Community and Freedom

An article I recently read begins by asking, "What makes a community a great place to live?"

This is a great question we should all consider. Is it the neatness and conformity the community has or is it the relationships neighbors have built with one another? Is it the high resale values our homes are able to maintain or is it the ability for property owners to use their property in the best way they see fit? Are our communities great because the local police are quick to respond to disputes or is it the ability of the individual neighbors to peaceably work out issues with one another because they have focused on one another's similarities and fostered friendships with each other?

One option is achieved by rules, regulations, rigor, and relevance. The other option fosters freedom.

This begs to ask the questions: What is freedom, how important is freedom, and what am I willing to give/sacrifice to have the level of freedom I feel is best?

Give this article a read The Tyrant Next Door and ponder on these questions.

I Voted... Did You?

Final Bit of Info Before Voting...

Please be sure to check out this blog before voting if you have a chance.

http://alaskapride.blogspot.com/

Recent article titles include:


Alaska Judicial Retention Election: Vote Yes On Judge Richard Postma, And No On Justice Dana Fabe, Judge Patrick McKay, And Judge David George


Alaska U.S. Senate Candidates Sound Off On Affirmative Action; Joe Miller Offers The Best Balance Between Liberty And Equality


Alaska U.S. Senate Candidates Sound Off On Global Warming In Anchorage Daily News Q&A; Joe Miller The Best Choice For Energy Independence And Affordability

UPDATE: Judge the Judges

I recieved this email with the following judge information (Be sure to click on the link to see specific judge recomendations):

In part it says, "What does anyone know about judges? Is the fact that they may be good tempered more important than their philosophy of government? What about their deference to the people and to legislators when they act against the judges personal views on public matters?

Conservatives and Common Sense Independents know that a judge must understand the limits of their own power. That the people have the right to determine their culture in line with the original intent of the constitution.

When they lose this basic understanding, they should be released back into private life. That process of relieving them of their power over the people is called retention.

First, what is it? Judicial retention is a periodic opportunity for the public to judge our judges. They are voted on, or ‘retained’, in our regular elections in what has traditionally been an elective ‘nonevent.’

Judicial retention matters because the misinterpretation of even a single word in our Constitution leads to overturning supermajorities of legislators and Governors. Our judicial branch was designed to be the least powerful, not the most important. That is no longer the case. Liberalism in all of its forms is not often implemented by our elected legislators. It comes almost exclusively through the courts.

In extreme cases, our judge’s rulings can abuse the will of the people by ignoring even a Constitutional Amendment such as the Marriage act that was passed in 1998. The Marriage Act was disregarded in a recent 5 to 0 decision that recognized ‘same-sex domestic partnerships’ as having the same characteristics as married people, and therefore were eligible for benefits.

Again in 2007, overturning a supermajority of legislators, the Supreme Court, including Justice Dana Fabe, ruled that a parent's right to raise their child ends when the child begins to have sex. An outrageous and unique view in the history of Western civilization."

I Must Apologize...

For the incompleteness of this first voter guide. I had a lot of research on another computer that was damaged last week. I just found out today that the hard drive is gone and all the research I had done was lost. I have been re-doing a lot of it but am having difficulties and quickly running out of time. At least I covered several of the judges which I felt important to cover before the research loss... please just remember it is important to vote and to do so as informed as possible. Here are some things to check out and/or ponder:

• A big tip for what to consider when deciding on who to vote for. Look at who supports the candidate (either through campaign contributions or endorsements): Often when you see support by Unions, mainstream media, and groups like Planned Parenthood or even NEA (National Education Association) you can say that candidate is likely to be more supportive of bigger government and "social justice" issues that are often not in line with a Constitutional Conservative view of the proper role of government and moral stances.
  
  


• I know many people have issues with who to vote for in the Senate race as it has been a heated one. If you are not comfortable with the top three contenders remember you have about 150 write in choices. The list is here. *Note* the person at the top of the list is Michael Ames (someone I know personally and he is a man of virtue, integrity, and holds to a view of Constitutional Conservatism. He recently ran for FNSB School Board Seat D and information on him can be found here). He says, "Be sure to fill in that oval...next to Joe Miller." Hahahaha.



• To make clear the FNSB computer use issue with Joe Miller : An email received from Mr. Ames:
  "Here is the information you requested: http://alaskadispatch.com/images/media/files/court_ordered_documents_to_be_released_10-26-10-alaska_dispatch.pdf
  
  At the previous link you'll see all the documents released from the borough from Joe Miller's personnel file. Within you will find that Mr. Miller admitted the truth IN FULL within just a FEW MINUTES of having tried to explain away what he had done to his coworkers. They were all wondering why their cache's were cleared (three of them) and he said that he had to do it to be able to access a website but not to worry, that he wasn't on any bad websites. Everyone went back to work and a few minutes later, Mr. Miller comes into one coworker's office and asked if she had told anyone yet. She said No, and he asked her not to tell Rene (their boss) yet, to just give him ten minutes. He left for a few minutes, came back, then told them exactly what he had done. He then suggested that he should call Rene (their boss, who was out of the office at the time) and tell her what had happened. In a telephone conversation with Rene, he offered to resign, but they requested that he not resign. He was put on leave for two weeks, then three days without pay, and came back to work for another year and a half.
  
  The media always uses Joe Miller's statement that he first lied about using the computers, then admitted to using the computers but lying about what he did on them, then finally admitted to everything. According to his personnel records, he never lied about using the computers, in fact he fully admitted to using the computers from the beginning. He tried to get his coworkers to drop the issue and told them it was no big deal and it sounds like they were going to drop the issue and get back to work, but a few minutes later he confessed what he had done and offered to call the boss. That sounds like integrity to me, a momentary lapse to be sure, but he realized what he had done, felt remorse, and immediately got back on track.
  
  http://www.alaskadispatch.com/dispatches/politics/7342-millers-paranoia-at-fairbanks-borough-ran-deeper-than-records-reveal
  
  This link is slanted against Miller, but has some interesting information. Whether it was warranted or not, it appears that Mr. Miller felt that his life or reputation was in danger and that he was under an inordinate amount of stress at the time the incident happened with his coworkers computers. He told one of his coworkers that Frank Murkowski and the chairman of the Republican party were after him and had the money and connections to pull something off. At the end of the article his former boss, Rene Broker says, 'The job he did here was at a very high level and he did very good work.'
  
  Taking the fear for his life and reputation into account, I was reading an article I can't find at the moment, but should be easy to google, Miller had said that he would be willing to release his personnel records IF the borough would waive client-attorney privilege. It makes me wonder if there is something he knows, that he cannot discuss because of client-attorney privilege that would clear up some of what his personnel records show. Perhaps his "bizarre" behavior could be explained by something he knows that he simply can't discuss because he learned it on the job as an attorney."
  
  


• Tammie Wilson (R) is running against Sean Rice for House District 11. I have spoken with her several times and she has been quick to return my emails and phone calls. For the most part she has been able to answer my questions to satisfaction and I find her views to be in line with my Constitutional Conservative ideals.
  
  


• I know Lisa Murkowski used a bit about "outside influence" funding Mr. Miller's campaign during the primaries. But did you know much of the funding she has gotten is from outside Alaska? Group Contributions and Individual Contributions


• Compare with Joe Miller: Group Contribution and Individual Contributions
  


• Here's the grand Campaign Contribution List

Update: Dana Fabe

Update 10/27/10: more detail found here.

United States Senator - Joe Miller

Joe Miller (Republican)
PO Box 72838Fairbanks, AK 99707
Phone: (907) 452-8559
e-mail: info@joemiller.us
Candidate's web site: http://www.joemiller.us/

There is plenty of information and mis-information about this candidate out there. But, I wanted to share some recent information I just learned.

I am friends with a wonderful couple whose values and principle's I know to be in line with mine. I trust their judgment and here is some things one had to say:

"Went to a congressional candidate forum today to listen to the House and Senate candidates answer questions. After listening to them in person, Joe Miller is the only one I can vote for in good conscience. I hope he proves me right if he wins...Joe Miller was the only one that seemed to say what he really meant, and mean what he said. He also was very clear about the road to bankruptcy that the nation and the state is on, and what needs to be done about it. Murkowski and McAdams seem to believe that tomorrow will be just like yesterday and can't seem to see that we've moved into a different era where the old solutions aren't working anymore."

When another person expressed mistrust supported by the fact that Miller is a lawyer and seemed, "arrogant" I found these rebuttals accurate, "- and you think Murkowski isn't arrogant? She's also a lawyer. You'll have to come up with something better than that. :-)...Speaking of arrogance...and these are little things you don't see in the political ads or the newspapers... time and time again, Murkowski would keep speaking after 'time' was called (the candidates had limited time periods to provide their answers, usually 60 seconds) until she felt she made her point. They had to tell her to stop talking several times. Both McAdams and Miller quit immediately when 'time' was called." (I'd say she behaved in such a manner because she thinks she is above reproach... like an aristocrat.)

Also, and this is a finalizer for me, the other half of this couple knew Mr. Miller personally from his working with this individuals family. This person knew Mr. Miller as a man of integrity who shared in persecutions during a time when both families breadwinners would not cave to political correctness.

Oh, yes, one final point from this couple, "To anyone who wonders why there's so much dirt on Joe Miller [and NOT on Lisa Murkowski?]... Is it possible that it's because he's not going around digging up Murkowski's personal life? Everything he says about her deals with her votes and stance as a politician."

Now, it is my contention that, "The Murkowski team is trying to "death of a thousand cuts" Miller. We all get dirty, some stay dirty and others wash off. Sounds to me like Miller bathes, not so sure about Lisa. :)." In particular I am referencing the FNSB computer controversy in which Miller admits to having used a borough computer to do something "unapproved" and unspecified during his lunch hour. (I'd quote it exactly but am having difficulty pulling up the video also, see this article).

For some clarification information in regards to some "issues" with Mr. Millers "worthiness" (especially about military issues) see this site: http://alaskapride.blogspot.com/.

More later....

House District 11 - Sean P. Rice (D)

Update 10/3/11 You can view the News Miner article for his School Board bid here.

On 10/23/2010 I interviewed Sean P. Rice via phone for about an hour.

Mr. Rice is 1/2 native from Kotzebue. He is a construction worker and is currently serving on the FNSB School Board (Seat F). He also helps run the Juneteenth Celebration that celebrates the freedom of slavery. Some values he grew up learning were to,"believe in self, your people and helping them." His desire is to lookout for Alaskan issues and for the Alaskan people.

When asked about how to interpret the US Constitution he thought it should be interpreted as the founders intended and does not think government should dictate or micromanage, especially what property owners can and cannot do with their property. Mr. Rice specified that he did not support the new regulation efforts of the Borough in reference to the PM2.5 issue (If unfamiliar see the "Proposition A" section of this post). In fact he emphasized to me his belief that forest fires pollute the air more and would support an effort to ensure that any fire within 40-60 miles of the FNSB boundaries be taken care of even if there is no immediate threat to homes, etc. as there is a threat to peoples health due to the smoke. He also stated that the government's purpose is to, "do for the people what they can't do themselves."

Two brief points:

• Pro-2nd Amendment



• Believes Abortion is only okay to save the life of the mother

In terms of the local economy Mr. Rice pointed out the need for another refinery. We could learn from the mistakes from the Flint Hills refinery (pollution of some North Pole water sources) and ensure proper steps are taken from the design up in another refinery. Also the refinery could have "dog legs" (branches) to support distribution and use of the natural gas from this refinery.

I asked him what the purpose of education was and he told me that the main idea is for jobs but learning never stops. He would like to see a satellite UAF school in North Pole and a reinforcement of the RN program. It would also be beneficial to strengthen vocational type training geared toward the oil and mining industry needs in after school programs. In his role as a school board member he has been involved with "Professional Learning Communities" which invites teacher collaboration on students needs. Mr. Rice further supports taking away the 100pt. scale for grading in favor of a rubrics grading system.

My impression is that Mr. Rice is a traditional democrat vs. what is our more common understanding of democrat.

Update on Bonding Propositions

Update 10/23/10 Just spoke with Rep. Tammy Wilson. Who I have always found to be quick to return my calls and willing to answer my questions. Some clarification and understanding on the bonding issues.

• The State of Alaska is guaranteeing the funds (which particular State funds used for the guarantee she was not certain on).
• She believes the bonds (essentially loans) are on a 30 year pay back plan.
• The terms of interest, etc. on the bonds is not delineated now; it is determined at the time when the bonds go out. Just like with a mortgage or car loan.

Bonding Proposition B - State General Obligation Library, Education, and Educational Research Facility Bonds

State General Obligation Library, Education, and Educational Research Facility Bonds, $397,200,000

Shall the State of Alaska issue its general obligation bonds in the principal amount of not more than $397,200,000 for the purpose of design and construction of library, education and educational research facilities?

Bonds Yes [ ]
Bonds No [ ]

Click here for HB424

Rather then write up an entry on this I will refer you to fellow blogger at Alaska Pride. His entry on this topic is well researched and documented. If you want to know how your representative voted be sure to click on the dated links for when each branch passed it.

Commercial for yes on Propostition B “All without impacting local property taxes”

Some information:

This bond to provide for a swimming pool (Mt. Edgecumbe), State Library, Archives, and Museum facility, Replacement/Repair of some village schools, UA system (center for art and learning, arena/athletic facility, classroom/lab, student housing, career and tech ed center, campus renewal/renovation), Dep. Of Fish and Game research facility, and a vocational center.

Mount Edgecumbe High School is in Sitka.

Population in 2000 of Anchorage 260,283 Fairbanks was 30,224 Sitka 8,835.

Anchorage has 5 public swimming pools, Fairbanks (including North Pole) 3, and Sitka 2.

An informative article about the Mount Edgecumbe “Aquatic facility”.
http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/102210/sta_724421042.shtml

A commercial for yes on Proposition B states “All without impacting local property taxes”. From Alaska Pride, "A group called Yes On Prop B has been formed to advocate in favor of the bond. One of the primary players is Arliss Sturgulewski, an ardent supporter of Lisa Murkowski."


In regards to this bonding proposition I asked Tammy Wilson, "If the money source is depleted before investors are fully paid the obligation owed them will additional taxes of the people be levied?" Now I am paraphrasing her response but it was to the effect that as citizens of the State of Alaska we are approving this bonding loan effort and if passed committing to a 30 year loan. There is a chance if funding by the State runs out (example if oil price per barrel drops) "we the people" could be saddled with the payback responsibility through additional taxes or fees.

*His recommendations are not necessarily mine*

Bonding Proposition A - State Guaranteed Veterans Residential Mortgage Bonds

State Guaranteed Veterans Residential Mortgage Bonds, $600,000,000

Shall the State of Alaska unconditionally guarantee as a general obligation of the state the payment of principal and interest on revenue bonds of the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation issued in the principal amount of not more than $600,000,000 for the purpose of purchasing mortgages made for residences for qualifying veterans, as defined by law?

Bonds Yes [ ]
Bonds No [ ]

Click here for the SB217

*Note* Bonding propositions are "we the people" approving loans to be backed by the State. If the State cannot cover the obligation then "we the people" could be saddled with the funding obligation through additional taxes or fees. That said, the default rates on Veteran loans is very low, this type of bonding has been done before, and it is viewed as a wise investment.

New 10/28/10 Additionally my brother-in-law "took a class and learned that the Alaska housing finance is the only state program that actually MAKES MONEY for the state!"

Rather then write up an entry on this I will refer you to fellow blogger at Alaska Pride. His entry on this topic is well researched and documented. If you want to know how your representative voted be sure to click on the dated links for when each branch passed it.

*His recommendations are not necessarily mine*

Bonding Propositions and Ballot Measure Up Next but first...

Despite having been an excellent student in public school I did not learn much. I knew how to test well but what I studied did not stick! I'm sure most of us can relate to that. Now I am on a learning adventure and boy is it fun!

Let me ask you something.... do you know what a bond is? Do you understand the different types of bonds? Who sells them, who buys them? If you wanted to, how would you buy one? What is the rate of return on one?

In researching for this upcoming election these are some of the questions I have had and am currently (in my mid 30's) learning about. I have been voting since 18 and am just now trying to be an informed voter instead of a blind approver.

When "we the people" vote yes on a bonding proposition we are authorizing an investment proposal without knowing all the detail's of it. And from what I have learned I'm not sure I want to approve an investment proposal with out that information.

Here's what I've learned so far:

"A general obligation bond is a common type of municipal bond in the United States that is secured by a state or local government's pledge to use legally available resources, including tax revenues, to repay bond holders.

Most general obligation pledges at the local government level include a pledge to levy a property tax to meet debt service requirements, in which case holders of general obligation bonds have a right to compel the borrowing government to levy that tax to satisfy the local government's obligation."

Emphasis added, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_obligation_bond

In case you don't know, levy is defined as 1. impose tax: to use government authority to impose or collect a tax.

To me, and if my understanding is wrong please comment, the bond propositions are essentially "we the people" approving our government to sell pieces of paper (bonds) to investors who will then be paid back over an undisclosed period of time and at an undisclosed rate of interest. What money source will be used to pay back the investors? Who will the investors be? Why would they invest? If the money source is depleted before investors are fully paid the obligation owed them will additional taxes of the people be levied?

Just some food for thought....

Update 10/23/10 Just spoke with Rep. Tammy Wilson. Who I have always found to be quick to return my calls and willing to answer my questions. Some clarification and understanding on the bonding issues.

• The State of Alaska is guaranteeing the funds (which particular State funds used for the guarantee she was not certain on).


• She believes the bonds (essentially loans) are on a 30 year pay back plan.


• The terms of interest, etc. on the bonds is not delineated now; it is determined at the time when the bonds go out. Just like with a mortgage or car loan.

Questions for Candidates 13

13. Can a tax rate be so high that it’s not acceptable?

• If so, name a tax rate so high that citizens would be under no moral obligation to pay it.
• If you can’t name such a rate, are you saying the government has a right to take 100 percent of what we earn and what we own?
  

Taken from: http://www.thesocialleader.com/2010/10/questions-political-candidates/

Questions for Candidates 9

9. Should it be legal for police to search automobiles without a warrant?

• Is it okay for police to tell drivers they have to consent to such a search?
• If a police officer searches a car without a warrant, should the police officer be arrested and put on trial? If not, why not?

Taken from: http://www.thesocialleader.com/2010/10/questions-political-candidates/

Questions for Candidates 7

7. Should judges tell jurors they have a right to decide whether the law in question is constitutional?

• Is it a fair trial if the judge tells the jurors they do NOT have a right to decide the constitutionality of the law?
• Should judges be allowed to prevent defendants from presenting any defense they choose?
• If not, what is the proper recourse in the case of a judge who refuses to let the defendant do so?

Taken from: http://www.thesocialleader.com/2010/10/questions-political-candidates/

Questions for Candidates 4

4. Are residents of our state free to engage in any business they choose?

• Is operating any local business for profit a privilege, for which a citizen should apply for a permit, paying a fee or tax?
• Would you favor any changes in this regard?

Taken from: http://www.thesocialleader.com/2010/10/questions-political-candidates/

Questions for Candidates 1

1. Can lawmakers enact legislation for any purpose “in the public interest,” or are they limited to those functions for which they’ve been delegated specific powers?

• Can you name some areas where government could probably do some good, but where it has no delegated power to act?
• If you can’t name any such areas, is it still accurate to say Americans have a “government of limited powers?” Does this matter?

Taken from: http://www.thesocialleader.com/2010/10/questions-political-candidates/

District Court - Fourth Judicial District Judge Jane F. Kauvar

Shall Jane F. Kauvar be retained as judge of the district court for four years?

Appointed in 1981 by Gov. Jay Hammond (R)

A article about a recent case she presided over: http://www.adn.com/2010/04/07/1215892/gun-rights-advocate-can-be-armed.html

Again, it is not easy to find much helpful information on the judges without reading through the cases they made decisions on. I will be much more diligent in this matter in the future as two weeks is not enough time to do that kind of research. If I find I have time to do more research/study before the election I may amend this entry.

Update 11/1/10: According to this research recommend No to retainment due to, "Weak on Drugs and Bad Judgement on Judges". Here is an excerpt on the research:

"http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread16912.shtml

After the trial, Fairbanks Superior Court Judge Richard Savell approved Satterberg's motion for
dismissal in June, writing under his signature of approval that Ravin governs. While Savell's decision attracted significant local media attention, Satterberg said it did little to address the question of whether a portion of Alaska's marijuana laws are unconstitutional, considering prosecutors are unlikely to appeal the ruling and send it to a higher court with the possibility of setting precedent.

He said that prosecutors' reluctance to appeal lower judges' decisions upholding Ravin is one
reason the issue has yet to be finalized. Also, many defendants will often accept the relatively light sentence that comes with a misdemeanor pot conviction and not pursue the matter any further, he said. Satterberg said he was actually pleased when Fairbanks District Court Judge Jane Kauvar rejected his motion for dismissal in the Noy case, providing him with an opportunity to bring the Ravin issue before the Court of Appeals.

"If Judge Kauvar would have dismissed, that would have been the end of it," Satterberg said.
"You'll never see these (dismissals) get appealed" by state prosecutors. Acting Superior Court Judge Jane F. Kauvar before the Blakely decision, filed a motion to correct his sentence under Alaska Criminal Rule 35(a), arguing that his sentence was illegal under Blakely because Judge Kauvar had found several aggravating factors without submitting those aggravators to a jury. Judge Kauvar concluded that she should review Averys sentence. The State argued that Judge Kauvar had no authority to review Averys sentence because all of the aggravating factors that the court had previously found were based upon Averys prior convictions, and therefore, Blakely did not require submission of these aggravating factors to a jury. When Judge Kauvar set a sentencing hearing to review Averys sentence, the State filed a petition for review in this court. We granted the petition. We now conclude that all of the aggravating factors that applied to Averys sentence were based upon his prior convictions, and therefore, Blakely did not require jury submission.

• Judge Kauvar sits on the Judicial Review Committee. There is obvious bad judgement made
for retention.

Suggest NON-RETENTION: Weak on Drugs, Bad Judgment on Judges"

Superior Court - Fourth Judicial District Michael A. MacDonald

Shall Michael A. MacDonald be retained as judge of the superior court for six years?

According to the State of Alaska Region III Voter Guide the Judicial Council Recommends a Yes Vote

Appointed in 2007 by governor Sarah Palin (R)

Not much easily found but here is one article:
http://www.adn.com/2009/02/07/683379/fatal-stabbing-draws-15-year-sentence.html

I'm publishing this now but may try to ammend it before the election.

Superior Court - Fourth Judicial District Marvin C. Hamilton III

Shall Marvin Hamilton III be retained as judge of the superior court for six years?

According to the State of Alaska Region III Voter Guide the Judicial Council Recommends a Yes Vote

Appointed in 2007 by Governor Sarah Palin (R)

One case I found involves a child abuse case (which I quickly scrolled through the descriptions of abuse) based on the defendants grandchildren’s statements that the defendant wanted stricken from the case. From the court document, “Superior Court Judge Marvin Hamilton denied _____ motion to strike her grandchildrens statements from the presentence report. Instead, he supplemented the record with _____ affidavit setting forth her competing version of events.”

A article about another case Hamilton presided over: http://www.thetundradrums.com/article/1014former_k300_race_manager_to_repay_7500

A couple more articles:
http://www.thetundradrums.com/article/1014former_k300_race_manager_to_repay_7500

https://www.abanet.org/rol/news/news_philippines_judges_training_speedy_trial_laws_1209.shtml

The only thing that stood out to me was his statement in the voter guide, "...I do my best to decide matters carefully and impartially, according to the law..." As I stated on my Blankenship post: "Those who are supporters of the Constitution being interpreted as the founders intended and Jury Nullification may want to think on this statement. That's not to say his views are for or against the two mentioned positions, merely that this statement could be a positional indicator."

Superior Court - Fourth Judicial District Douglas Blankenship

Shall Douglas L. Blankenship be retained as judge of the superior court for six years?

According to the State of Alaska Region III Voter Guide the Judicial Council Recommends a Yes Vote

Appointed in 2006 by Gov. Frank Murkowski (R) re-appointed in 2010 by Walter L. Carpeneti.

Here is an article relating to his judgment in relation to the CLEAN-WATER INITIATIVE REACTION TO PEBBLE MINE: http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/030208/sta_252907217.shtml

• This document relates to his above judgment. http://www.alaskalawblog.com/sp-ord62.pdf

The only thing that stood out to me was his statement in the voter guide, "I believe the charge to a judge is to interpret the law as enacted by the legislature as representatives of the people." Those who are supporters of the Constitution being interpreted as the founders intended and Jury Nullification may want to think on this statement. That's not to say his views are for or against the two mentioned positions, merely that this statement could be a positional indicator.

Court of Appeals Judge David Mannheimer

Shall David Mannheimer be retained as judge of the court of appeals for eight years?

According to the State of Alaska Region III Voter Guide the Judicial Council Recommends a Yes Vote

Appointed in 1990 by Governor Steve Cowper (D)

In my searches the best information I found was some articles on some of his judgments. They are as follows:

• An article on an abuse case (Some details may bother some people): http://www.frontiersman.com/articles/2011/02/18/local_news/doc4b74ce3e58d5e284078130.txt

• Another helpful article about a case involving Coercive Searches by police officers during traffic stops: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/23/2333.asp

• This article goes along with the one above: http://flexyourrights.org/2008_04_21_a_great_4th_amendment_ruling_in_alaska

• Finally this one features Mannheimers dissent statements in regards to a Marijuana used for religious purposes case: http://www.newsminer.com/pages/full_story/push?article-Alaska+court+rejects+religious+appeal+in+marijuana+case+%20&id=5635448&instance=home_news_window_left_top_3

Update 11/1/10: According to this research recommended No for retainment due to "weak sentencing".

Supreme Court Justice Dana Fabe

Ballot question is:

Shall Dana A. Fabe be retained as judge of the supreme court for ten years?

According to the State of Alaska Region III Voter Guide the Judicial Council Recommends a Yes Vote

Appointed in 1996 by Governor Tony Knowles (D).

Senator Mark Begich recommended her to President Obama for a U.S. Supreme Court Vacancy.

According to this website http://noonfabe.org/ they state, "In her nearly 22 years on the bench, Justice Fabe has continually used her office to advance a left-wing ideology, characterized by controversial rulings that have no sound basis in the law or the constitution."

One such instance they point out involves a case ruling from November of 2007 in which the Alaska Supreme Court overturned a law requiring parental consent for minors to obtain an abortion. According to this and this article Justice Fabe wrote the majority ruling stating, “a measure that simply provided parents with notification in advance of a minor's abortion, rather than obtaining their consent, would be legally sound.”

Actual Alaska Supreme court rulings can be found at this site: http://touchngo.com/sp/spindex.htm

This blog also has some information on her, just do a search on her name.

Update 10/27/10: more detail found here.

Note: I don't always want to say Yes to the judges just because I know nothing about them. I have realized that they are some of the people working to circumvent constitutional boundaries to push their private agendas.