Should state government be empowered to restrict how much money an Alaskan is allowed to give to a political candidate running for local or state office, while allowing outside super-PACs unlimited spending?

That is exactly what leftist-backed Ballot Proposition 1 is asking voters to determine in the upcoming August 18 primary election.

If it passes, the state will impose a $2,000 limit on what an individual can give to a particular candidate. Additionally, there would be a $4,000 limit for contributions from groups to local candidates, along with an $8,000 limit from groups to gubernatorial candidates.

Rather than being annual limits, these restrictions apply to each election cycle. If a donor gives up to $2,000 to a candidate two years before an election, they would be unable to contribute any more during that election cycle. The same goes for group-giving restrictions.

Those opposed to the measure warn that it essentially allows the government to restrict citizens’ free speech by restricting how they show support for candidates.

Prop. 1 explicitly excludes any limitations on contributions from outside super PACs, which can continue to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations, unions and others.

“Prop 1 wants you to think it is for ‘fairness,’ but it actually limits your right to support the causes you believe in,” the official opposition statement on the ballot pamphlet notes. “While the goal is to change how much money people can give to campaigns, the actual results would hurt freedom of speech and ignore how the real world works.”

Authored by former Republican state legislators Liz Vazquez, David Wilson and Ben Carpenter, with support from Mat-Su Mayor Edna DeVries and Larry Baker, the opposition statement emphasizes that the government should not interfere with ordinary Alaskans’ ability to weigh in on the political square.

“Campaign contributions are a form of political speech. To limit someone’s ability to support a candidate is to limit their voice in the democratic process,” the opposition statement highlights.

They add that a 2021 federal court ruling blocked Alaska’s previous campaign contribution limits.

“This is because giving money to a candidate is a way of expressing a political opinion,” the opposition continues. “By putting a cap back on individual donations, this act makes it harder for regular people to have a big impact.”

Those arguing in favor of Prop. 1 are generally from the political left. This includes lifelong liberal Democrat Bruce Botelho, left-leaning State Rep. Calvin Schrage, who caucuses with the legislative Democratic majority, and dog musher David Monson. Together this trio formed Citizens Against Money in Politics to sponsor Prop. 1. They are backed by a wealthy outside political nonprofit called New Venture Fund, which dumps money into leftist causes around the country. Additional funding for Prop. 1 comes from progressive unions like Alaska AFL-CIO and the NEA-Alaska teachers’ union.

Proponents of Prop. 1 claim that restricting what Alaskans can give to candidates is needed to combat undue influence from “wealthy and special interests, particularly those from the Lower 48 who may not share Alaskan values…”

The proposed law, however, explicitly excludes any limitations on spending from outside, independent-expenditure-only groups (super PACs), which can continue to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations, unions, and other groups. These groups currently flood Alaska’s airwaves with millions of dollars of paid advertising aimed at influencing voters.

Nevertheless, Prop. 1 backers assert that capping what Alaska citizens can give will help ensure that outsiders don’t “drown out the voices of everyday Alaskans.”

They highlight that in 2006, 73% of Alaskans voted to pass the former limits on political giving that were ultimately struck down in federal court for violating free speech.

“These limits ensured that the voices of ordinary Alaskans were on the same footing as wealthy and special interests and, in turn, heard by their representatives,” proponents argue in the official support statement. “But that changed in 2021 when a federal court struck down Alaska’s voter-approved campaign contribution limits – resulting in elections where a donor can give unlimited amounts directly to candidates.”

Opponents counter that limiting how much Alaskans can donate makes it harder for new candidates to raise enough money to get their message out, thereby giving a leg up to entrenched incumbents with established financial war chests and name recognition.

“This kind of cap helps only those politicians who are already in power,” the opponents argue. “Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United have shown that the government shouldn’t be capping political support, yet this initiative tries to do exactly that.”

“Voters should reject Initiative Prop 1,” they conclude. “We should be encouraging more participation in our democracy, not drafting laws that make it harder for citizens to be heard.”

TAKING ACTION

— Click here to read the Prop. 1 pamphlet from the Division of Elections.

— Click here to view sample ballots for the Aug. 18 primary.

— Click here to find out which House District you live in, which will determine your primary ballot.

Click here to support the Alaska Watchman.