Two former colleagues split over whether Ballot Measure 1 curbs big money or just reroutes it

Rep. Calvin Schrage and former Rep. Ben Carpenter gave the opposing statements Wednesday on Ballot Measure 1, and their split cut to the heart of it: whether restoring caps on campaign donations would actually reduce big money in Alaska elections, or simply push it somewhere the caps don't reach.

The measure would reinstate limits Alaska hasn't had since a 2021 federal court ruling struck down the state's caps, leaving no limit on what an individual can give directly to a candidate. It's the first measure to appear on an Alaska primary ballot since 2014, and it goes before voters Aug. 18.

Schrage, who represents an Anchorage district, framed it as voters restoring something they already chose. He noted that 73% of Alaskans backed strict contribution limits in 2006, and that without them, "individuals from anywhere in the country can donate unlimited funds directly to candidates in Alaska's elections." A state candidate today, he said, can legally accept a bigger check than a candidate for U.S. Senate or House, where the cap is $3,500.

Carpenter's objection was that the measure caps one kind of money while leaving the bigger kind wide open. It limits direct contributions to candidates but does nothing about independent expenditure groups, whose spending stays unlimited. "It limits one kind of wealthy influence while protecting another," he said. About 98% of individual donors, he added, already give less than the proposed limit anyway — while the top five independent-expenditure donors provide more than nine of every 10 dollars flowing to those groups, and "roughly 6 out of every 7 independent expenditure dollars come from outside of Alaska."

Charmin Haley of Anchorage, testifying in support, pushed back on that. Contributions over $2,000 to independent expenditure groups already have to be reported to the state, she said, including their true sources — and communications paid for by majority-outside-funded groups must say so, in a database anyone can search.

Of twelve members of the public who testified by phone, seven backed the measure and four opposed it. Opponents said the caps restrict individual donors while leaving political action groups and unions free to spend; supporters called it a partial fix they'd want to extend further. The initiative can't be amended before the vote.