By NICK BEGICH
Opening the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge and National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska — if there is one issue Alaskans agree on, this is it.
In poll after poll, an overwhelming majority of Alaskans – nearly 80% – say they support opening more of Alaska’s North Slope. Ted Stevens, Don Young, Frank Murkowski, and every governor of Alaska in recent memory –- all have gone on record supporting exploration and development of ANWR. It’s hard to think of an Alaskan issue that would have stronger bipartisan support.
Alaskans support it because we see it as a necessary next step in the development of our resources and the strengthening of our economy, only for it to be blocked by Outside environmental activists and the national Democrats who are beholden to them.
Alaskans realize that these Outside interests want to lock Alaska up and prevent us from having a prosperous future. We need representation who will stand for us, not stand with those who would block our potential.
But for Mary Peltola, this is apparently optional. We saw that clearly earlier this month when the question of opening ANWR and NPR-A came to the House floor in the form of the “Alaska’s Right to Produce Act.”
You may remember that when President Trump’s tax cuts passed Congress, they included provisions for lease sales in ANWR -– a stunning victory for Alaska resource development and the culmination of decades of work by our congressional delegation. But on his first day in office, President Joe Biden issued sweeping executive actions that suspended the ANWR leases and closed ANWR to further development. In what would become a pattern, Biden continued a relentless campaign against Alaskan development; the count of his unilateral actions locking up Alaska is now up to 63.
The Alaska’s Right to Produce Act rejects Biden’s closure of ANWR and would restart lease sales. One would think that our lone member of Congress would be an easy “yes” vote – and indeed, Peltola co-sponsored it when it was introduced last year.
But Mary Peltola first urged her colleagues to vote against it, voted to kill the bill, then voted “present” on it. Since only “yes” votes count toward passage, a “present” vote has the same effect as a “no” vote.
Why the flip-flop? She claims that there is a poison pill in the bill that somehow pits ANWR development against fish. The provision she cites doesn’t actually do that -– and it was in the bill when she co-sponsored it. When it was just a bipartisan bill with a catchy title, she co-sponsored it, with not a poison pill to be found.
But now that she’s in a serious fight for re-election, and needs support from Outside environmental interests, suddenly the bill doesn’t pass muster.
She’s scrambling to cover her actions, but one thing is clear: when Alaskan development is truly on the line, Mary doesn’t stand with us. In the battle between partisan politics and doing what’s right for Alaska, Mary Peltola has chosen the wrong side.
Peltola claims to be carrying the mantle of the late Congressman Don Young. But it is impossible to imagine Don Young voting “present” on a bill to open ANWR for exploration and drilling, a goal he promoted tirelessly for decades.
The “Alaska’s Right to Produce Act” did pass the U.S. House, and the vote was bipartisan. Five Democrats voted to open Alaska for resource development. If only Mary Peltola had been one of them.
If I’m elected to serve as your representative, my commitment is clear. I will advocate tirelessly for ANWR’s development, ensuring that Alaska remains at the forefront of America’s energy future. I will stand against those who seek to lock up our resources, denying us the prosperity that is rightfully ours.
I will be the voice in Congress that says “Yes” to Alaskan development, “Yes” to our economic future, and “Yes” to the enduring spirit of our great state.
Nick Begich is the leading Republican candidate for Alaska’s at-large seat in the U. S. Congress. To find out more about Nick, visit his campaign website.
