| In August of 2008, the citizens of Alaska proposed | | | | But those who leaned toward the state's work force |
| the Alaska Clean Water Initiative. This initiative | | | | expressed distress and outrage that fellow Alaskans |
| concerned Alaska's robust mining industry, that it was | | | | were prepared to turn the economy inside out. Many |
| accelerating the deterioration of natural resources | | | | suggested that passing the Alaska Clean Water |
| and contaminating much of the state's water supply. | | | | Initiative would strain and ultimately destroy the |
| Alaska is unique not only for its location and | | | | Alaskan economy. Others petitioned for the welfare |
| intemperate climate, but also for its governance. In | | | | of the state's families, using education and healthcare |
| order for a bill to pass, it has to be proposed by | | | | as two reasons to keep people working--so they |
| state citizens, not the state's legislative branch, as it | | | | could afford to support their families. |
| is in the rest of the United States. Rather than | | | | By the time the Alaska Clean Water Initiative was |
| people mounting dissent or support for a particular bill, | | | | ready to be voted on, the issue had become a |
| they bring the bills to the legislature themselves, | | | | source of contention and emotion. The sides were |
| ensuring a strictly democratic practice. | | | | formed and the dividing line had been drawn. It was a |
| A bill must develop interest and enthusiasm. People | | | | question of who had more numbers, and which, if |
| must sign a ballot, signifying their support for the | | | | any, circumstances would affect the bill's outcome. |
| initiative, and only then, once enough names are | | | | Certain circumstances did arise. Opponents said the bill |
| gathered, the bill moves to the state government. | | | | misappropriated state lands. By cordoning off |
| Alaska does not have difficulty with this system. | | | | sections of state land, the opponents said, the bill |
| Thousands of citizens, whether they were for or | | | | effectively took away an Alaskan's place to work. |
| against a particular measure, regularly sound their | | | | This was illegal, they argued, because only the |
| voices. | | | | Alaskan Legislature can appropriate state land. |
| On the surface the Clean Water Initiative was clearly | | | | Advocates for the bill reacted by bringing the |
| a positive measure to protect Alaska's pristine, | | | | objection to the Supreme Court, who ruled that the |
| natural landscape; to assure the state's water supply | | | | bill did not break the law. The bill was now in the |
| is not further polluted and that it remains a healthy | | | | hands of the voters. |
| resource to the people who depend on it for survival. | | | | The bill did not pass. 57% of voters did not support |
| But look closer, as every Alaskan did, and you'll see | | | | the bill; 43% did. Ultimately, the mining industry |
| that the bill puts restrictions on one of Alaska's | | | | triumphed, and the Alaska Clean Water Initiative was |
| economic engines-mining. A significant amount of the | | | | forced into redevelopment. |
| working population goes to work everyday in one of | | | | In short time another clean water bill will arrive on a |
| the numerous mining projects taking place around the | | | | petition ballot. After all, one thing each Alaskan citizen |
| state. And while much of Alaska's land is preserved | | | | agreed upon was the need for clean water, and its |
| and free from industry, the mining industry leaves a | | | | preservation. It's merely a matter of how to keep it |
| deep environmental footprint, emitting destructive | | | | clean, how to preserve it, without seizing the state's |
| toxins into the air and water. | | | | economic engine. |
| What this meant, then, is that Alaska had a divisive | | | | This was an important moment for the state of |
| issue on their hands. Was it more important to | | | | Alaska. The division on the bill served as a microcosm |
| preserve the state's water or its work force? Was it | | | | of our times, and the many economical and |
| a question of morality, or economics? Those who | | | | environmental issues we face. In the end, Alaska's |
| leaned toward the environment suggested that it | | | | workforce and preservationists need to find smart, |
| was time for the mining industry and other energy | | | | bipartisan ways to solve complex problems. |
| programs to invest in clean energy systems, using | | | | When and if they do, Alaska will be revered not only |
| solar, wind, or nuclear technology, rather than oil. | | | | for its natural landscapes and way of life, but for its |
| There was also a call for the mining industry to be | | | | ability to address the most complicated legislature. |
| diminished in general, for the state's workers to | | | | Clean water is necessary for a healthy population, as |
| focus on jobs where the future was cleaner and | | | | is a strong economy--it's time for Alaska to make |
| economically diverse. | | | | sure their state employs both measures. |