Bob Bird: ‘Vote No’ on constitutional convention group is targeting conservatives



Have you been wondering about these avalanche of “Vote No/Defend Our Constitution” commercials? Who are the people paying for them? Who are the people who are promoting them? 

You will notice some of their scripted “typical citizens” have hard hats. This is a visual ploy to speak to the conservative part of the working class. They will certainly not interview pro-aborts, rainbow-clothed leftists or liberal bureaucrats.

The Green Lobby, the Democrats, the socialists, the RINOs, the Leftists are the people who will be voting “No!” They have got everything they want right now. Why would they want to change anything? They must convince the very people who would actually benefit and control a constitutional convention, to vote against their own interests.

Our supposedly “model” constitution, the recipient of much overblown high praise, came right out the socialist think-tank of the Rockefeller-funded University of Chicago. The Public Administration Service [PAS] was a great place for loyal FDR New Dealers to spend their dotage in the late 40s and early 50s. They crafted model templates for municipalities and states, who would hopefully come to them to get an impressive and scholarly-looking model in which to craft their local governments.

None other than conservative Bob Atwood, the editor of the influential Anchorage Times, is the man who was somehow suckered to signed off an Alaska template from the PAS. If today’s “Vote No” lobby, now flooded with millions of dollars of “dark money”, is warning frightened conservatives that the outcome of a constitutional convention might lead to a socialist constitution, they certainly don’t want to change the current one.

We already have a socialist constitution, crafted by socialists and for socialists, and the hideous problems we are facing now are a result of all this.

I submit:

Unlike the lower 48, Alaskans do not have sub-surface mineral rights. Who does? The state! This is the very definition of socialism.

We cannot control the courts because of the tyrannical judicial council system. Socialism.

We were forced to accept Article 12, Section 12, which gave the federal government control of unconstitutional properties. And how much? Fully 65 % of the state is owned by the federal government. Socialism.

Another 25% belongs to the state. Socialism.

Another 10 % by natives, under the watchful eye of corporations which are receiving billions of dollars in federal contracts. Socialism.

Only about 1 % of Alaska is in private hands. Socialism.

Even Walter Hickel identified Alaska as “The owner State.” Socialism.

They raid our PFD to feed an already overblown bureaucracy. Socialism.

We were not allowed four options during the statehood vote, which was guaranteed to all Non-Self-Governing Territories under the UN Treaty of 1945. Puerto Rico and Guam still have these four options. Alaska and Hawaii do not. Ignoring treaties obligations is a federal art. Socialism.

We do not have counties, but boroughs. Just why is a matter of conjecture, but counties have sheriffs, who are the ultimate authority in their area, because they are elected by the people. They can order out the FBI and the IRS if they are wielding their power in an unjust manner, which they are doing all over America and Alaska, right now. Socialism.

We cannot build a 12-mile gravel road from King Cove to Cold Bay for the sake of humanitarian health care. Why? The federal Congress fears the propaganda of the Green Lobby. Socialism.

Despite guarantees that the current constitution “is dedicated to the principles that all persons have a natural right to life”, we have been unable to allow the definition of “personhood” to be submitted to a vote by the people, but instead is defined by unelected federal and state judges. Socialism.

The power of the purse has been seized from the people’s elected representatives. Socialism.

And now, let’s go to this “dark money” thing. The propaganda machine of the Vote No consortium tells us that should a convention be called, it might — might — come under “dark money” control. What hypocrisy!

They fear that economic independence will lead to a political one. They insert straws into our guts and take what vital resources they can use, but never so much as to allow us freedom to control our own destiny. By depriving the people of subsurface mineral rights, the lobby that controls us is Big Business, not what would naturally arise from a free economy — the people. We have seen this with fish, oil, timber, mining. It gives us a boom, to be followed by a bust.

Over $2 million dollars has come into the “Defend Our [socialist] Constitution” lobby from Outside of Alaska. They have been at it for nearly a year. The “Vote Yes” works out of its own pocket or from contributions received by Alaskan residents, and amounts to a miniscule $21,000. 

Yet the governor has just endorsed the Vote Yes. Despite a stacked deck in their favor, however, the Vote No side fears something.

They fear Alaskans, who know that we cannot keep the status quo, which feeds socialism.

As Rep. Ben Carpenter has said, “The question is not, will a con-con make things worse. It is whether do you believe it can get better without one?”

Bob Bird is chair of the Alaskan Independence Party and the host of a talk show on KSRM radio, Kenai.


  1. We don’t have the courage to vote yes. It’s scary and conservatives have to actually do something.

    I want to be wrong. I hope I’m wrong. But I doubt I am.

  2. Contrary to what Mr. Bird claims, it’s not just the the Green Lobby, the Democrats, the socialists, the RINOs, and the Leftists who are the people that will be voting no, plenty of conservatives will be voting no as well. Unless and until the pro convention folks can begin to address how it is in a supposedly red state where we’ve elected “Republican” majority legislatures but end up being ruled by Democrats and leftists, how exactly are we going to elect actual conservatives to the convention? How are we going to keep the left from dominating the convention the way they do our legislature? There are conservatives who believe turning a constitutional convention over to the Green Lobby, the Democrats, the socialists, the RINOs, and the Leftists is not a good idea.

    The clock is ticking, if the pro convention side cannot convince conservatives that opening the constitution to the Green Lobby, the Democrats, the socialists, the RINOs, and the Leftists who pretend to be conservative is a good idea then there will be no convention.

    The most compelling argument in this column is what Representative Ben Carpenter is quoted as saying, “The question is not, will a con-con make things worse. It is whether do you believe it can get better without one?” If we elect actual conservatives to office I believe it can get better without one, does that mean I should vote against a convention? I’m not sure it does.

    • The legislators are NOT guaranteed to be “representatives” at a the convention. Not so fast there. At this rate they will NOT be. The as a whole are not supporting even the US Constitution.

    • We will be looking forward to your financial contribution in assisting us in the criticism that said: “Unless and until the pro convention folks can begin to address how it is in a supposedly red state where we’ve elected “Republican” majority legislatures but end up being ruled by Democrats and leftists, how exactly are we going to elect actual conservatives to the convention? How are we going to keep the left from dominating the convention the way they do our legislature?”
      If the Left fears a “yes” vote, that is reason enough to do it!
      As is said not only in the “Vote Yes” Ballot statement, but by myself endlessly in the many valuable questions where I explain this: DEMAND that we use the Town Hall/Precinct method of choosing delegates! Don’t ask. DEMAND.

      • Bob,

        Respectfully, I don’t base my beliefs or decisions upon what those I disagree with think or fear. I base my beliefs and decisions upon facts, evidence, and well reasoned arguments that support those beliefs and decisions.

        Demanding something that you can’t demand doesn’t help anything. As I’m sure you know, Article XIII section 3 says in part “the call shall conform as nearly as possible to the act calling the Alaska Constitutional Convention of 1955, including, but not limited to, number of members, districts, election and certification of delegates” your demands are meaningless.

        Lastly, I find it odd that I ask you to convince me why I should vote for this convention and in response you ask for my financial support. If I vote for the convention it won’t be because of anything you’ve said or written, but in spite of it.

    • This state has an entire generation of illiterate millennials who have the ability to view, and their illiterate, Gen Z children are beginning to tricks in to the rolls. I do not see or situation changing for the better. All the ignorant (our state is one of the top 5 least states educated n the US) citizens of this state will vote for whomever promises them free stuff. I hold these beliefs as a 38 year old millennial. Although I would rather be an optimist, empirical evidence has not given me cause to remain hopeful.

  3. Will a con-con make things worse is a very valid question. There are ever guarantees, but I’d like to read more on the mechanics of rep selection/election for starters.

    • Unlike the U.S. constitution the state constitution can be over ridden and amended by the state legislature as past court cases have shown.
      I for one would like to keep the original constitution to prevent new commers to Alaska from changing things by virtue of only living here for a year.

  4. Thousands of retired Alaska schoolteachers scattered around the sunny Southwest will heed the call of the National Education Association and vote NO on a constitutional convention. Gotta protect the legislature’s right to raid the state treasury whenever the teacher’s pension fund starts going off the rails, like they already did two or three times now!

    • I had never heard of this guy so I looked him up. Apparently he is a retired teacher. So maybe we have a case of the pot calling the kettle black. But maybe he turned down the union benefits. Either way I have no issues with our constitution. Nothing in it has kept me from having a great life in Alaska. The last thing I want is special interests affecting my family and I with their agenda. I think most Alaskans agree as they have rejected Bob Bird in statewide elections.

  5. While I agree with Bob’s sentiments, his goals are unachievable without re-writing the entire Alaska Constitution.
    Many of his complaints are the purview of the federal government – a much more serious problem than any defect in our Alaska Constitution. I doubt the elected representatives of a con-con would be any higher quality than the people we elect to our legislature and their ability to address issues of significance will be wildly unpredictable. A con-con would be a horrible distraction to our State particularly as we endure another recession caused by corrupt policies from the socialist wing of both parties. I will be voting NO.

    • It’s not a question of reaching Bob Bird’s goals but the question is if the US Constitution is distributed to Alaskan residents or not. We have been hoodwinked. We need four (4) things. We need Constitutional Sheriff’s to review for Constitutional compliance the lobbyists girls writings that passes for law from inception to date. Alaskans don’t have that due process available. Why be proud of that. We need an actual Secretary of State of Alaska. We do not have this function in Alaska either. Does not exist. We need the PFD distribution written in the State Constitution in order for legislators to obey them. Their bad to horrible legal advice is that they do not need to obey their corporate bylaws their favorite lobbyists’ recent grads wrote for someone to obey while the legislators are on the clock being paid by the people’s public trust funds. Let executives select judge appointments. Not the English Bar Registry for instance. For starters. And things.

  6. The convention needs to happen, so Alaskans can decide what our PFD should be not the legislature. By codifying the statutory formula into our constitution, it will tie the hands of the elected. We must also stop the leftist judges from over ruling when they see fit and follow what law actually is written. No matter what comes of the yes and no vote, the people of Alaska will still be required to vote to approve of any changes. One thing for sure, the ranked choice voting shenanigans need to be thrown out along with their dark money rules that don’t exist.

  7. Bob brings several points to consider, but whether State or Federal, the socialism is the same. Voting Yes on 1 may accelerate our demise, but to vote no will only assure that we face a prolonged death by a thousand cuts. Surviving to fight another day is not living, it’s slavery. Alaska is a defensive, conservative with a gun on his hip facing a Socialist with one drawn and pointed at the Alaskan. Does the Alaskan attempt to draw and fire in the hope that the Socialist only knows how to hold the gun but knows nothing else about the gun except what he’s heard from anti-gun lobbies; who thinks all guns are evil and are named “assault weapon.” The Alaskan is pro-gun. Not out of some Constitutional authority, but because God endowed upon him a sense of survival out of necessity and he’s well trained and a practitioner in its use, meaning that he never assumes his opponent is inept, but questions; Did the Socialist remove the trigger lock, load the weapon with the proper ammunition, ensure that a round is in the chamber and cocked? The Alaskan is a minimalist, having no retention locks, less holster to minimize draw friction, one in the chamber and the safety is off; the weapon is hot. So, what does the Alaskan do; risk being shot and killed by the Socialist without attempting to save himself? Or draw and shoot the Socialist when he opens his mouth to justify his lust for power? Then rally the people of this state and include them in the process to save themselves and the future of this Alaska. Maybe Alaska dies with its efforts, but assuredly it dies if we make no attempt.
    This is how I see our predicament. I’ll vote yes on 1.

    • “Voting Yes on 1 may accelerate our demise, but to vote no will only assure that we face a prolonged death by a thousand cuts.”
      Good argument, but you’re talking to frogs in a pot slowly coming to a boil. By the time they catch on, it may be too late. What is usually needed is a “hero” to inspire and lead us.
      It’s been a long time since we’ve had a real hero; probably because they are usually politically incorrect, and don’t care what the polls say would be the “smart” platform. The usually don’t even have a “platform”, just a good intuition, courage, and integrity.
      Just one will do it. Is there one in Alaska? Just one?

  8. The PFD is the worst of tool of communism in a capitalism-principled society that has ever been inflicted on a people group. It uses wealth instead of scarcity to divide and hurt people from a corrupted root.
    “Give me a better tool to express my greed please !!” Communist constitution needs fixed, PFD needargument.
    And spare me the $10/gallon fuel in the village argument.

    • You have a socialist 401k? You vacation in socialist national parks? Drive on socialist national highways? You work for a socialist civil service? You pay a socialist income or sales tax? Do you attend a socialist church? “So the disciples determined, everyone according to his ability, …”
      Socialism works in constitutional republics. Communism first has to destroy the republic, before it can rule. Conflating the two is a logical fallacy. Socialism could lead to communism, but an informed populace wouldn’t permit that to happen.
      Communism starts with lies, really big and transparent lies. The lies are proffered constantly, consistently, and relentlessly; until the people become weary of having to refute them. Then the lies are ignored, until hardly anyone cares anymore.
      Then the lies become codified, embedded within legislation, making them the “official” truth. Gender choice is but one example. Critical Race Theory is another; only possible after the national education system was successfully hijacked by communist operatives.
      The national social fabric becomes saturated with lies; lies that make good sound bad, and bad sound good. “Cancel Culture” becomes a tool to silence what few critics of the big lie who remain.
      You, Operator, sound like a big lie; someone who would want to “cancel” my voice.

  9. Seems to me that the special interest groups are vary scared, we the people will vote to have a conventional, it could upset the gravy train and fix the problems with rank choice voting , the ,PFD and how judges are selected and retained, when will the left be held accountable Voters should not be scared the process is simple and done in other states all the time. (1) Vote in favor of convention (2) Select representatives (3) vote for against any changes,. No risk just possible accountability

  10. Gee, Bob, it’s quite a shocker to find out that liberals are against a constitutional convention. I was also quite surprised to find out that it’s going to snow soon……. M.John

  11. We Alaskans don’t have the financial means to counter the money being used to discourage us from voting in favor of a constitutional convention. Legislation should be introduced to at least expose the dirty money being used to influence voters on this and many other things. The days of whatever side has the biggest wallet needs to end, especially when the big bucks are from people who don’t live here and use our state as a political toy. Our State politics should not be for sale. We need independence from lower 48 influence. Great article, I hope people share it. Thanks

Comments are closed.