Search for...
Follow @ontheissuesorg
OnTheIssuesLogo

Lisa Murkowski on Principles & Values

Independent Sr Senator (AK)


I will remain a Republican & will keep committee seniority

Sen. Murkowski declared that she will remain a Republican if she wins her write-in bid to retain her seat. "I am Republican. I have been a Republican since I was 18," said Murkowski. "I will always be a Republican."

Murkowski's assertion is a mixed blessing for national Republicans, who support the man who defeated her in the GOP primary, Joe Miller. On the one hand, her continued candidacy stands to hurt Miller by siphoning off votes from him, making way for Murkowski or Democrat Scott McAdams to win.

On the other hand, Murkowski signals she will continue to caucus with the Republicans in the lame-duck session and, if she wins reelection, throughout the next Congress.

Murkowski vowed that she would return not only as a Republican but with her seniority intact--including her plum committee leadership spot--next year. "In January, I will return with the most seniority on the Natural Resources Committee," she said. "I will not lose a minute of seniority and I will continue to build on that."

Source: Politico.com coverage of 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Oct 7, 2010

Aligned with Alaskans; not aligned with party positions

Q: the chairman of the Alaska Republican Party, has said you could be more of a danger to McAdams than Miller. True?

A: If this is not a Republican state, it's certainly more of a conservative one. Though we have [Democratic] Senator Mark Begich, it's certainly not a Democratic state. I think Alaskans are looking at me as one who has clearly demonstrated that I can represent all Alaskans and I think the real question is whether Miller could really represent all Alaskans.

Q: If you win, would you consider caucusing with the Democrats?

A: No. I'm a Republican. I'm running as a write-in Republican candidate. So, I'm not my party's nominee. Does that give me a little more flexibility & independence? Perhaps, yes. Keep in mind, over half the people in this state chose not to align themselves with any party at all. So, in order for me to represent them, I have to have that approach: you're not going to find me 100% in alignment with the party position but I'm 100% aligned with Alaska's position.

Source: Time magazine coverage of 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Sep 24, 2010

Not conservative enough for Tea Party, but I am for Alaska

Q: Senator Lisa Murkowski is one of many victims of the anti-incumbency wave this election season. The freshman senator lost to Tea Party favorite Joe Miller in a contentious primary battle. The Republican establishment has made it clear they won't support Murkowski this time around. [To Murkowski]: When you decided to become a write-in candidate, Senator Jim DeMint called you a big-tent hypocrite, saying these people all talk about how they want people in the Republican Party, and then the minute they lose, they go on out and run as independents. Your response?

MURKOWSKI: Well, let me tell you, Jim DeMint or the Tea Party Express, far be it for them to determine whether or not the senator representing the people of Alaska is conservative enough for them. I'm trying to do is represent the people of my state. Maybe from Jim DeMint's perspective, you know, I'm not conservative enough for him. But the question is, do I represent the values of the people of the state that I represent?

Source: CNN "State of the Union" coverage: 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Sep 19, 2010

Running against Tea Party to give Alaskans a choice

Q: In the Alaska Republican primary, they voted you out; doesn't it look like sore loser to now launch this write-in campaign?

MURKOWSKI: What happened in my particular race, you had the Tea Party Express, this California-based group, come in at the last minute in a mudslinging, smear campaign, with lies and fabrications and mischaracterization. They dumped $600,000 into a small market here in Alaska, and they clearly influenced the outcome of that election. But you have a process here where so many Alaskans did not have an opportunity to speak up and vote for the person that they wanted to.

Q: But isn't that how the process works? And you're now kind of undermining the Republican Party?

MURKOWSKI: It's not about undermining the Republican Party or the Democratic Party. It's about representing the people of the state of Alaska. And if the people of the state of Alaska are going to stand up and say, Lisa, you've got to give us an opportunity to participate, to give us a choice.

Source: CNN "State of the Union" coverage: 2010 Alaska Senate debate , Sep 19, 2010

Voted with Republican Party 80.6% of 319 votes.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), was scored by the Washington Post on the percentage of votes on which a lawmaker agrees with the position taken by a majority of his or her party members. The scores do not include missed votes. Their summary:
Voted with Republican Party 80.6% of 319 votes.
Overall, Democrats voted with their party 88.4% of the time, and Republicans voted with their party 81.7% of the time (votes Jan. 8 through Sept. 8, 2007).
Source: Washington Post, “US Congress Votes Database” , Sep 8, 2007

Didn’t ask Alaskans to accept father’s appointment to Senate

KNOWLES: “I didn’t make nepotism an issue in this campaign, Frank Murkowski did when he appointed his daughter, and Lisa Murkowski did when she accepted that appointment,” Knowles said. “Alaskans are clearly concerned about it,” he added, referring to the record 50,000 signatures in support of Ballot Measure No. 4, which would bar a governor from ever making an appointment to fill a Senate vacancy again.

MURKOWSKI: “I have made no point hiding from the fact that my father appointed me to this seat. I didn’t ask Alaskans to accept that or get over that, if you will,” she repeated her stock answer. “What I’ve asked is that Alaskans look at the job I’m doing in the US Senate.”

Source: [Xref Knowles] AK Senate Debate in Anchorage Daily News , Oct 27, 2004

Didn’t check before sending thousands of campaign e-mails

MURKOWSKI: Murkowski answered directly when asked the candidates what decision they regret. She said she made a mistake by not checking the Anchorage School District’s Internet policy before sending thousands of campaign e-mails through the district’s computer system with an endorsement from former Anchorage Education Association President Bob Roses. She also made light of a choice to use an Exxon station on Capitol Hill as a backdrop for a press conference on gas prices in Washington DC, which has been used relentlessly by her opponent in commercials criticizing her Exxon policies. “I wish I’d been able to find a Tesoro station to discuss the high price of oil,” she said.

KNOWLES: Knowles, however, expressed regrets for a policy failure, not campaign gaffes. He said he wished he had gotten subsistence on the ballot as an issue when he was governor.

Source: AK Senate Debate, in Anchorage Daily News , Oct 27, 2004

Keep “God” in Pledge & prohibit flag burning

Lisa won passage of a resolution that required the Senate to submit an amicus brief to the Supreme Court defending the words “under God” in the Pledge. Lisa has cosponsored the pending Constitutional Amendment to prohibit flag burning. The flag is a symbol of our nation and the efforts of millions of men and women to defend that flag and thus we should protect it and respect it.
Source: 2004 Senate campaign website, Lisa Murkowski.com, “Issues” , Aug 17, 2004

Voted NO on confirming of Sonia Sotomayor to Supreme Court.

Yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee kicked off the confirmation hearings for Supreme Court Nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. In her opening statement, Judge Sotomayor pledged a "fidelity to the law:"
"In the past month, many Senators have asked me about my judicial philosophy. It is simple: fidelity to the law. The task of a judge is not to make the law--it is to apply the law. And it is clear, I believe, that my record in two courts reflects my rigorous commitment to interpreting the Constitution according to its terms; interpreting statutes according to their terms and Congress's intent; and hewing faithfully to precedents established by the Supreme Court and my Circuit Court. In each case I have heard, I have applied the law to the facts at hand."
Reference: Supreme Court Nomination; Bill PN506 ; vote number 2009-S262 on Aug 6, 2009

Voted YES on confirming Samuel Alito as Supreme Court Justice.

Vote on the Nomination -- a YES vote would to confirm Samuel A. Alito, Jr., of New Jersey, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Reference: Alito Nomination; Bill PN 1059 ; vote number 2006-002 on Jan 31, 2006

Voted YES on confirming John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Vote on the Nomination (Confirmation John G. Roberts, Jr., of Maryland, to be Chief Justice of the United States )
Reference: Supreme Court Nomination of John Roberts; Bill PN 801 ; vote number 2005-245 on Sep 27, 2005

Rated C by the Club for Growth, pro-growth but not targeted.

Murkowski scores C by the Club for Growth, a conservative PAC

The GOP controls the Senate by just one vote. Even with today’s margin, the GOP doesn’t have effective control of the agenda as the Democrats use the filibuster to kill pro-growth reform or crucial judicial appointments. The next Senate could confirm two U.S. Supreme Court justices.

If the Republicans do manage to pick up a few extra seats in the Senate, there could also be an ideological shift toward pro-growth issues. Right now, the balance of power is in the hands of the RINO Republicans like Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter. With a seat pick-up for the GOP, plus the addition of GOP superstars, Olympia and Arlen would no longer be deciding votes. We could move away from watered-down Republicanism toward a genuine pro-growth agenda.

Members of the Club are economic conservatives, like-minded political contributors who are frustrated with the ideological drift of both parties today. Club members have a shared goal of contributing to and electing more Reaganites to Congress who are willing to stand for the issues like: cutting taxes, controlling federal spending, personal accounts for Social Security, ending the death tax, eliminating the capital gains tax, fundamental tax reform, providing true school choice and minimizing government's role in our daily lives.

The stakes are mighty high in the Senate elections. That’s why we’re providing you now with our outlook for every competitive Senate race and a list of our top tier choices. The “A” List Candidates make this list because their races are competitive and they are the very best on economic issues. The “B” List Candidates are all in hotly contested races too, but they are not as rock solid on economic growth issues.

Source: CFG website 04n-CFG on Sep 21, 2004

Rated 0% by the AU, indicating opposition to church-state separation.

Murkowski scores 0% by the AU on church-state separation

OnTheIssues.org interprets the 2006 AU scores as follows:

About the AU (from their website, www.au.org):

Americans United for Separation of Church and State (AU) is a religious liberty watchdog group based in Washington, D.C. Founded in 1947, the organization educates Americans about the importance of church-state separation in safeguarding religious freedom. AU is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to preserving the constitutional principle of church-state separation as the only way to ensure religious freedom for all Americans.

Americans United is a national organization with members in all 50 states. We are headquartered in Washington, D.C., and led by the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director. AU has more than 75,000 members from all over the country. They include people from all walks of life and from various faith communities, as well as those who profess no particular faith. We are funded by donations from our members and others who support church-state separation. We do not seek, nor would we accept, government funding.

Source: AU website 06n-AU on Dec 31, 2006

Other candidates on Principles & Values: Lisa Murkowski on other issues:
AK Gubernatorial:
Mead Treadwell
Sean Parnell
AK Senatorial:
Dan Sullivan
Joe Miller
Mark Begich
Mead Treadwell

AK politicians
AK Archives

Retiring in 2014 election:
GA:Chambliss(R)
IA:Harkin(D)
MI:Levin(D)
MT:Baucus(D)
NE:Johanns(R)
SD:Johnson(D)
WV:Rockefeller(D)

Retired as of Jan. 2013:
AZ:Kyl(R)
CT:Lieberman(D)
HI:Akaka(D)
ME:Snowe(R)
ND:Conrad(D)
NE:Nelson(D)
NM:Bingaman(D)
TX:Hutchison(R)
VA:Webb(D)
WI:Kohl(D)
Senate Retirements 2014:
GA:Chambliss(R)
IA:Harkin(D)
MI:Levin(D)
MT:Baucus(D)
NE:Johanns(R)
OK:Coburn(R)
SD:Johnson(D)
WV:Rockefeller(D)

Senate races Nov. 2014:
AK: Begich(D) vs.Miller(R) vs.Treadwell(R) vs.Sullivan(R)
AL: Sessions(R,unopposed)
AR: Pryor(D) vs.Cotton(R)
CO: Udall(D) vs.Gardner(R) vs.Baumgardner(R) vs.Buck(R) vs.Hill(R) vs.Stephens(R)
DE: Coons(D) vs.O`Donnell(R)
GA: Nunn(D) vs.Perdue(R) vs.Kingston(R) vs.Gingrey(R) vs.Handel(R) vs.Broun(R)
HI: Schatz(D) vs.Hanabusa(D) vs.Cavasso(R)
IA: Braley(D) vs.Ernst(R) vs.Whitaker(R) vs.Clovis(R)
ID: Risch(R) vs.Mitchell(D)
IL: Durbin(D) vs.Oberweis(R) vs.Hansen(L) vs.Truax(R)
KS: Roberts(R) vs.Tiahrt(R) vs.Wolf(R) vs.Taylor(D) vs.Orman(I)
KY: McConnell(R) vs.Bevin(R) vs.Grimes(D)
LA: Landrieu(D) vs.Cassidy(R) vs.Maness(R)
MA: Markey(D) vs.Herr(R) vs.Skarin(I) vs.Gomez(R)
ME: Collins(R) vs.D`Amboise(R) vs.Bellows(D)
MI: Land(R) vs.Peters(D) vs.Wiedenhoeft(R)
MN: Franken(D) vs.McFadden(R) vs.Abeler(R) vs.Ortman(R)
MS: Cochran(R) vs.Childers(D) vs.McDaniel(R)
MT: Walsh(D) vs.Daines(R) vs.Edmunds(R) vs.Bohlinger(D)
NC: Hagan(D) vs.Tillis(R)
NE: Sasse(R) vs.Domina(D) vs.Haugh(L) vs.Osborn(R)
NH: Shaheen(D) vs.Brown(R) vs.Smith(R) vs.Rubens(R) vs.Testerman(R) vs.Martin(R)
NJ: Booker(D) vs.Bell(R) vs.Sabrin(R)
NM: Udall(D) vs.Weh(R) vs.Clements(R)
OK-2: Lankford(R) vs.Johnson(D) vs.Shannon(R)
OK-6: Inhofe(R) vs.Silverstein(D)
OR: Merkley(D) vs.Wehby(R) vs.Conger(R)
RI: Reed(D) vs.Zaccaria(R)
SC-2: Scott(R) vs.Dickerson(D) vs.Wade(D)
SC-6: Graham(R) vs.Hutto(D) vs.Ravenel(I) vs.Stamper(D) vs.Mace(R) vs.Bright(R)
SD: Rounds(R) vs.Weiland(D) vs.Pressler(I)
TN: Alexander(R) vs.Carr(R) vs.Adams(D)
TX: Cornyn(R) vs.Alameel(D) vs.Roland(L) vs.Stockman(R)
VA: Warner(D) vs.Gillespie(R) vs.Sarvis(L)
WV: Capito(R) vs.Tennant(D) vs.Raese(R) vs.McGeehan(R)
WY: Enzi(R) vs.Cheney(R) vs.Hardy(D)
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology
War/Peace
Welfare

Other Senators
Senate Votes (analysis)
Bill Sponsorships
Affiliations
Policy Reports
Group Ratings

Contact info:
Fax Number:
202-224-5301
Mailing Address:
Senate Office SH-709, Washington, DC 20510
Phone number:
(202) 224-6665

Page last updated: Aug 09, 2014