JOE MEHRKENS

Surrounded by corruption scandals, promising ethics reform and new threats to citizen initiatives, there's no better time to be an activist. Three issues could use your immediate attention: 1) the incomplete efforts to root out legislative conflicts, 2) the wrong-headed benefits of having a citizen legislature and 3) the potential hijacking of citizen's initiatives.

Sound off on the important issues at

We are fortunate to have one of the best state constitutions ever crafted, so our problems are not the basic articles governing our state. Rather, it is the associated environment where some legislators feel comfortable in crossing way over the line. History shows that the best way to combat corruption is through greater transparency, stricter public disclosure and stiff consequences. Gov. Sarah Palin has delivered on her campaign promise of greater transparency and she got the ethic reforms started. But in her words, the reform legislation is a good start and we should all agree.

The most egregious omission in the reform legislation is that it only deals with blatant conflicts. Conflicts go well beyond the obvious problems of legislators having consulting contracts with constituents. When was the last time you heard consultants give their client some straight-up advice? More likely, you saw hard work to find a way to tell them what they want to hear? Simply stated, high standards are needed to identify direct and indirect financial ties to legislators. These standards must be explicit and must prohibit an active role in any related legislation. We can no longer afford to act as if we are just a little bit pregnant.

One common justification for tolerating blatant conflicts is our notion of citizen legislators. In theory, this puts a working man's perspective into the legislative process and prevents the rise of professional politicians. I'm not sure this policy was ever successful.

First, many of our citizen legislators are long-term incumbents, so that dog won't hunt.

Second, there are real issues about affordability. How many people do you know who can regularly take off months from their primary jobs? Granted, legislative salaries are augmented by liberal per diem, but this is really symptomatic of the affordability issue. Citizen legislators today have to be extraordinarily altruistic, wealthy, comfortably retired or some de-facto representative of special interests. Perhaps the temptation to take a bribe is, in part, an unintended consequence of part-time pay? Perhaps it is time to increase salaries and to make legislators full-time lawmakers.

On top of all the legislative corruption, we now find new threats to our citizens' initiatives. Citizen's initiatives are laws set in place by voting on propositions. Sponsors of initiatives have to gather a sufficient number of citizen signatures to certify an initiative and place it on the ballot. If the voters approve, the proposition or initiative becomes law. It is real democracy, but it has it pitfalls too - the worst being insufficient disclosure of funding behind the initiative.

For example, two initiatives before us are the Clean Elections Initiative and the Anti-Corruption Act. On the surface, both initiatives appear to be like-minded efforts, but in reality they are diametrically opposed. Clean Elections proposes greater public funding/participation in future elections while the anti-corruption effort clearly prohibits this objective. Even more disconcerting are allegations that the anti-corruption folks are claiming their effort is a substitute for the Clean Elections Initiative. If so, it is clearly not. But the bigger issue lies in the existing disclosure rules. The sponsors of the Clean Elections Initiative have voluntarily disclosed their funding sources, while the anti-corruption campaign folks will not - their right under existing law until the initiative is certified. What is known is that the anti-corruption campaign has at least indirect ties to Howard Rich, a New York real estate developer. This tie stems from former state Rep. Dick Randolph, who has lent his name to the anti-corruption effort. Both men are friends and devoted libertarians. Unfortunately, Rich is infamous for funding stealth citizen initiatives in other Western states. Nearly all have failed, but more importantly, some have been thrown out by the courts due to "persuasive patterns of wrong doing and fraud."

While there is no proof of wrong doing in Alaska, we cannot afford to be blindsided again. Full disclosure of the funding behind initiatives from the get-go would go a long way in letting citizens decide whether proposed initiatives can pass the common "smell" test.

• Joe Mehrkens is on the board for the Alaska Public Research Interest Group, a proponent of the Clean Elections Initiative. He resides in Juneau.