By MICHAEL TAVOLIERO
On Oct. 10, the Chugiak Eagle River Chamber of Commerce held a State Senate Candidate Forum during lunch.
I couldn’t attend due to another engagement, but I did have the opportunity to watch several recorded videos.
In listening to the closing statements, I heard incumbent State Sen. Kelly Merrick, somewhat boldly state “I have an extremely conservative record”… “I challenge you please go look at my record.”
Challenge accepted.
Merrick was the Eagle River State House representative for two sessions from 2018 through to 2022. She shifted to the State Senate in 2022 and because of state reapportionment she only received a two-year term and is now running for that seat in Senate District L.
Merrick has raised over a combined approximate total of $391,000 in campaign cash for her entire incumbency. When examining her current Alaska Public Office Commission report, she received about $11,500 from supporters in Eagle River and Chugiak, but many of these local donors are either directly tied to Big Labor or are the beneficiaries of Big Labor.
Over 6% of her campaign donations are out of state from Big Labor and its affiliates. The majority balance of her 2024 campaign to date totaling over $131,000 comes from Big Labor and its affiliates.
A clear example of Kelly Merrick’s connection to Big Labor can be seen in her campaign’s use of paid union members to knock on doors and wave signs under collective bargaining agreements. This tactic creates a pretense of grassroots support while masking the reality that union influence is driving these efforts. What appears to be a conservative, community-led movement is orchestrated by labor groups, which some view as an exploitative strategy, undermining the authenticity of conservative campaigning.
This raises the question of who really would support her in her senate district if Big Labor did not participate?
Can Kelly Merrick, a sitting Alaska state senator, who claims to “have an extremely conservative record” and is campaigning in one of Alaska’s most conservative districts truly maintain that claim, especially when the majority of her campaign donations comes from Big Labor?
This raises questions about the consistency between her voting history and traditional conservative principles, which typically advocate for limited government, individual liberties, and less involvement in labor union-backed initiatives.
How does such support from typically non-conservative donors influence her stance on key issues?
Common sense tells me the undeniable truth that this is a recipe for influence, power and control.
- Any politician backed by labor unions will support legislation that aligns with union interests, such as promoting higher wages, collective bargaining rights, protections for workers, and expanding the costs of government. These priorities often clash with traditional conservative positions that favor deregulation, smaller government, fiscal discipline, and less intervention in the labor market.
- Moreover, campaign contributions from unions and their affiliates lead to a more moderate or even left-leaning voting record, particularly on economic policies and labor issues. This includes opposition to right-to-work laws, support for union-backed ballot measures, or votes against budget cuts to public sector jobs, which conservatives support to reduce government spending.
- Lastly, receiving significant donations from Big Labor pushes a politician to form alliances with Democratic or more centrist legislators, especially with budgetary and economic policies. This often results in bipartisan coalitions that dilute conservative influence in the legislative process.
In discussing Item 1, Merrick’s alignment with labor unions is evident in several actions and legislative decisions that reflect union interests, particularly in promoting worker protections, higher wages, and public-sector support.
Merrick supports the 2024 Ballot Measure 1. Ballot Measure 1 will raise the state’s minimum wage over the next few years as well as require small employers to provide sick leave to employees. It prohibits employers from making their employees attend meetings about any perceived religious or political issues. Unions may also be exempt from this last requirement as it could impact collective bargaining.
As chair of the Senate Revenue Committee, a Finance Committee subcommittee, Finance Committee member and Labor & Commerce Committee member, Merrick has been involved in budget negotiations which continue to increase the size of the state bureaucracy. The state budget has grown, and Merrick has participated in that growth since her election to the House in 2018.
Alaska’s public sector has a strong union presence, and these wage increases align with union goals of protecting and expanding worker pay. Conservatives, on the other hand, often argue for reducing government spending and limiting wage increases to address budget shortfalls.
Merrick’s decision to join a Democrat dominated coalition in the Alaska State Senate, which included Democrats and moderate Republicans, was supported by unions. This coalition supported a Leftist agenda that included protecting public sector jobs and government programs. Such coalition-building contrasts with conservative calls for smaller government and deregulation.
Her actions demonstrate a pattern where Merrick’s legislative priorities have aligned with union interests, which diverge from traditional conservative values of reducing government size, cutting spending, and favoring free-market solutions over regulation.
In discussing item 2, while conservatives often advocate for smaller government and budget cuts, Merrick has opposed cuts that reduces the state bureaucracy, particularly those related to education and state services. These positions align with union.
This is also demonstrated in her continual obstruction of full Alaska Permanent Dividend annual payments to Alaskans. She has also voted against any legislative efforts to pay eligible Alaskans the outstanding balance owed since her election in 2018.
Merrick supports maintaining Alaska’s controversial ranked-choice voting system, a position unpopular with many conservatives who see it as a confusing and undemocratic method. This aligns her with left-leaning groups that favor ranked-choice voting.
Merrick has been criticized for not supporting stronger restrictions on abortion in Alaska. While she may not have voted for expansive abortion rights, her failure to advocate for stricter regulations has disappointed pro-life groups who expect more conservative leadership on the issue.
Merrick’s consistent support for increasing public education funding highlights a clear departure from traditional fiscal conservatism. Her vote to override Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of a Democrat-backed education bill further emphasizes her alignment with Left-leaning priorities. Crucially, her backing of this funding increase came with no provisions for accountability, despite Alaska’s persistently poor educational outcomes.
Instead of advocating for conservative solutions like school choice or voucher programs, which promote parental control and fiscal responsibility, Merrick has favored union-driven policies that focus on spending more without reforming the failing system. Her voting record reflects a pattern of siding with labor interests over conservative principles, prioritizing more government spending at the expense of meaningful educational reforms.
Merrick supported the reinstatement of defined benefit pensions for state employees, seen by conservatives as a bureaucracy-expansion move that increases long-term unfunded liabilities. With Alaska’s unfunded pension liabilities in the billions already such a move would not only produce increased long term unfunded liabilities but impact all participating local governments and school districts with potential non-ending retirement costs.
Merrick’s support for expanding Medicaid coverage to postpartum mothers, though presented as a benefit for low-income families, is seen by some conservatives as growing government dependency and increasing Alaska’s budget strain. More critically, it is viewed by some as a veiled way to maintain state-sponsored abortions, indirectly supporting policies at odds with pro-life values. Rather than advocating for reduced government intervention, Merrick’s backing of this expansion aligns her with Leftist priorities, distancing her from conservative fiscal principles focused on cutting government spending and limiting entitlements.
Throughout her tenure, Merrick has been involved in budgets that have contributed to government expansion rather than efforts to cut spending and reduce Alaska’s deficit. This is particularly a point of contention among fiscal conservatives who prioritize reducing the size of the state government
In discussing item 3, one of the most significant actions Merrick took was joining a Democrat coalition in the Alaska State Senate. While in the State House, she also aligned with a left-leaning coalition. These moves helped shift control of the House and the Senate away from a Republican-led majority and gave more power to Democrats and moderates. By doing this, in the Senate, Merrick marginalized conservatives such as Senators Mike Shower, Robb Myers and Shelley Hughes, who have been vocal about their disapproval of her decision to collaborate with Democrats
As part of the Democrat coalition, Merrick has accepted roles in key committees, including the Senate Finance Committee, which oversees the state budget. This coalition-based approach deliberately dilutes conservative influence, as the power is shared with Democratic legislators who have different priorities, particularly on issues like government spending, taxes, and social programs.
Merrick has voted with Democrats on several key issues, such resisting Permanent Fund dividend restoration at higher levels, increasing education funding, and endorsing union-backed measures like Ballot Measure 1, which many conservatives view as harmful to small businesses. Her deliberate resistance against the full PFD was especially egregious during Covid.
Merrick has also received endorsements and campaign support from groups traditionally aligned with Democrats, such as the AFL-CIO and the NEA. These endorsements signal that she is seen as a crossover candidate by some on the left, further fueling conservative frustration.
Merrick’s defenders argue that her coalition-building with Democrats is a pragmatic approach to governance, especially in a state with a diverse political landscape. She claims that such alliances allow for more effective policymaking on issues like infrastructure and the state budget. However, many conservatives see this pragmatism as a betrayal of core conservative values as well as an excuse to grow more government in a time when the size of the state bureaucracy should be reduced.
In my opinion, her record shows that she doesn’t have “an extremely conservative record. Indeed, her statement at the Chugiak Eagle River Chamber Lunch was more than an embellishment, it was a prevarication designed to deceive Chugiak-Eagle River voters.
Michael Tavoliero resides in Eagle River and writes for Must Read Alaska.
Gets elected, joins the Democrats in Juneau, giving them majority votes, claims to be “extremely conservative”……seems totally legit.