Pushing Reform & the Guv's In A Battle Over Who Loves You (in Rural AK) Baby

From a Les Gara newsletter

Dear Friends and Neighbors: This summer I read McCullough's epic John Adams biography - a great read on early American history for you history buffs. Adams took his job seriously and worked more than he sniped. He was boring (he spent years in France missing and dismissing things like French food. Mmmm. English food!), but impressed people with his sincerity. Well, not to take the parallel too far, but there are a lot of folks in Juneau, Democrats and Republicans, doing good, boring work, and proposing their ways to move this state forward. Kudos to the dozens of them: like Democrats Hollis French and Bill Wielechowski, and Republicans Paul Seaton and Nancy Dahlstrom.

I'll discuss our office's priorities on health care, renewable energy, economic development, and creating opportunity for our next generation.

But first there's the stuff that's interesting.

First, there was (and there's a lot of competition for this kind of honor) the oddest hearing of the year.

The University of Alaska is this state's greatest potential economic engine in the short term - for producing research, jobs, workers and opportunity. Well, last Tuesday University President Mark Hamilton came to the House Finance Committee to present his case for legislative funds. For 15 minutes he took questions from three of my GOP colleagues about why the students at the University were so, uh, politically misguided. Misguided in opposing the Pebble Mine project, in opposing offshore oil development in the Arctic , and that students might do well to have different political views on these issues. In fairness, listen to the hearing for the actual statements of the legislators - http://community.adn.com/adn/node/137612. Or for you Mudflats Blog fans, two stories (and my committee comments) on the hearing can be found there, http://www.themudflats.net/2009/02/06/bedtime-in-alaska-the-daily-wrap-up/.)

Some of the discussion by legislators went as follows:

"If I ask university staff, the people who are educating our future leaders, if they support the Chukchi Sea development, the Red Dog Mine or the Pebble Mine or any type of industry along those lines, a stereotypical response is they are in opposition . . ."

And

"I found it amazing there was a large disconnect in where the dollars for the state of Alaska come from on a regular basis as far as production of oil on the North Slope goes, and how it is turned into revenue for the state of Alaska and in turn is invested in the university system," she said.

And

"How should I advocate more funding for an entire group that doesn't want to see development going forward,"

The tenor of this hearing was troubling for many reasons.

First, there is no "right" or "wrong" view on the Pebble Mine, or offshore development, and lumping students with divergent views in one camp is easier than it is accurate. I don't find students to be of one mind on these issues, and I find them more than able to justify their divergent views.

Second, universities are for teaching students to learn and explore policy solutions. It isn't my business whether a student agrees or disagrees with me on these points - I only care that they are interested enough to form their opinions and do some thinking about them. Thinking students can come to conclusions on these issues across the spectrum and I'm glad when they do.

And, finally, if the point is that students should stand up for policies that bring the state money, so we can fund the university - then maybe the students weren't misguided at all. The "liberal" students stereotyped at the Finance Committee hearing would presumably have voted for the oil tax reform bill we passed last year - which will likely bring in over $30 billion in additional revenue while including oil production incentives to promote development. So, if we're going to rate these students on how much money they'd bring into the state with their "views", they, I believe, did a better job for the state than those who voted against the November, 2007 oil reform law we passed. And since offshore oil development on federal lands and mining bring in relatively little state money, it's not clear how a student's views on those projects has much bearing on bringing in state revenue to fund the University.

And then there's the brewing war of words between Rep. Jay Ramras (R-Fairbanks) and Governor Palin about who is or isn't helping rural Alaska in it's time of high fuel and food prices. http://newsminer.com/news/2009/feb/05/palin-ramras-engaged-flap-over-aid-alaska-villages.

OK, um. I applaud their current interest. I just wish they were interested last year in efforts by legislators to avert this crisis-one we knew was coming and knew wouldn't be solved by a $1,200 check. They joined a majority of legislators who scuttled the energy relief we were warned would be needed this winter. During last summer's "Energy Special Session," legislators and the Governor heard loudly from rural residents that they would face $2,000 a month heating bills, and $9/gallon heating fuel this winter. We were warned this would cause crisis in rural Alaska . We were warned many people would have to choose between food and heat.

When many legislators (led by Rep. Mary Nelson and Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel) tried to address this with a plan for supplemental winter heating assistance to low income families facing these crisis-level costs, we were told by the Governor and a majority of legislators that it wasn't needed.

Well, that legislation would have done more to avert the crisis than the airlift of food that's been hitting the headlines. The airlift is laudable. But it wouldn't have been needed if we did the right thing when we were warned.

The debate last fall, I thought, was unfortunate. Rural residents who told us they'd need heating cost assistance were told during hearings that it wouldn't be fair to send more funds to a struggling family in Emmonak than the $1,200 we'd send to other Alaskans. And when many tried to put together a much more significant plan for heating aid to communities based on how high their costs were, it was met with the same result. The Special Session ended with a $1,200 check and some needed electrical cost assistance, but no plan to level the cost of heating fuel for the rural residents we are now airlifting food to.

Kudos to Senators Lyman Hoffman and Donny Olson for staying out of the current flap and for trying to start the discussion again this year about next winter's heating fuel crisis.

OK.

The boring stuff you hire me to work on.

Energy Independence , Better Wages, More Manufacturing Jobs

We're currently working on plans to improve the energy efficiency of public buildings. That, like our work to fund renewable energy projects statewide (our office worked with Senator Lyman Hoffman last Special Session to add $50 million to the Renewable Energy Fund, for needed renewable energy projects around the state) has two goals. Stable, long term energy costs, especially in rural Alaska , where reliance on diesel generation is costly. And reduced pollution and greenhouse gas emissions so Alaska can do its part in fighting global warming, and pollution-caused illness and environmental damage.

We're also working to file legislation to increase Alaska's minimum wage. If you work, you should not have to live at a poverty level wage. In 2003 Governor Murkowski and his party allies gutted our minimum wage law, and took out the annual inflation index which would have raised it to $8.65/hr by now. Instead, it remains at $7.15/hour ($14,500 a year for a full time worker), the lowest on the West Coast.

And, the long call to bring high paying manufacturing jobs to Alaska . This week we filed legislation to grant a tax break to companies that will produce value added products from Alaska's natural gas. Currently our law says that North Slope Natural gas will be taxed at a lower 5% rate if we use it in state for fuel. That tax incentive is aimed at keeping in state energy costs down. We'll try to apply the same reduced tax rate to natural gas used for manufacturing of plastics, fertilizers, and any other products we can create from our natural gas resource. In April we will hold a conference in Anchorage to attract interested businesses here, to look at the manufacturing opportunities in Alaska . It will be useful to let them know Alaska has adopted incentive plans to help them operate.

Protecting Alaska's Children: Creating Real Opportunity

As you may have read, we've started a plan to get businesses to offer discount clothing to foster children. That's a project we love working on. But it won't change the world. We're also working with Senator Bettye Davis, and Amanda Metivier, President of Facing Foster Care Alaska , and some of her colleagues, to fix Alaska's foster care system. Today 40% of all foster youth end up homeless after leaving foster care. Few can afford college. Kids get bounced between schools as they bounce between families - something that studies show nearly ensures underachievement. And the contact between social workers and foster families needed to make the system work is frequently lacking. We'll have a bill to help our foster families, fix these problems, and help our underpaid, overworked social workers soon.

Universal Kids Health Care. From our press release Thursday. . .

Today legislators presented a plan to provide affordable medical care to every child in Alaska . The Democratic legislators' "No Child Left Uninsured" plan follows on the heels of the children's health care expansion President Obama signed this week. Under the enhanced federal plan, states can choose to extend low cost health coverage to their children.

"Denying low cost medical care to children who need it would be failure, not leadership," said Rep. Les Gara (D-Anchorage).

"This is a cost-effective way to provide needed medical care to children of working families," said Rep. Scott Kawasaki (D-Fairbanks). Rep. Bob Buch (D-Anchorage) is the third co-sponsor.

Alaska's children's health plan ranks second worst in the nation, and roughly 10,000 Alaska children of working families receive no private or public health coverage. Current Alaska law cuts off coverage to families that earn more than 175% of the federal poverty level, or roughly $30,000 for a single parent with one child. Alaska had a flagship state plan in the 1990's under Governor Tony Knowles.

"Private plans cost upwards of $3,000 - $4,000 or more for a child. That's a significant cost to parents. Roughly half of Alaska's small businesses aren't able to offer employer health insurance, leaving parents and children without medical coverage" said Gara.

In 2007, Rep. Gara and Sen. Bill Wielechowski (D-Anchorage) proposed similar legislation. The new federal law that passed this week will enable states to provide universal children's health coverage at a low cost to families, and to the state.

Under the new federal law, Alaska will qualify for federal funding that would cover 60-70 percent of the cost of this insurance. No Child Left Uninsured:

- provides no-cost coverage for families that earn up to 200% of the poverty level ($34,000/year for a single parent with one child);

- allows families to purchase this health coverage at higher incomes up to 350% of the poverty level.

- higher income families would be charged the full state cost of the plan.

"The Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center supports expansion of Denali KidCare that allows more parents the peace of mind in knowing they can access quality health care when they need it," said Joan L. Fisher, Executive Director of Anchorage Neighborhood Health Center.

" American Academy of Pediatrics supports this effort to help working families. Maximizing the health of children is the basis for success in school and an active lifestyle," said Dr. Jody Butto, a prominent Anchorage pediatrician.

Improving School Performance: Early Education Efforts

According to the landmark Perry Pre-School study, lower income students who have pre-kindergarten learning opportunities earn more, end up in jail less, attend and graduate college in higher numbers and pay more taxes. That study followed children from age 4 to adulthood and has been replicated many times in other studies.

Alaska is sadly one of 10 states that does not have a universal statewide pre-k learning plan. We're pushing 2 approaches this year, both of which are aimed at dulling the opposition of more conservative legislators, who make fair points in voicing their concerns. One follows a conservative "Parents As Teachers" model, which offers services, training, and educational materials to families who want to keep their children home until Kindergarten. That's HB 69. Then we're pushing HB 59, which grants funds statewide to school districts that offer voluntary pre-k classroom teaching. Parents wouldn't have to send their kids, but could if they wanted.

Both bills address the conservative view, which I agree with, that we shouldn't force kids to attend classrooms before kindergarten. But offering classroom and in-home options makes sense.

Phew.

That's it for now from Juneau . As always, call if you have any questions, or if we can help.

Best Regards, Les Gara

© AlaskaReport.com All Rights Reserved.