Pallin' around with ignorance....

(4/16/09) They say lawyers are like nuclear weapons; if one side has one, the other side has to get one and once you use them everything is changed forever. So goes the epic drama of fulfilling the simple task of honoring Juneau's constitutional right to be represented in the Alaska State Senate.

The six week stalemate or spitting match if you will, between Governor Sarah Palin and Senate Democrats escalated yesterday with the governor proposing three names, instead of the traditional one.

To add a bizarre twist, two of the names were for nominees that Senate Democrats had already rejected.

The legislature's lawyers quickly released an opinion saying that Palin's strategy was in violation of the law. "The short answer is that the governor's presenting more than one name at a time to fill a vacancy in the state Legislature does not comply with state law," the legal memo stated.

According to state law, Palin must nominate "a person" not persons and the fact that she has re-nominated two people who had already been rejected, violates AS 15.40.350 which states that if a nominee is rejected, the governor must nominate "another qualified person."

The intent of those statutes is to ensure a fair process based on a system of checks and balances, not to allow the governor to create a never ending game of duck, duck, goose.

Late Wednesday afternoon, Palin sent a letter to Senate Democrats hoping to eliminate the confusion on the confusing way both her and her nominee for Attorney General, Wayne Anthony Ross, interpreted the law. She wants the Senate to consider the nominees one at a time.

This eleventh hour clarification highlights the short sightedness of this entire approach and shows that Ross didn't understand the law when he signed off on the governor's strategy.

According to legislature's lawyers, if Palin's initial letter was suggesting the Senate Democrats pick one of the three, that would have violated the law because it would have meant the Senate would be nominating and potentially confirming the nominee.

This would violate the established process in which the governor nominates "A qualified person" and the nominee is then considered for confirmation by the members of the same house and party.

So Palin was forced to explain in a follow up letter that she is first appointing Tim Grussendorf to the Senate seat and, if the Senate Democrats reject him, she's then appointing Joe Nelson. And if Nelson isn't confirmed, she said she is appointing Alan Wilson.

Both Grussendorf and Nelson were rejected already, while state voting records show Wilson registered as a Democrat just six weeks ago, conveniently right after the senate seat became vacant.

However Pam Finley, a legislative lawyer, reviewed whether a rejected applicant could be resubmitted and concluded that was not legal.

She said Nelson could not be considered “another” appointee under the appointment law. Likewise, the appointment of Grussendorf, because he had been rejected as well, would not comply with the law.

“In line with the clear intent that the governor appoint someone who has not already been rejected, a second appointment of Mr. Grussendorf would also be improper,” Finley wrote Wednesday morning.

Aside from the governor's continued sophomoric behavior, the biggest issue is the competence of her Attorney General nominee who's willingness to ignore the law is shocking.

During an interview with KTUU's Rhonda McBride Wednesday evening, Ross blamed lawmakers and stated that he thought they were being unfair to Palin.

"I'd like to see the Senate and the governor work a bit closer together, and it seems that no matter what the governor tries, there is always someone criticizing her," Ross said.

Earlier in the day, Ross told Sean Cockerham of the Anchorage Daily News that lawmakers should ignore the legality of the process and just appoint someone already. "It seems to me the most important thing that can be done by the Senate is not argue with legal or illegal but to appoint somebody to represent Juneau," Ross said.

Not argue with legal or illegal?

Memo to Ross:

They're called lawmakers, not lawbreakers. 

This incident raises serious question about the man who is nominated to be Alaska's chief law enforcement officer.

During his contentious legislative confirmation hearings this past week, Ross was asked who he perceived as being his primary client; the law or the governor.

"My duty to the law comes first," Ross told the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

However judging from his comments on the KTUU news Wednesday night, Ross showed he was more interested in defending the governor rather than standing up for the law.  

But more importantly, it's quite apparent that Ross didn't understand the law, as evidence of him approving something that so clearly violates the intent of the law. 

We said it best last week; send in the clowns, don't bother they're here.