Pro-Begich Super-PAC releases third ad attacking Sullivan on HB 77

Here’s another ad from Put Alaska First, the pro-Mark Begich super-PAC, going after GOP Senate candidate Dan Sullivan over HB 77. The ad features Beth Northlund, the executive director of Anchorage Park Foundation, talking about the controversial, complicated bill that got scuttled because of the controversy last legislative session. On one side, the rap on it is that it proposed to give unprecedented powers to the DNR commissioner to issue permits. At the time of its drafting, Sullivan was the DNR commissioner. Those who helped draft the bill, including Sullivan, said that it cut through red-tape that was impeding development. In any case, the public came out in droves to testify against it and the bill died in the Senate. This is the third ad Put Alaska First has made featuring HB 77. The first featured a moose hunter—the claims of which were a ‘stretch’—and the second featured well-known former Democratic lawmaker Sam Cotten. I’d bet that Put Alaska continues to focus on the issue because it works.

Here’s the response from the Sullivan campaign to the ad:

We’re not surprised Mark Beigch’s special interest allies are running yet another false attack ad funded by Harry Reid and Michael Bloomberg. The ad has no bearing in reality, as the legislation in question had nothing to do with taking away Alaskans’ hunting and fishing rights, and everything to do with cutting red tape and streamlining Alaska’s permitting process. Senator Begich’s special interest allies seem to believe that a lie is true if you tell it enough.


28 thoughts on “Pro-Begich Super-PAC releases third ad attacking Sullivan on HB 77

  1. Steve

    Originally I had on my schedule to participate in the Anchorage Parks Foundation’s Volunteer Fix-It day this Saturday. I am so shocked by Ms. Nordlund’s irresponsible behavior, given her position, that I will no longer be planning to attend. I detest the politics of negativity and destruction. I find Ms. Nordlund to be as big of a hypocrite as the candidate she is promoting. Parks are important to the community’s fabric as is the civil discourse of elections. I’m sorry, Ms. Nordlund. I had you pegged for being better than this.

  2. Derp

    Exactly. Sullivan looks so strong because of the super pac cash, money that would go directly to treadwell if he won. Word from the dems is that they are glad to see Treadwell making it a tighter race, but ultimately want to run against Sullivan and are hoping that he loses. As a left leaner myself, I’m impressed by Treadwell’s ability to recruit and maintain energetic young volunteers, the most direct response to the D’s coordinated campaign effort I’ve seen out of republicans.

  3. Legislative Aide

    Talk about taking liberty with the truth. This is embarrassingly bad. Does Begich have nothing to stand for? Any accomplishments? I mean besides ObamaCare. Begich and his super pac will never be thought of for their truthfulness.

  4. Fact Teller

    Poor Markie Begich. Is this the best your coordinated (Oops! That would be illegal) SuperPAC could do? The only person they could find to make such a bogus claim was the spouse of one of your liberal friends that you got an appointed position for in YOUR President’s administration? Oh Markie, times aren’t good for you are they? Markie, you made Beth look , well, let’s just say not too good. And the polls must have you worried because after you and your coordinated (Oops! That would be illegal) SuperPAC have spent millionsattacking Dan Sullivan’s credibility, he is getting stronger by the day. Poor Markie, you’re just not going to get your wish of running against Mead or Joe. Alaskans are going to vote for the one guy who can and will beat you – – Dan Sullivan. Poor Markie, oh my!

  5. AKR

    Saying that Dan Sullivan supporting HB77 might deprive Alaskans of the ability to harvest moose is like saying that Mark Begich supporting ANWR development might deprive Alaskans of the ability to harvest caribou. This whole HB 77 ad campaign lacks merit. I have always been opposed to HB 77; however, the reasons and arguments articulated in this ad campaign borders on the absurd.

  6. LysanderSpooner

    LOL. It is so NOT that simple.

    Treadwell has a much broader, less-ideologically blinded base of support than Sullivan does. He would attract a wider range of voters in the general election than Sullivan ever could, which would argue strongly for him to be a more formidable opponent for Begich. Additionally, the potential for Joe Miller to carry the Libertarian Party banner into the general election after placing a distant third in the primary would likely be much more problematic for a Sullivan candidacy in November than it would be for Treadwell.

    Ask Jay Ramras about the perils of underestimating Mead Treadwell’s statewide appeal.

  7. LysanderSpooner

    The inability to disprove a hypothetical does not render the original supposition false.

    It is fact that Dan Sullivan helped craft and promote the proposed legislation. Whether he was following his own convictions or doing someone else’s bidding is irrelevant. Sullivan pushed a notion that contained the potential to remove public input from the permitting process, which could have resulted in the restriction of hunting and fishing rights.

  8. LysanderSpooner

    The inability to disprove a hypothetical does not render the original supposition false.

    It is fact that Dan Sullivan helped craft and promote the proposed legislation. Whether he was following his own convictions or doing someone else’s bidding is irrelevant. Sullivan pushed a notion that contained the potential to remove public input from the permitting process, which could have resulted in the restriction of hunting and fishing rights.

  9. Elwood

    It’s clear by the number of anonymous commenters here who seem knowledgable and less “crazy” as the ADN commenters that some must remain cautious due to their profession. Beth made a poor decision and the people who conducted the commercial put her at risk of public backlash and jeopardy of losing her job or funding support. Beth is typically very savvy, effective and great to work with. Why would she alienate? Begich is running scared. He’s calling in old pals and allies and it doesn’t seem to matter to him if it is risky or untruthful. Selfish move Mark.

  10. Concerned Park Advocate

    Words cannot express how disappoinyed I am in Beth for jeopardizing the nonpartisan nature of the Park’s Foundation. As the head of this organization, she certainly is entitled to have her personal opinions; however, to agree to participate in this type of ad represents poor juudgement or a callous disregard for her position and those that fund her orgaanization. I will no longer be a regular contributor because of this as long as she remains in this position. I no longer respect Mrs. Nordland professionally.

  11. 357

    These ads are increasiingly laughable. I have never seenm a politician take such a beating by negative ads and still continue to run strong. Sullivan is the only R that can beat Begich and that’s why he and his superpacs are spending millions attacking him. If any R votes for Miller or Treadwell they might as well be voting for Begich. It really is that simple. With Miller or Treadwell as the GOP nominee, Begich wins.

  12. ARGO

    Jim Lottsfeldt’s comment made me chuckle. His example on HB 77, seemingly to reach Reppublicans, suggests how awqful HB 77 could be if the likes of Tony Knowles or Hollis Frrench were governor and they used HB 77 to grab lands for eco-tourism. Yep Jim, that’s right in terms hoe Democrats thinks, particularly liberals like Begich. Not a good example. Also, the HB 77 ad is factually incorrect. Your talking head is also a liberal with a questionable motive.

  13. Mae

    Gee, could you at least stay classy for the one you actually support?
    Rude and crude just reflects upon you and not whom you despise. Just sayin.

  14. Mae

    L48 Dan supported and wrote a bill that was designed to silence Alaskans.

    It is that simple. He wanted to silence the very people he wants to represent on congress.

    Just crazy.

  15. Mae

    Seriously, “that bill” doesn’t carry any weight because it didn’t pass the senate?

    Psssst, what carries weight is who and why they wrote the bill to begin with. L48 Dan wrote the bill to silence Alaskans. And he says he is always fighting for Alaskans! Yeah, don’t think so.

    Pure and simple, L48 Dan Sullivan, as attorney general, wrote a bill to silence Alaskans.
    Stupid move in my opinion.

    AND he was willing to do this for a specific group, the pro pebble folks. So basically he can be bought.
    No different than those in the Corrupt Bastards Club.

  16. Steve Brostko

    This post, sponsored by Harry Reid’s Put Alaska First PAC, about an attack ad put out by Harry Reid’s Put Alaska First PAC, now has Jim Lottsfeldt, who is funneling Hary Reid’s money into Put Alaska First PAC, trying to justify the ad. What a joke.

    Harry Reid is leading Mark Begich and Put Alaska First PAC around by the scrotum. It may feel good now, but it’s going to hurt when the GOP primary is over.

  17. Anonymous

    Right! A bill that died in the Senate is all they have? I guess Begich isn’t going to turn down the PAC ads, is he?

    That bill, if passed, would have had unintended consequences on both sides of the aisle. It’s ridiculous to make it an issue.

  18. John Smith

    Again, the fact that the only thing you have and which you are trying to create false outrage about, is a law that did not pass, is very telling. A little sad in fact. I understand your opinion and your motivation to make this a much larger and broader issue than it really is (the bill failed in large part due to the governor requesting that it be remember), I jsut find it incredible that this is all you have. I think it shows a little bit of fear and timidity about Sullivan winning the primary, but that is purely opinion on my part.

  19. Jim Lottsfeldt

    Dan Sullivan testified as “sponsor” of HB 77 in both the House and Senate. Sullivan doesn’t dispute this, not sure why you do.

    Charitably, I suspect HB 77 was really his way to assist Pebble mine. But the bill–that he wrote–was so over broad it became a debacle.

    Now, imagine it passed and was law. And the Governor is Tony Knowles or Hollis French or … and their Commissioner of DNR decides to take huge tracts of public land and give them conservation or environmental organizations to develop eco-tourism.

    People would, understandably, go nuts. Pesky things about laws–the sponsors intentions mean very little after they are passed.

  20. John Smith

    I am wondering how wise it is for the Executive Director of a non-profit to come out and take a side. I always thought that non-profits should remain strictly non-partisan in order to keep from alienating potential donors. Also, with the close ties the APF has with the muni, it would seem to me to now be a very smart thing to do.

  21. John Smith

    Two thing:

    1. The State Attorney General serves at the pleasure of the Governor.

    2. The bill didn’t make it past committee.

    I think it is funny and quite telling that the only thing you have to try to stick on Dan Sullivan is a law that didn’t pass and that you can’t prove wasn’t the governor’s idea to begin with.

  22. Rebecca Logan

    Beth Nordlund? Like married to Jim Nordlund? One of Mark Begich’s very close friends – who got the Alaska USDA rural affairs job because of Begich?

  23. Jim Lottsfeldt

    Politifact: “If The DNR Limited Land Use Through The Authority Granted Under HB 77’s Original Draft, The Department Could Have Restricted Hunting Without Having To Go Through Public Review Processes.” “Some HB 77 critics have said the broad language would have allowed it to affect hunting, because land access plays a big role in hunting, [Carl] Shepro [a political science professor emeritus at the University of Alaska] said. If the DNR limited land use through the authority granted under HB 77’s original draft, the department could have restricted hunting without having to go through public review processes.” [Politifact, 6/13/14]

Comments are closed.