By JIM MINNERY
It’s time for Wasilla Rep. David Eastman to find a new job.
His commitment to conservative values is admirable but his actions have done very little to advance those values in Juneau. In fact, I would argue that Eastman has done more to damage the pro family, pro life cause politically then anything else.
Let’s start with the most important issue – protecting unborn Alaskans.
He believes, as do I, that our State Constitution does not even remotely contain a “right to abortion” within the privacy or equal protection clauses as liberal politicians and the Alaska Supreme Court fraudulently assert. But his strategy to push back on that false assertion is deeply flawed and counterproductive.
Four states ( Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee & West Virginia ) have amended their State Constitutions to explicitly state that their founding document does not contain or provide a right to abortion or the right of public funding for abortion. In doing so, those four states have literally saved unborn lives. With those Amendments in place, the Justices have no wiggle room to manufacture meaning out of thin air as they do here.
Eastman, as you can see above in his answer to our Values Voter Guide survey, would vote AGAINST such an effort joining forces with Planned Parenthood, the ACLU and every other leftist, pro-abortion group.
His reasoning ? Because the right to abortion doesn’t exist in our State Constitution, we shouldn’t have to amend it to clarify the matter. Here’s the problem with that line of thinking – the Alaska Supreme Court rules in a manner believing it does exist and David Eastman hasn’t been able to do anything about it. Period.
The high Court used that judicial philosophy to strike down a statewide initiative that was passed by the people of Alaska requiring parental notification before a minor can get an abortion and they used it to overturn a law passed by the legislature stating that Alaskans shouldn’t have to pay for elective abortions through Medicaid.
If language were in place in our State Constitution as it is in those other four states, the Justices would have been stopped in their tracks and unborn babies in Alaska would have been saved. Full stop.
Eastman and many of his faithful followers believe that holding fast to theory is righteous but we live in reality. His refusal to amend our Constitution to protect the least of these among us has consequences.
In addition to his refusal to protect the unborn through necessary and proven Constitutional amendments, Eastman has been unable to move beyond window dressing in terms of advocating any effective legislation. Through four terms in the State House, he introduced more than 140 measures. Not a single one has advanced to the floor for a vote.
Eastman has also consistently demonstrated that he is unable to work with his own party. His greatest fan, Pat Martin with Alaska Right to Life, someone I vehemently have disagreed with over the years, has made it his mission in life to malign every conservative in the Alaska Legislature. You don’t hear much from Pat about the progressives. He’s too busy trying to throw conservatives under the bus.
In 2020, the minority caucus suspended Eastman from committees after conflicts with fellow Republicans. In 2022, he was removed from the Republican House minority caucus for “disruptive” behavior, stripping him of some of his committee assignments. More recently, in the last legislative session, he was not offered a place in the Republican-dominated House majority, but was given a single committee seat.
Rep Eastman also voted against HB 2, a bill that would have prohibited Alaska public agencies from contracting with any group that boycotts or discriminates against Israel on the basis of nationality, national origin, or religion. The sponsor of the pro-Israel legislation, Representative Sarah Vance out of Homer, a solid Christ-follower and consistent conservative, was appalled when Eastman once again sided with the Democrats in a 20-20 vote to kill her bill.
Eastman’s followers, and there are many, are fond of saying he is the “only true conservative” in the Legislature. But, having a leader that preaches an explicit belief system or ideology and who is followed by unquestioning believers is the defining characteristic of a cult. That may sound intense but for those of you who are ardent supporters of him, ask yourself if you’ve ever opposed him on anything. If not…remember that we all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
Believe it or not, I like David Eastman. He is a smart, interesting man with convictions but he is in the wrong profession. His presence is doing nothing to advance an agenda other than platitudes and disruption. He has a place in the battle for ideas. It’s just not the legislature.
Alaska Family Action strongly endorses his opponent, Jubilee Underwood, who actually has a track record of working with others within and outside of her political persuasions and of getting real policies across the finish line.
It’s time for change in District 27.
Jim Minnery is president of Alaska Family Council.
Wow, sad way to attack the most conservative legislator there is. The moderates keep trying to take Eastman out and he keeps winning. Praise God.
For those of you who don’t know, Jim Minnery and his group Alaska Family Council has been endorsing pro-abortion candidates for a few years now (not saying Jubilee is one of those), he fights against conservative values just so he can get a “win” that doesn’t really win.
Send the bible thumper home!
By pro abortion Lance, do you mean anyone who doesn’t line up exactly with David Eastman and Pat Martin? Who have we endorsed that is actually pro abortion? And in terms of a win…I believe the young Alaskans walking around right now as fourteen year olds who were born during the short window when the parental notification law was in effect count as a win. Remember, we’re trying to save lives. David, of course, would have voted against that policy.
You and your group have supported Mike Cronk and Mike Prax who both voted for abortifacients, as per the Watchman article on HB17 on 9/9. Thankfully the Governor vetoed it.
You guys have also supported Bart LeBon who spoke publicly in the Legislature of his support for abortion. As you well know it’s on Gavel to Gavel.
You’re like the kings of Israel and Judah who allied with pagan nations instead of trusting God. You refuse to stand on what’s right, which is also noted by your support of exception language that allows certain babies to be killed.
Spot on Jim Minnery; I couldn’t agree more. Two things is why did David Eastman cause issues, when Dave Talerico, could have been Speaker of the House and who did it go to Louis Stutes and the Democrats; and the all or nothing approach to life; I am 100% pro-life without exception, but if you had a house burning down and you said – oh, I could save some lives, but I can’t save all; so, I will save zero. Is that truly moral or pro-life, no it isn’t. As an example, South Carolina had all or nothing “pro-life conservatives” vote against the heartbeat bill, why?? Because it did save all, and they even attempted and didn’t have the votes to do had to go back to a 6-week heartbeat bill. You don’t win a battle saying I’m all or nothing, I’m not for nothing and God’s Word clearly states- it’s about the direction we are going, if I can win a battle to save more lives than at this moment, even if not all – than absolutely, I will vote for the bill! If the direction goes the opposite direction, then no I will not! This is why I 100% support Jubilee Underwood and replacing David Eastman and I do not trust him. When I see this kind of action; I don’t want to hear how “conservative you claim to be” – you better prove it with actions and words and he has failed that in my view absolutely.
Jim Minnery, you have summarized in this article what I have believed for years. I really like David Eastman and he is a great orator on the House Floor. I also admire him as a West Point graduate. But unfortunately, he seems to be a picture of the former Army motto-“An Army of One”. Politics is about consensus. He should pick his battles better and win some for the “team”. Otherwise, one only wins a Pyrrhic Victory.
David, I’ve got to hand it to you: you’re really leaning into that “Army of One” comparison. But here’s the thing—sometimes an “Army of One” is exactly what’s needed, especially in a political landscape where “consensus” often translates to “caving.” Eastman’s job isn’t to be the GOP’s yes-man; it’s to hold the line on conservative principles. If he has to stand alone to keep those principles intact, then so be it.
Now, as for the Pyrrhic Victory angle—if the “team” you’re worried about winning for is more focused on staying comfortable than pushing back against the leftist agenda, then maybe it’s time to redefine what victory actually means. Eastman’s not trying to win a popularity contest in the halls of the establishment; he’s fighting to protect Alaska’s values. And that’s a victory that actually matters.
In politics, compromise for its own sake is the quickest path to mediocrity. We need more “armies of one” who aren’t afraid to stick to their guns, even when it’s inconvenient.
Bipartisan consensus legislation is the slow erosion of our liberty and constitutional rights through unconstitutional legislation. It is the slaughtering of our liberty through death by a thousand cuts.
Eastman does EXACTLY what he is supposed to do:REPRESENT his constituents!
He is not elected to dice head first into the swamp with the RINO CABAL!
He is not elected to join a caucus!
He is not elected to play along to get along!
He is not elected to DIShonor his oath to the Constitution!
Hear, hear!
Consensus requires swimming in a swamp. He has no obligation to engage in such blind activities. That’s how you get swallowed by an alligator and pooped out the other end of the Juneau meat grinder, as many legislators have, selling off their morals and potential legacies and this great state on the way out the door.
No he is the one who speaks the truth.
We need more like him.
And David Eastman voting against a full Permanent Fund Dividend, when we had the opportunity and people were hurting. I’m sorry, I don’t trust him and when he attacks conservatives and doesn’t show grace or encouragement to them – no doubt nobody trusts him; he would be better off spending his time actually attacking democrats with the same passion.
Jubilee Underwood will be a better choice over Eastman!
We need to list out the people who did this. This just cost us a conservative mayor in Fairbanks. Why Aaron LowJewski dropped out will never make sense–Coghill had no chance.
lies lies and more lies….can you not do simple math?
Are yo saying as a “conservative” that he should vote for a MASSIVE BLOATED budget that allows for the murder of BABIES????
YOU are the one that would be better off attacking the Dems instead of the 100% rated actual Conservative in Juneau!
A clear reading of the US Constitution shows it only protects the rights US citizens. Constitutional text defines a US citizen as people “born” in this country or otherwise naturalized. Strictly speaking, our constitution does not protect the right to life of unborn humans (who, as said, have no constitutional rights). Therefore, under our constitution, women are free to murder unborn babies up to the point of birth, when they become citizens. Our constitution is a contract we are all bound to. A contract is a contract but most Americans do not truly want to live by that contract.
Please look up the term ‘ coup de grace’. There is a reason women would kill their unborn, it’s not something women do for fun, if you think so, you might just hate women.
You must be thinking of Lisa Murkowski. Every time a Bill passes under her nose she signs it for the national scene and international scene, so the abortion numbers are already in the millions with her willingness to sign on bills responding to women who want an abortion to cover their behavior or circumstances or economy. In other words, Lisa Murkowski may still be living a time in her life when an abortion was up close and comfortable for their/her reason. Doesn’t have anything to do with hating women but what’s comfy and for the moment.
The reason is because their convenience is more important than God. They don’t believe life is sacred.
Wayne, an interesting opinion from you above, following your strained logic would it be permissible for a U.S. citizen to say, murder an illegal alien? By definition those here illegally were born outside of the United States, meaning ( according to you ) they also have a zero right to life, true?
Prior to making Constitutional Arguments I would welcome you to bone up on Madison’s copious notes and perhaps struggle through Hamilton, Madison and John Jay’s Federalist papers,( you will object to them immediately however since they wrote them under assumed names… ). Within these documents one comes to realize the enormity of the arguments which eventually gave birth to the Constitution.
” dying ain’t so hard for men like you and me. It’s living that’s hard when all you’ve ever cared about has been butchered…” Outlaw Joesy Wales
BTW, unlike Obama I can never be President of these United States since I wasn’t born in a State but in a Territory. That much is clear from reading the Constitution.
Bob, as to straining interpretations, if an Italian in Italy is murdered the US government has no jurisdiction and no concern. If an American citizen is murdered in Italy the US government is concerned.
As to the constitution itself, please remember it is a fully integrated instrument. As the “law of the land,” it supersedes and replaces are working documents promulgated prior thereto, including the Declaration, Federalist Papers, Copious Notes, and anything similar. Those documents merely serve as references but we cannot allow our constitution to be translated by political opinion. It can only be changed by the amendment process.
I mentioned the recent AST sweep on the Samoan community in Whittier. We learned that people born in American Samoa aren’t citizens and therefore can’t vote or run for office, yet both have happened there. Digging further, there’s sources which state that people born in territories are citizens if it was provided for in an organic act or treaty.
I do not know Eastman’s reasons for opposing Vance’s HB2. By your account it sounds like one worth supporting. Alaska’s judicial branch is controlled by the the Alaska Bar Association which makes our government NOT one of, by, and for the people. That must change. When it does, it might also become one that upholds and defends the constitution. This is a great time to remind Alaskans of Eastman’s amendments to HB76 of the 32nd Alaska legislature. His amendments, seeking to preserve our liberty and freedom, were undermined by Republicans Stutes, Rasmussen, Nelson, and Merrick. In truth, it is the party that requires realignment and our government that requires adjustment. Without the help of Eastman I anticipate conservative representation will continue to be underrepresented, and follow the path of leftist placaters like Stutes, Rasmussen, Nelson, and Merrick. The worst offender of the current legislature may be Senator Giessel.
Jubilee Underwood sounds like some tranny drag queens name
So you as a “trueindependent” have no beliefs. Hmmm.
its rather arrogant to think she is better than the ONLY 100% rated Conservative in Juneau.
She is backed by all the SWAMP CREATURES!!!
that 100% is from John Birch Society in the Lower 48.
Well said! Those who have ears and minds of their own please reflect on the well stated words of Jim Minnery. As a former legislator, I know and witnessed it in the 32nd session and afterward. Jubilee Underwood will bring back true representation to the District and Alaska.
working across the aisle to get a legislative comprise? like lions and sheep lying together in a meadow, it’s the beginning of the end.
Minnery has been endorsing SWAMP Creatures for a very long time….he needs a come to Jesus moment!!
Separation of Church and State is a real thing, Minnery. No one needs to subscribe to your religious perspective and if they don’t it’s more an indication that they have an analytical mind than that their thinking may be flawed. Religious nutters should have no sway on political matters.
It’s just in some letters. Not in stone.
Nor is it in the Constitution
Pretty good opinion piece, and assessment, Mr. Minnery. Politicians eventually wear themselves out when towing a particular line without some flexibility to work with others of a similar, but not identical, attitude. Take for instance, John Coghill. A decent man with great intentions. But John fouled-up himself with the PFD and the bill releasing inmates early. This highly offended his constituents back home. John Coghill will never recover from his political snafus, as recently demonstrated by his loss for mayor to a snot-nosed left-wing looney kid up in Fairbanks.
Agree here. And yes, Coghill knows he’s done.
Alright, Jim Minnery, you’ve officially hit peak irony here. You’ve managed to wrap up your call for “change” in the legislature in so much establishment fluff that it practically reeks of bureaucracy. Let’s be honest: Eastman’s real crime isn’t a lack of results—it’s his refusal to fall in line with your brand of “go-along-to-get-along” conservatism that only serves to maintain the status quo.
This “strategic” reasoning you’re selling—about amending the Alaska Constitution to appease the activist Supreme Court—is precisely why Eastman’s supporters appreciate him. He’s standing firm on the principle that we shouldn’t need to tweak founding documents just because a handful of justices can’t read them without their progressive glasses on. Alaska Family Council isn’t about saving lives; it’s about flexing establishment muscle over any conservative who dares to think independently.
Let’s talk about that “legislative track record” criticism. Eastman’s job isn’t to crank out laws for the sake of padding stats. Conservatives don’t measure success by passing a deluge of useless bills; they measure it by standing up for values, even when it means stopping bad bills in their tracks. Eastman’s seen as ineffective because he won’t rubber-stamp the establishment’s agenda? That’s exactly why he’s effective to Alaskans who actually believe in conservative principles.
And let’s not forget the kicker: accusing Eastman’s supporters of cult-like loyalty? Nice try. Being willing to challenge even the Republican Party doesn’t make Eastman a cult leader; it makes him a true representative of the people, someone willing to go up against the self-anointed “real conservatives” in power, including those like Sen. Hughes cozying up with the very leftist groups they claim to oppose.
Instead of telling Eastman to retire, maybe the establishment should take a look in the mirror. Alaska doesn’t need more legislators who trade principles for political favor. Alaska needs leaders who will stay true to the Constitution, not amend it for convenience.
“Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers.” (Psalm 1:1)
I get a chuckle Pete at you using quotes from the Bible, as an anti-Semitic person. The Devil uses verses as well and Jesus refuted each and every one of them.
Yes, I just equated you to the Devil on purpose. For as anti-Semitic as you are, as hateful and sexist and racists you past comments are are and continue to be, I will continue to call you out. David Eastman, for the reader, has never, not once denounced Peter for this comments.
Well, Mike, that’s quite the leap you’ve made here. Equating me to the Devil for quoting the Bible? Let’s get something straight: Just because I have a different perspective and support someone you don’t, doesn’t mean I’m “anti-Semitic,” “hateful,” or “racist.” Tossing out those labels like candy on Halloween is a transparent attempt to shut down any genuine discussion and smear anyone who disagrees with you. But, hey, if name-calling makes you feel more righteous, who am I to stop you?
Now, as for Eastman not “denouncing” me for my “comments”—David Eastman isn’t the babysitter of every single person who supports him. He’s focused on what matters to Alaskans: standing firm on principles and keeping government in check. If he wasted time every time someone tried to drag his name into a parking dispute or squabble, he wouldn’t have time to do what he was elected to do.
If you’ve got a real issue with policy or principle, let’s hear it. People are tired of hearing accusations without substance. Otherwise, maybe it’s time to reevaluate where your energy’s going—because it’s starting to sound a lot like an obsession.
Remember, Mike: “The tongue of the wise brings healing, but a deceitful tongue crushes the spirit.” (Proverbs 15:4)
Agreed.
So hilarous! Your anti-Sementic posts are well known. Your racist and sexist comments are as well known, what with you calling Shelley Hughes, Cathy Tilton and Jamie Allard the C word!
No Pete, you don’t like being called out, tough. And yes, what you are doing in the name of David Eastman is vial. Yet David is beholding to you somehow, don’t know what, but that is his problem!
I and so many others have answered those policy questions, you keep ignoring them.
Yep, your deceitful tongue is well known to us and God.
Just for grins and for the readers, since you will ignore, as usual. You wanted policies? Excerpts from Senator Shelley Hughes.
Here’s just a sampling from the last couple of years. He voted against toughening penalties for fentanyl drug dealers, against free market options for healthcare that will help lower costs, against a citizen watchdog group to push back from federal overreach, against increasing homeschool funding per student, against a new option for charter school approval, against a tax break for businesses that donate to schools, against a $3500 pfd that killed it (and caused 7 Mat-Su troopers to be cut in the process), against honoring Vietnam helicopter pilots, against new timber jobs and clearing beetle-killed trees, and the list goes on. . . .
You may also be surprised to learn that he and his supporters strangely partnered with Planned Parenthood to oppose a pro-life constitutional amendment a few years back. More recently, he was the only pro-life legislator not to sign a pro-life letter thanking a national drug chain stores for following our law and removing the abortion pill from its stores in Alaska.
As to David and your relationship with him. DE has been asked several times and has refused to denounce antisemitic statements made by his supporters alongside their glowing remarks about him. The most recent request was at candidate forum a few weeks ago. He also voted against a pro Israel bill last year and it failed on a 20-20 vote. Had he been a yes vote, it would have passed 21 to 19. Yet another example of him sadly tripping up the conservative cause.
His actions and his votes have a pattern of tripping up the conservative cause far, far too often. We get upset when rhinos do this, but I have to say, Eastman does it just as often, but no one has been talking about it, and the media doesn’t report it. In fact, the Mat-Su Democrat party is recommending voters support Eastman because of this. They are concerned that Jubilee will be effective in moving the conservative cause forward. They should be concerned because she will.
The Wasilla voters deserve the truth as to what has been happening. By the way, his vote against the version of the education bill with an increase in homeschool funding, for example, caused it to fail on a 20-20 vote and the bill reverted to an old version without the homeschool funding.
Jim Minnery is NOT representing God’s Character when he attacks the most Godly man in the Legislature!!!
That is a huge assumption KMP! Didn’t Jesus say not to judge, least you be judged?
By actions I can think of a whole lot of people that I, as a human could see as more “Godly” than David.
David Eastman responded NO to both of these questions
1. Do you support an amendment clarifying that the Alaska state constitution does not provide for a right to abortion, or the right for public funding of abortion? Representative Eastman said NO, “The Constitution is already clear on this point. If you need a constitutional amendment to correct every instance of judicial activism we will expend finite resources doing so and be further behind because judges can write bad decisions faster than we can pass constitutional amendments.”
2. Do you support an amendment to the Alaska state constitution that would protect the right of a parent to provide consent and/or receive notice before an abortion is performed on the parent’s minor child? Once again Representative Eastman said NO, “There is nothing in the Constitution that conflicts with these rights. If you need a constitutional amendment to correct every instance of judicial activism we will expend finite resources doing so and be further behind because judges can write bad decisions faster than we can pass constitutional amendments. It is also natural for politicians to blame the constitution and point to the supposed need for a constitutional amendment as an excuse instead of accepting responsibility for their part in solving the problem.”
See the 2024 MAT SU / KENAI GUIDE at ‘https://akvoter.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/AK-Legislature-Responses-w_Comments.pdf’
Representative Eastmans comments and lack of support for these two specific questions are at odds with virtually every other conservative candidate. Representative Eastman has been an extremely effective legislator, unfortunately he’s been extremely effective for the left.
I’m glad you show his reasoning. True conservative reasoning.
How exactly is it true conservative reasoning, feel free to take your time. True conservative reasoning is not putting your head in the sand and pretending that reality, the constitution, or the judicial precedent based upon that constitution does not exist.
The framers never intended for the church to be completely out of the state business. They felt it was needed for morality, even though Franklin was an atheist and probably Jefferson.
The answer to judicial activism is not to amend the Constitution, which the courts are already violating. They will just violate your new amendment. The answer to judicial activism is to impeach bad judges.
Note, I do support constitutional amendments to fix the judiciary.
Eastman is a loud disagreeable child. If it was up to him he would slap that child back to the 1950’s. However, he likes to argue like he’s a 2020’s child. Which is it Eastman?
A clear reading of the US Constitution shows it only protects the rights of US citizens. Constitutional text defines a US citizen as people “born” in this country or otherwise naturalized. Strictly speaking, our constitution does not protect the right to life of unborn humans (who, as said, have no constitutional rights as non-citizens). Therefore, under our constitution, women are free to murder unborn babies up to the point of birth, at which time they become citizens. Our constitution is a contract we are all bound to. A contract is a contract but most Americans do not truly want to live by that contract.
If the unborn have no rights up until birth, why do many states have laws which will charge a murderer of a pregnant woman with two counts?
They have no right to take life.
A clear reading of the US Constitution shows it only protects the rights of US citizens. Constitutional text defines a US citizen as people “born” in this country or otherwise naturalized. Strictly speaking, our constitution does not protect the right to life of unborn humans (who, as said, have no constitutional rights as non-citizens). Therefore, under our constitution, women are free to murder their unborn babies up to the point of birth, at which time they become citizens. Our constitution is a contract we are all bound to. A contract is a contract but most Americans do not truly want to live by that contract. However, to be sure, Yahweh lives by His contract.
I know it took guts to write this and I’m glad you did. Polarizing, self-serving NAzis don’t belong in our club. We need conservatives that aren’t living out their fantasies of getting nothing done in office, we need people with a vested interst in our state and an understanding of our economy. Time for Eastman and his Nazi leanings to go.
are you Kamala Harris in drag?
stop with the NAZI rhetoric!!!
Bill, I don’t stand for Harris puling the Nazi crap, I won’t here as well. David may be a lot of things but this is over the top.
Many Legislators put in amendments to bills just to be able to talk on the floor. Then they pull those amendments, or let them go to a vote and don’t really care they fail. I have seen Eastman do this dozens if not hundreds of times over the years. But when your BFF (or your staffers father) then uses the votes those cconservative Republicans took to vote down or table those amendments, to attack those conservatives using their paid for by donations 501(c)3 pages, and put out flyers and emails to their lists. ….Lucy we have a problem. Those other legislators oppose Eastman because of the behavior of his BFF(s) and will not invite him into the majority. That’s what happened four years ago. Three Republican women refused to have him in the majority with them because of actions he took the previous year. So, despite the fact that there was a majority republicans in the House, they were in the minority. All because of Eastman. Ask any of them. Fact is, Eastman is not a conservative. He is an uber right populist who never apologizes and thinks his (mis)understandings of the constituion should be accepted by everyone.
DJC, sounds like you’re caught up in the classic establishment playbook—blame the principled conservative for not playing nice with a system designed to water down any real resistance. Eastman isn’t out there trying to score political points with meaningless amendments or fake alliances. He’s putting up amendments and casting votes based on principle, even if it means he’s outnumbered. That’s what accountability looks like, not politicking for the sake of a “majority” that compromises on values.
And calling Eastman an “uber right populist”? That’s just another way of saying he’s got the courage to stand against both parties when they stray from conservative ideals. Alaskans are tired of legislators who spend more time worrying about majority cliques than representing the people who elected them. Eastman’s refusal to “apologize” for his views isn’t arrogance—it’s conviction, something we need a whole lot more of in Juneau.
If “conservative” means going along with anyone who’ll have you in the majority, then I’d say Eastman’s brand of standing alone is exactly what Alaska needs right now.
I have a different perspective. I don’t see Eastman as the primary issue. The real problem stems from his supporters, who harshly criticize anyone with a differing opinion. When a legislator dares to oppose his amendments or expresses views that diverge from his own, his loyal followers launch relentless attacks on social media and other channels to pressure that legislator to conform. Individuals like Pat Martin, McClure, Roberts, Nash, Peterson, KenX2, Andrews, Lovings, and others are quick to join in. It reminds me of Jim Jones security teams, standing by to ensure everyone drank the koolaid.
Interesting perspective. What if elected officials continually gaslighting constituents and voting on bad bills were the problem? You do realize that society as a whole has lost trust in politicians and those in high places in general. This comment reeks of a politician pissed off that they are being called out by everyday citizens. Grow up or get out of the game.
The number one fruit on the tree of a politician is how they vote.
Eastman’s followers should watch the House Floor on Gavel to Gavel to see just how ineffective he is. Wonder why the Session can’t be completed in 90-days? Eastman is the reason. Eastman introduces amendment after amendment, resulting in long at eases while copies are being made; thus c
wasting time and money to the state of Alaska. Eastman has to speak on every single bill or amendment, and it’s never short. After his long spill he generally votes “No” even on good conservative bills. This last Session I was appalled to see him huddled with the Democrats and voting with the Democrats. The Democrats love Eastman because it’s one less person available to form a strong Republican Majority. Yes, it’s time for a change!
AGREED! And he seems to do so thinking it makes him look good, but it makes him look unprepared and childish. He was very chummy with the demoncrats!
Linda listen, many of the people who support Eastman DO watch gavel to gavel, and that is precisely why they support him. Name ONE frivolous amendment he has introduced that wasn’t a protective amendment for Alaskans. Just one. The at ease’s are because the RINOs have to go consult with their lobbyists to figure out what their script is after every amendment, they can’t think for themselves because they are all bought and paid for. Unfortunately for Alaskans, Eastman is one of the very few that takes his job and the constitution seriously and he is not willing to pass bills with poison pills in them. The rest of the RINOs on the other hand refuse to adopt his amendments out of SPITE, simply because it is Eastman. Shower is on record saying that. People like Shelley Hughes stating “I agree with Eastman 99% of the time.” Yet backstab and trash the citizens of District 27 calling them stupid for weeks on end. So, who is the real problem here?
Exactly.
Unfortunately, in real life all adults have to make compromises.
Children generally don’t.
Sounds like Eastman isn’t the problem but the Judiciary is. So your reasoning is pass a law against a law that doesn’t exist. Got it. 🤔
I’m calling BS on this.
The correct tact to take, is to give him some help by electing more people just like him.
Republicans have been gutlessly trying to “get along” with Democrats for 50 years, and look at where our country is now.
Our beloved Republic is going down in flames because the Eastmans of the world are few and far between instead of being the norm.
Jim Minnery is selling out his soul….to what end? Is he afraid that if abortions are outlawed in Alaska that he will be out of a job?
He keeps promoting FAKE “prolife” candidates.
BTW, Eastman had just been endorsed by his District, you now, the ones he actually represents!?!?!
Down with the SWAMP CREATURES!!!
Way off target, Jim. Republicans have a majority in our legislature, yet Alaska keeps moving steadily to the left. We don’t need more “conservatives” who are eager to “reach across the aisle” and hand democrats everything that they want. We need more legislators who actually represent the people who elected them, not their little club in Juneau or special interests. We need MORE David Eastmans.
I do not understand why Representative Eastman voted against these bills.
HB104, the salvage/sale of beetle killed spruce. He sided with 2 Senate Democrats (Tobin & Kiehl) and 5 House Democrats (Groh, Hannan, Mina, Story, and Josephson).
HB148, extending education tax credits thus increasing school choice for parents. He was the ONLY vote in the House against the bill; the Senate voted 20-0.
HB66, the omnibus crime bill that increased the penalties for death by fentanyl. He sided with senator Loki Tobin the only senator who voted against the bill. He sided with 5 House Democrats (Mina, Hannan, Gray, Carrick and Armstrong).
He voted against SB34, Reestablishing the Citizen’s Advisory Commission on Federal Management Areas in Alaska. The vote in the Senate was 20-0. He sided with 5 House Democrats.
It appears from these votes that Representative Eastman has joined the Democrat caucus and has become a “useful tool”.
You sure do complain about not knowing stuff a lot. Ever thought to ask or do some research on it? You’re not convincing anyone of anything by being helpless all the time.
Call him up and ask him. Odds are that those bills contain riders that you wouldn’t want to touch, things compromising Rs put in to get D support.
There are always two things: The thing, and the thing causing the thing.
If we had a legislative majority made up of David Eastman clones and another sitting in the governor’s seat this state would be much better off. Eastman is a lone voice who can’t make any headway against the Democrats and weak pseudo-Republicans? I say a lone voice is better than no voice at all. And our Supreme Court justices do seem problematic…so let’s retire them. There’s no right to abortion in our Constitution and Eastman is correct that we don’t need to modify our Constitution to explicitly state that. As rightly pointed out it is our Supreme Court that is the problem here so let’s work on that directly instead of trying a constitutional workaround. There’s nothing wrong with our state constitution except that we don’t have enough David Eastman types to enforce compliance with it. Getting rid of the, apparently, only guy with the courage to stand firm in the face of overwhelming opposition instead of joining with him seems like exactly the wrong approach.
Let’s talk about that PFD issue y’all like to misremember.
Back in September Mike Shower penned an op-ed in the The People’s Paper touting his work on pushing for the PFD 50/50 plan, and said but for three House members, his bill would have passed.
”Here’s the kicker. About $5,500 PER ALASKAN went to the House for a concurrence vote. If it passed it was a done deal and would have gone to the governor for his signature. Except it didn’t pass. 3 House republicans voted no, joining the democrat led majority, and the statutory PFD died – again. And died at the hands of republicans who said they supported the PFD but when push came to shove abandoned that position for something else. 2 of those 3 were Republican House members from the Matsu.” – Mike Shower, The PFD, The People’s Paper Mid-Aug 2024, page 10
The problem is that this is fantasy. Mike Shower, and now Jubilees supporters, are masking the inexcusably bad votes of their friends this year and last year, and using a budget cycle from three years ago to do it. Shower is merely doing what many in Juneau do, playing smoke and mirrors and banking on you not knowing the truth. So let’s talk about the details, shall we?
First off, it wasn’t three Republicans it was seven.
If you include the senate Republicans who voted against it, it was actually nine Republicans who voted against it.
Facts matter.
Three house Democrats (and one “independent”) voted with Mike on the bill he was pushing. If you include the senate Democrats who voted for the bill it was seven Democrats (and an “independent”) who voted for the bill.
Why was it so enticing for Democrats? In a word, more abortion funding, and trans-surgery. What happens in Juneau stays in Juneau, and deals to make Republicans look good on one issue while secretly caving on others is what happens in Juneau.
Of course, that was a rule guys like David Eastman and Chris Kurka kept breaking, and the swamp hates that.
That year’s budget was a conservative’s worst nightmare, filled with so much “pork” that even the moderates joined the most conservative legislators in coming out against it. No Republican should have been caught dead joining those seven Democrats in voting for it. But Shower did, and now he’s wearing it as a badge of honor. And Jubilees parroting the talking points shoe probably has no clue about.
It was a political gimmick and nothing more. It quickly became an opportunity to make the two conservatives in the house — Kurka and Eastman, who are first and foremost pro-life — look bad.
Depending on which time Mike and other Republicans tell the story, Kurka and Eastman were “the deciding votes” that day, which was never true (neither of their two votes were ever in play) or were “two of the three Republicans”, which was also never true, or were “voting with all the Democrats”, which ALSO was never true.
The Republicans who voted NO on that vote in the house were (in alphabetical order):
1) Eastman (Rural Mat-Su)
2) Kaufman (South Anchorage)
3) Kurka (Wasilla)
4) LeBon (Fairbanks)
5) Merrick (Eagle River)
6) Stutes (Kodiak)
7) Thompson (Fairbanks)
The Republicans in the senate who voted no were:
8) Revak
9) von Imhof
#4-7 were in the “Bipartisan Majority”
#2 was in the “House Republicans” Caucus
#1 was officially expelled from the “House Republicans” Caucus
#3 was disinvited from the “House Republicans” Caucus meetings, but was not officially expelled at the time the vote was taken
#8-9 were part of the “Bipartisan Majority”, which included all the Republicans and also Lyman Hoffman (D-Bethel)
Other anecdotes:
Rasmussen voted YES, even though she self-ejected from the “House Republicans” Caucus in exchange for a seat on the House Finance Committee.
Ortiz (Independent-Ketchikan) voted NO
Patkotak (Independent-Barrow) voted YES
Democrats who voted YES in the House were:
1) Foster
2) Tuck
3) Zulkosky
In the senate,
4) Gray-Jackson
5) Kawasaki
6) Olson
7) Wielechowski
These seven were all able to do so because the votes had already been counted in the house and they knew it would die in the house. Had their vote been needed, any of these seven could have easily switched their votes to ensure that it would die.
The truth is that there was no actual battle over the PFD because too many people on both sides are more interested in mainting power and influence than they are fighting for conservative principles, like defending the unborn, or fighting state curruption, or defending your Constutional rights to free speech and free exercise of religion.
The vote that actually mattered (legally) was when that same bill, sans the full dividend, was put to a vote on 5/18/22. And for all the grandstanding about being a dedicated defender of a full dividend, Shower voted for it after the PFD had been cut by $867. They all voted for it.
In the senate, Lora Reinbold was the only senator who voted “No.” And the swamp got rid of her.
In the house, it was little better. Of the 18 who beat their chest for being “defenders of the full PFD”, 14 of them voted for the bill sans the full dividend. (After the outcome of the vote was clear, DeLena Johnson asked to switch her vote to be officially counted with the six of us who initially voted no).
The final vote was 19-1 in the senate and 33-7 in the house.
Shower and the rest publicly declared themselves heroes because they had only cut the PFD by 21% that year, which was less of a cut than what some legislators were supporting.
Their two goals were achieved:
1) Declare themselves PFD heroes in an election year…the same year that they literally voted to pay out a divide dividend that had been cut by 21%.
2) Declare the conservatives villains going into the 2022 election.
This is what the vast majority Republicans count as victories. And now you have the rest of the story.
I heard that the Alaskan Republican party has a s.w.a.t. team that attacks anything good said about Eastman. I believe it based on the ramped up attacks against Eastman by Boyle, Coons, Minnery, and others. I am willing to bet that they are having fun going against everything good said. I wonder what the Republican party has to lose if Eastman wins?
Minnery is wrong about the abortion amendment. It is unnecessary. Worse, it is just as divisive as similar pro-abortion amendments floated by the left in other states since the Dobbs opinion was released in 2022. The reason we haven’t seen one of those here in Alaska is that the pro-abort victory handed out by the AK Supremes was so complete that there is no need for such an amendment.
But Dobbs also handed the issue right back to the legislature and the governor. Alito’s opinion handed the issue back to the elected representatives of the people. State courts and their mini-me Brennan wannabees weren’t mentioned.
This governor / legislature or another one can pass a restriction on abortion here in Alaska and wait for the pro-aborts to take the argument back to the AK Supremes, where they will win. The State then takes the case to federal court arguing that the Alito language and the 6-3 Dobbs opinion overrides the AK Supremes concoction of privacy in the AK Constitution creating a bulletproof right to abortion anywhere, any time and by anyone.
We have the win. Alito gave it to us. Time to grab it. Cheers –
agimarc, Alito and Dobbs said one thing, abortion wasn’t a FEDERAL issue to decide but was instead a State Issue, meaning in your case, an appeal to a Federal Magistrate would likely just land you back to a ruling made by the State Court.
Well, if we must “dumpster dive,” I’ll choose Jubilee Underwood over Eastman–the promise of a pretty candy wrapper over that of an empty Spam can.
It’s Eastman Derangement Syndrome!
17 paragraphs maligning Eastman, 1 paragraph telling us to vote for Underwood.
Unless you give some solid background on Underwood and give us some actual reasons to vote for her, your article can be summed up in three words: Orange Man Bad.
Well Jim minnery will you now explain to Alaskans why you have stood by when dunleavy took advantage of your guest Chloe Cole, as he smiles in the camera lense hugging this abused young lady, knowing his own dhhs still pays with our dollars for these same mutilation practices on Alaskan children? Minnery is at best disingenuous, at worst a demon in sheep’s clothing!
What, ma’am, is the process due or due process to “amend” the US Constitution? Hint, it is not another corporate bylaw with jurisdiction over temporary legislators. The US Constitution is the law of creation born out of a revolution on the continental soil of America. Is that what you in your ladylike way are proposing here?
We have servants who have sworn an oath to secure, defend and keep this document declaring our form of government.
Comments are closed.