Rich measure would ban public campaign financing

Today, Dick Randolph of Alaska is 72 years old. Like Bob Walker of South Carolina, Randolph is an insurance salesman. Like Bob, Randolph is a former member of his state legislature. But as Bob's legislative service comes to an end, Randolph has come back into the public eye because of his leadership on an Alaska ballot initiative. He was asked to take on the job by "his old friend, New York land developer Howie Rich," according to the Anchorage Daily News in January 2008.

The ballot measure is called the "Anti-Corruption Act," and Randolph describes it this way: "The basic gist is to, you know, stop the use of government money to lobby for more government money."

The Daily News wrote in January that there's more to the measure than just that, and that the Rich-Randolph act is the opposite of a "Clean Elections Initiative" on the same ballot. It writes, "

They both have such great names: "The Clean Elections Act." "The Anti-Corruption Act." Who wouldn't want that? But voters may find they can choose only one of the dueling ballot initiatives that are circulating.

The Clean Elections effort is a push to allow candidates for state office to opt for publicly funded campaigns -- if they agree to give up private donations. The Anti-Corruption initiative would make it a crime for someone who hires a politician fresh out of office to get a government contract, ban government contractors from giving donations -- and ban any public money for campaigns. In other words, one initiative could cancel the other out. Initiatives are a way for voters to make laws without the Legislature.

And in January, people working in support of the Clean Election Act complained that those promoting the Anti-Corruption Act were telling voters that the measures were the same, in order to collect their signatures on petitions.

Scott Kohlhaas, a Libertarian working on the Anti-Corruption team, called the complaint frivolous. His signature gatherers are trained to draw a distinction between the two initiatives, he said. Kohlhaas sat in a suit and tie in a mostly empty office on Sixth Avenue Tuesday. A map of Anchorage political districts and a whiteboard with his group's signature-gathering goals written in marker, hung on the wall.

As Kohlhaas talked, a petition gatherer called looking for his money -- $1 per signature. Backers of both initiatives pay people to collect the nearly 24,000 names they need to put their proposal on a statewide ballot.

When it learned from Kohlhaas and Dick Randolph that Randolph's friend Howie Rich was behind the measure, the Daily News sent an email to Rich asking for an interview, but Rich did not respond. They asked Kohlhaas and others for more information about Rich's participation.

When asked about Rich's role in the Alaska initiative, Kohlhaas said: "I can tell you he sent me an e-mail telling me not to 'eff' this up."

Bob Adney, director of the Anti-Corruption Act committee, said Rich has not given any money to the effort. If the group's proposal gets on the 2010 ballot, it will ask Rich for funding, Adney said. So far, his committee has raised about $75,000, Adney said. But he won't say specifically who gave the money.

Groups trying to get an initiative on the ballot don't have to report where they get they get their money until the initiative makes it to the ballot and the groups start to campaign, said Chris Ellingson, assistant director of the Alaska Public Offices Commission. Alaskans for Clean Elections, which wants public money in campaigns, is voluntarily reporting its funding sources.

When it compared the two ballot measures, the Daily News drew these conclusions:

CLEAN ELECTION INITIATIVE
Meant to reduce the influence of special interests and wealthy donors, it would let candidates for state office opt for a publicly funded campaign.

Candidates who agree to forgo private donations -- and are able to get a minimum number of $5 donations to show they have a solid base of support -- would get a limited amount of state money to run for office.

ANTI-CORRUPTION ACT
Supporters describe it as a way to curb influence peddling between politicians and the people, companies and groups who do business with the state. It also proposes a ban on using public money for campaigns, lobbying or any partisan purpose.

The proposal would put restrictions on anyone who has a government contract. For example, government contractors couldn't hire a politician or staffer who left office within the previous two years.

"Clean elections, anti-corruption initiatives aren't the same critter - 1 seeks, 1 bans public campaign money"
Anchorage Daily News (AK) - January 9, 2008

New Yorker has history in Alaska, too

The Howie Rich who was mentioned by Cindi Ross Scoppe in The State on May 13 was mentioned also by a reporter in Alaska's Anchorage Daily News last winter, on January 9, more than a week before Joey Millwood's public forum on immigration in Landrum. A former Alaska state representative named Dick Randolph told the Daily News that he was "contacted by an associate of his old friend, New York land developer Howie Rich" about leading a ballot initiative campaign there.

On January 20, a writer in the Juneau Empire explained the initiative and the relationship between Randolph and Rich:

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.

And, back in the original Anchorage Daily News article, Randolph confirmed part of that information.

Randolph said he knew Rich as a prominent member of the national Libertarian Party. Today, Rich is better known for his controversial role in quietly paying for initiative efforts in Western states, according to a series of news reports over the past two years.

"Clean elections, anti-corruption initiatives aren't the same critter - 1 seeks, 1 bans public campaign money"
Anchorage Daily News (AK) - January 9, 2008

An author named Melinda Pillsbury-Foster knows more about their relationship. In the late 1970s, she writes,

in Alaska, a state with a population of only one million and an unusual set of circumstances due to the Alaska Pipe Line things had been developing. They continued to develop, but in very different directions. Several people had been elected to the state legislature as Libertarians. No matter what the size of the legislative body this was a major accomplishment.

It began with a guy named Dick Randolph, who had served two terms as a Republican state legislator in 1974 and 1974. After that he dropped out and did some thinking. Then he ran again, but this time as a Libertarian, in 1980 and then in 1982. This caused an explosion of popularity for Libertarianism in the Far North. Dick was the kind of guy who was well liked and thought of in his community. Dick encouraged another Libertarian, Ken Fanning, to run in his district in 1982 and Fanning squeaked in, too. Then Randolph decided to run for governor as a Libertarian in 1984. He lost, naturally. But Alaskans were happy that Randolph had managed to rescind the state income tax. It looked like anything was possible.

Another writer named Murray Rothbard was editor of the Libertarian Forum, the monthly newsletter of the Libertarian Party in the 1980s. Rothbard explained the relationship between Howie Rich and Dick Randolph in February 1983, when he listed several Libertarian Party activists who had created their own organization within the party. Rothbard called this organization the "Crane Machine," named for its leader, Ed Crane.

Rothbard wrote that Howie Rich "ran the disastrous Guida campaign for national chair in 1981, the equally disastrous Randolph campaign in 1982, and the likewise disastrous Northrup for Governor campaign in New York in 1982."

Of Randolph, Rothbard wrote, "A special category for the straw boss of the Alaska LP. Formerly State Rep, ran disastrous campaign for Governor in 1982. Turned his entire campaign over to the Crane Machine. One has the feeling, however, that Dick could someday leave the Machine. Is rumored to be suffering from revolt within Alaska LP."

Rothbard's notes say that a man named Kent Guida, a former businessman from Maryland, "ran the calamitous Randolph campaign under Rich's supervision." Another Libertarian, Eric O'Keefe, had been the national director of the Libertarian Party, but "when ousted, went to Alaska to help Guida run the Randolph fiasco."

Rothbard ties all of these men together under the leadership of Ed Crane, and he describes Crane this way:

The Big Boss: capo di tutti capi. Main power base: Head of the Cato Institute, which moved from San Franciso to Washington, D.C. early in the Reagan Administration to be close to the Corridors of Power. Also, Boss of: Libertarian Review Foundation, and its publications Inquiry and Update; National Taxpayers Legal Fund; and the Crane Machine in the Libertarian Party. Formerly, boss of Students for a Libertarian Society, and formerly, National Chairman of the LP. Managed the LP presidential campaigns in 1976 and 1980.