Grading State Disclosure 2008 Logo Graphic

A l a s k a

Grade
Rank
C
30

golden bar divider

Subcategories
Grade
Rank
Campaign Disclosure Law
C
33
Electronic Filing Program
F
42
Disclosure Content Accessibility
B-
23
Online Contextual & Technical Usability
B-
15

Grading Process green cube Subcategory Weighting green cube Methodology green cube Glossary

golden bar divider

The State of Disclosure in Alaska

Alaska has earned a grade in the C range in each of the five Grading State Disclosure assessments conducted since 2003, and ranked 30th in 2008. Alaska improved from a C+ to a B- in the Online Contextual and Technical Usability category since 2007. Additional gains to the state’s overall disclosure program can be expected when electronic filing becomes mandatory in 2009.

Alaska’s disclosure law, average by this study’s standards, requires candidates to report the name and address of their contributors and, for those contributing $250 or more, occupation and employer data. Subvendor disclosure is not required, but candidates must report the name of the recipient, and the purpose for, and date of, all expenditures made or accrued. Independent expenditure disclosure remains a weak point in the law as last-minute expenditures are not disclosed prior to Election Day. Currently, electronic filing is optional in Alaska, and just 15 percent of candidates do so voluntarily. With the passage of House Bill 109 in 2007, electronic filing will be mandatory for all statewide and legislative candidates regardless of the amount raised or spent starting in 2009. To handle the transition, the Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC) is developing a new online filing system for candidates.

Access to campaign finance records has not changed in Alaska in the last year and the state earned a B- again in the Disclosure Content Accessibility category in 2008. The APOC’s web site features electronically-filed disclosure reports and reports filed on paper that have been data-entered by agency staff. The disclosure site features searchable databases of campaign contributions and expenditures, and data can be sorted online or downloaded for offline analysis. As noted in the 2007 assessment, the site’s best feature, a comprehensive database search tool, might be missed by site visitors since it is last on a list of eleven search options and presented with a non-descript label of “Ad Hoc Query”.

The APOC’s web site has been redesigned since the 2007 assessment and usability testers responded favorably, returning the state to the B range in the usability category. The site reorganization allows for easier navigation and includes a helpful “How Do I …?” menu that offers choices for both the public and candidates. The site also contains helpful contextual information such as campaign finance rules and regulations, and the index of a candidate’s reports clearly displays the reporting period and whether reports have been amended. To further enhance the usability of the site, specific instructions could be added to describe the capabilities of the searchable databases, and how to extract data from them.

Quick Fix: Provide information about the various database search capabilities and rename the “Ad Hoc Query”.

Editor’s Pick: Overviews of campaign finance disclosure data for all candidates. View image

Disclosure Agency: Alaska Public Offices Commission
Disclosure Web Site:
http://www.state.ak.us/local/akpages/ADMIN/apoc/home.html

View past summaries of this state

View another state's summary:

Back to the Grading State Disclosure home page


First published September 17, 2008
| Last updated September 17 2008
copyright ©
Campaign Disclosure Project. All rights reserved.