.

Dunleavy vetoed school bond funds and claimed that contrary to the text of the federal law, the bailout money could be used as a replacement across the state. The money can’t be used to make up for his vetoes.

Regarding the ferry system, the latest in a long series of study groups is no replacement for leadership. A year ago, before the recall, the governor wanted to shut down the system.

What we don’t have from the governor is any clear guidance on the biggest political and financial challenge in state history or a plan for eduction, transportation and other state services. There is no fiscal plan, except duck and cover, while talking endlessly about the dividend.

A year from now, under Dunleavy’s “no plan,” the state will have to cut $1 billion or $2 billion from services or make an irresponsible withdrawal from the Permanent Fund.

Last fall, after the recall campaign took off, the pressure forced Dunleavy to back off on many of his proposals, but he refused to offer alternatives. Dunleavy implemented political distancing, washing his hands of any responsibility for fixing Alaska’s finances.

He proposed a plan to spend all of Alaska’s savings, except earnings of the Permanent Fund, by the fall of 2021, but wouldn’t defend the plan. Since then, the collapse of oil, tourism, fish and investments has moved up the date by which all of the money will be gone.

“We have to have a continued conversation about how big our government is going to be going forward, how much we can afford,” he said two months ago.

Aside from proposing to spend more on dividends—always a crowd pleaser—Dunleavy has stayed on the budget sidelines, occasionally hinting that the cuts he proposed last year remain his ideal solution.

He won’t come out and say that, however, and Alaska news organizations haven’t pressed him on the point. Last month, Dunleavy mentor Dick Randolph wrote that Dunleavy’s “wisdom appears to be almost prophetic” with the budget cuts proposed a year ago.

The state is going to have to cut its budget. It is also going to have to cut the dividend and raise taxes. The longer that Dunleavy distances himself from every difficult financial decision, the more we need the pressure of the recall to continue.

The recall campaign this week mailed about 20,000 household-sized signature booklets to people who signed the application for the recall last summer, but have yet to sign for the second phase needed to get the measure on the ballot. If you don’t get one in the next week, there is a form on the Recall Dunleavy website.