Straight Talk

Mud season comes twice for Alaskans: once every spring during breakup, and once every other November before an election. A lot of claims about my views are being thrown around -- here's the straight story on where I stand. If you have any questions about my positions or my record, you can call me at 451-0684.

I support a balanced, fair, and bipartisan approach to solving our budget crisis.

Seekins Slogans	Straight Talk from John Davies
We don't have a budget problem now.	Then why are we closing parks, cutting back on road maintenance, even eliminating restaurant inspections? Everyone knows that as oil revenues decline we are plugging the gap by spending down our state savings account (the Constitutional Budget Reserve). When the reserve runs dry in about three years, we'll face a $500 to $900 million budget deficit. That's the truth, and that's a problem.
We'll just "grow" the economy...	This is the same bed-time story Republicans have offered us since the Hickel administration. Right now Alaska's corporate income tax on non-oil industries -- fishing, timber, mining, tourism and every other business combined -- brings in a mere $50 million. Even if Ralph (or Frank) could magically grow all these industries to double their size in one year, the increased tax revenues would only amount to another $50 million. The budget gap is TEN TIMES bigger than that, at least.
...and cut out government waste.	Certainly any large institution can improve its efficiency, but our general fund operating budget is $2.4 billion. To suggest that there are enough small savings to be found to add up to a third of the entire state budget is simply chicanery.
I'll protect your dividend.	How? Without a source of revenue to pay for the obligations of government -- education, road maintenance, troopers -- the Permanent Fund will be the only source of money left. And spending the Permanent Fund's earnings is a millionaire's dream: it's a world where the super-rich pay no more for government than the most needy child. There is no doubt in my mind that the Republican's "No Problem, No Plan" strategy will result in the loss of the Permanent Fund Dividend in a very few years.

My Position: I support exploration for gas in the Minto Flats Wildlife Refuge that is sensitive to the habitat values of the refuge and local residents' concerns.

The Claim: Voted against gas exploration in Minto Flats.

The Facts: I voted for the House version of HB 507, a bill supporting exploration and development of gas in the Minto Flats Wildlife Refuge. I voted against concurrence with changes made in the Senate because I believed that they unnecessarily created a new and untried set of standards for such gas exploration and development. They invite lengthy court tests of the standards and could be counter-productive to prudent exploration in the Minto basin.

My Position. I support enhancing the land-grant status of the University by giving the University additional lands, provided that there is a strong financial advantage to the University.

The Claim: Voted against University Lands.

The Facts: I have voted for several bills granting additional lands to the University. I voted to uphold the Governor's veto this last time for strategic reasons. The votes were not there to over-ride the Governor; by siding with him I got his commitment to try to develop an alternative bill that he would support and not veto. Unfortunately, that whole effort became mired in the Wolf Townships issue. The fundamental difficulty is that there is not an abundance of valuable land that can be granted to the University without a great deal of controversy. In part, this results from the fact that land selections have already been made by the state, the municipalities, native groups, and the Mental Health Land Trust. Most of the good lands have been selected, and the Legislature has been unwilling to consider transferring valuable land such as those with producing oil and gas leases.

My Position: I support trapping as a life-style and method of subsistence. I would vote to maintain state laws that allow trapping.

The Claim: Voted against Trapping.

The Facts: I voted against a resolution that proclaimed trapping was a way of life in Alaska. This was a protest vote, not against trapping, but against us wasting our time and everyone's money on an "apple pie and motherhood" resolution that was not even addressed to anyone. It was, in my opinion, a very expensive "memo to self."

My Position: I am supportive of environmentally sound and financially sensible development. I believe that government plays a vital role in building the infrastructure - roads, airports, harbors, power lines, etc. - for economic development.

The Claim: Because Alaska Conservation Voters says I voted "right" on 93% of a few select votes, it is implied that I agree with their opposition to development of gas in Minto Flats, the Pogo and Fort Knox mines, and oil in ANWR.

The Facts: I have never opposed any of these projects. I am happy to have the support of the ACV as well as the State Chamber of Commerce and many other groups around the state. Just because they support me does not mean that I agree with them on every issue. What I do agree to do is to listen with respect to each person's ideas and to make up my own mind on what is best for Alaska.