Alaska’s Senate Contest – Still More Ethical Problems For GOP/Tea Partier Joe Miller . . . Likely Voters Deserting.
“Joe tried to brush off his unethical behavior while he was a public servant at the Fairbanks Northstar Borough, calling the issue ‘petty.’ I believe Alaskans disagree with the severity of his actions and they expect more out of all employees serving in government positions – especially out of someone running for the United States Senate. The bottom line is Joe cheated, he lied, tried to cover it up, lied again, then finally got caught and had to admit it, just as he lied to Alaskans when he initially denied any problems with his employment at the borough, claiming his record was ‘exceptional’ and ‘second to none.’”
—Rod Boyce, Fairbanks Daily News-Miner managing editor
 Miller’s personnel records |
Miller called the line drawn by the borough over the technicalities of his time off as a “retaliatory act due to our differences,” but [supervisor] Dolan refused to budge.
“You cannot obtain leave on the basis that you need [redacted] immediately and keep the leave when that circumstance changes significantly. Instead you did not show up to work today and when requested to do so you resigned effective immediately. What exactly am I missing here,” she wrote in an e-mail to Miller about two hours after accepting his resignation.
By that time, Miller’s supervisors were already wary of the part-time attorney who clearly was on his way out. E-mails in his personnel file show colleagues and other outside attorneys had been told not to copy him on documents or correspondence having to do with what was once his biggest case — the trans-Alaska oil pipeline valuation matter.“So do we just consider him to have quit without notice today then?” Dolan wrote to Broker.
“That’s how I read it,” Broker replied.
His personnel file includes the notation that he is not eligible for re-hire for at least three years.
KING: He [Alaska Dispatch reporter Joe Hopfinger, for background , see my October 10, 2010 post] says what he was trying to do is ask you some simple questions about your past work for the Borough (FNSB), for the Fairbanks North Star Borough. You have said that you don’t want to talk about those things. . .
MILLER: Well I think that there’s been a real effort here in Alaska to basically take away from the Alaskan voter the opportunity to see the issues that are before them. There’s been a concerted effort to cloud it with things from the past that really have nothing — they’re petty issues and that’s all they are. They aren’t things that have anything to do with where we are as a state. . . And as long as we talk about petty issues or we talk about you know a reporter that assaulted somebody, we aren’t getting at the issues.
KING: I think a fair issue for any voter to make is can I trust somebody that I’m going to send to Washington for a six-year term to deal with these big consequential issues, and the question Mr. Hopfinger says he was trying to ask you was this. Were you ever disciplined when you worked for the Borough for improperly using essentially public taxpayer computers for political purposes?
[Dodging interviewer King’ direct question, Miller continues, TWSA! writer comment]
MILLER: What he [Alaska Dispatch reporter/editor Hopfinger] asked me was I ever threatened with termination from the Fairbanks North Star Borough and I answered him directly and I said no and that’s the straight truth. That’s exactly what we’ve said consistently throughout this campaign and that was the answer that we gave him and again, yet another attempt to look at something from years ago to dissuade the voters from the issues that are at hand. Yes, our perspective is, is the record speaks for itself. The work I did there as a part-time Borough attorney speaks for itself.
KING: The mayor of the Fairbanks North Star Borough, Mr. Whitaker, was quoted in a newspaper saying you were disciplined for violating the ethics policy. Is that true?
MILLER: I will answer that correctly that it was in fact a case that happened while I was at the borough. There were a myriad of things that happened over time and this was something back in 2008, but the fact of the matter is the performance of the borough at the time that I left had absolutely nothing to do with anything that happened two years before then. This is an attempt again to take away from the voters an opportunity to see where we are at as a state, an opportunity to take a choice that is not based on the past which is the Scott McAdams Lisa Murkowski path, but one that is designed to look at the petty issues and say that really is what matters to voters. I don’t think it’s fair to Alaskans. . .
Is he actually saying that his resignation without notice (Sept. 1, 2009) was due to “the performance of the bureau,” and not his own new violations of FNSB leave policies? In fact, Miller had been warned for previous violations of the leave policy. So his implication that on September 1, 2009 he suddenly quit his FNSB job due to conditions at FNSB runs hard aground on the facts of his leave policy violations, and the likelihood that FNSB would soon discipline him or terminate his employment.
Quo Vadis Alaska? So, given the new revelations about Joe Miller – especially his attempted manipulation of FNSB’s leave policy – will any of this affect his election prospects? And if so, will the effect be negative or positive? His far right and further right Tea Party support is thought to be glacier solid, but will the sudden glaring light of his personnel records pack enough heat to melt it a bit? Since the beginning of October, incumbent Republican Lisa Murkowski has gained a bit of ground, to be sure, yet, although Miller has lost a small amount of support over time, he’s still maintained a lead of from 2 to 9 points, depending upon whose polls you believe, as of this October 27th post.
CNN/Time Poll Shows Possible Miller Weakness. Only a CNN/Time poll has yet measured the preferences of likely voters since October 17th’s “debacle at Central High,” the Miller Town Meeting where Alaska Dispatch editor Tony Hopfinger was handcuffed and “arrested” by Miller’s security detail. On October 19th, however, a CNN/Time poll found the race to be a dead heat among likely voters with Miller and Murkowski both pulling 37%, with Scott McAdams (D) at 23%. So perhaps Murkowski’s gain was due to the events a the Town Hall meeting blowing back on Miller. I believe it was.
Generally, a significant number of voters make no decision until the week of the election. Although the polls indicate relatively few undecideds in Alaska, Miller, I believe, is stuck in the mud, permanently. His months long record of deflecting FNSB issues suggests he’s consistently played a shell game with the voters and the press that informs them. He also was suspiciously late reporting his financial records, and within the last week questions have arisen regarding legal status of some 1,000 acres of Willow, Alaska property that Miller allegedly illegally failed to disclose in 2004 while serving as a federal magistrate.
The full weight of these disclosures will, I think, cause Miller’s campaign to sink further into the mud, and benefit both Murkowski and Democrat Scott McAdams. Will McAdams gain enough to contend? Will Murkowski gain the lead in time for the election? I’m guessing that by next Tuesday the toss up will be McAdams vs. Murkowski, with Miller consigned to the mud. Well earned all.
