It was a public hearing filled with varying points of view. Most who weighed in with the Juneau Assembly last Wednesday said the emergency measures being enacted to combat Covid-19 need to end. Others supported them.
But one woman participating online wanted fewer whites testifying about the matter.
Many who weighed in about the continued mandates in Juneau were concerned about constitutionality, personal responsibility, and said the community had done everything right — gotten vaccinated, masked, and limited capacity in restaurants and gyms. This, in a community that has been highly compliant with previous mandates.
“With such great vaccination rates, it would seem appropriate to remove fines at this point. We’re likely to live with COVID in some form for the rest of our lives. No need to be punitive about it. Publish guidance or best practices. Trust your community,” commented Dan DeBartolo, in the online comment section of the meeting, which was broadcast on Zoom and Facebook.
“The community has followed the guidelines set forth by CBJ/CDC/DHS this entire time. More than 70% of the community is “vaccinated,” and it seems a farce at this point to mandate or mitigate. It doesn’t “follow science;” it makes NO SENSE,” commented Leisa Barnes Hydock.
“I support extending the mandate. Your job is to help the majority of people and this kind of protection helps everyone, particularly the most vulnerable residents. Many people resist vaccination which can harm others. I’m very sorry to hear so much extreme positions. Thank you for your effort,” wrote Laurie Craig, who appeared to be in the minority.
Then came the racist commenter on the Assembly’s live Zoom comment box who said there were just too many whites testifying.
“Can we put a limit on how many white able-bodied, non-immunocompromised people who get to testify?” Megan L. Cochran commented. She appears to be a para-educator with the Juneau School District.
That comment was eventually removed from the discussion panel. She removed her educator status from her Facebook account.
The Assembly passed the ordinance keeping mandates generally in place, although a few restrictions have been lightened to take into account the community’s current vaccination rate of over 70 percent, wrote the city’s deputy city manager.
The Covid-19 Community Mitigation Strategies were set to expire on July 31. They will now go through Oct. 31.
Juneau’s mask mandate is for those indoor in public, regardless of Covid-19 vaccination status. It began on Friday. Masks are required for people outdoors where social distancing is not possible.
“This masking requirement is an attempt to prevent continued case count activity while having as light a touch as possible on our local economy and activities,” said Mila Cosgrove, Juneau’s incident commander.
Bars are at 50% capacity and restaurants are asked to reduce capacity. All indoor gatherings have 50-person limits unless a mitigation plan is approved by city authorities.
Superintendent Deena Bishop ripped the bandaid off of the question as to whether children in Anchorage Public Schools will be masked to prevent the spread of Covid-19.
According to Bishop, she will propose a universal mask policy to the Anchorage School Board and it will discuss it during its Aug. 3 meeting.
Many on the school board have pressured her to enact the mask mandate for all in Anchorage schools.
Bishop, in a letter to parents stated:
Universal masking will be required for all individuals while inside any ASD school or building. Some exceptions will apply. Masking while outside is optional. 2. Keep ASD Symptom Free. We must all do our part to minimize viral spread. Please stay home and get tested if you are experiencing ANY symptoms. 3. Cleaning and Disinfecting. Regular cleaning of classrooms, buses, and offices will continue. Hand sanitizer will be readily available and frequent handwashing will be encouraged. Enhancements and upgrades have been made to building HVAC systems to allow for optimal ventilation and air exchange. 4. Keeping students and staff in the learning environment. The District will continue to make COVID-19 vaccine clinics available to eligible students (with parental consent), staff, and community members through a contracted provider. Additionally, following new guidance from the CDC, asymptomatic, properly masked students and fully vaccinated individuals will not be required to quarantine if deemed a close contact.
“These past few weeks I have gathered information, heard from parents and staff, and spoken with experts. The science tells us the new variant is highly contagious, is circulating around the globe, and is at a high rate in our community. Given the rapid rise of COVID cases in Anchorage and the new public health recommendations provided last week by the CDC, I will recommend this mitigation plan to the Anchorage School Board. The Board will review and discuss it during its August 3 meeting, she wrote, ending her letter with the word “Cheers! Dr. Deena Bishop”.
A nationwide poll conducted in late June by the Trafalgar Group reveals that Americans are not in favor of an overbearing government response to the Delta variant of Covid-19.
The survey was conducted during the third week of June and the participates skewed Democrat.
63 percent of those surveyed said that “Government should take no action. With widespread availability of the vaccines and treatments individuals can make personal decisions on how to respond.”
17.7 percent of all respondents said “Government should reinstate mandates for mask wearing, social distancing.”
7 percent said they favor lockdowns in addition to mask wearing and social distancing.
On Friday, President Joe Biden said Americans can “in all probability” expect to face more restrictions due to the spread of the Covid-19 virus’ so-called Delta variant. The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, said on Fox News that the White House was also “looking into” mandating vaccines. Later she backtracked and said the Administration wasn’t considering such a measure.
The White House statements reflect the often contradictory and unsupported statements coming from the Biden Administration.
The survey shows Biden is facing a nation that has become more skeptical of the government’s official talking points on Covid-19.
In the Trafalgar poll, Democrats were more in favor of mandates, with 37 percent saying that masks, social distancing mandates and even lockdowns were acceptable. But 50 percent of Democrats said the government should back off and take no additional mandate action.
Republicans were different in their response Over 83 percent said 63 percent said “Government should take no action. With widespread availability of the vaccines and treatments individuals can make personal decisions on how to respond.”
7.3 percent of Republicans said they’d support mask mandates and social distancing mandates. Just 2.4 percent of Republicans support further lockdowns, compared with 11.3 percent of Democrats.
Those who don’t affiliate with either party trended toward the greater personal responsibility side — 55.5 percent said “Government should take no action. With widespread availability of the vaccines and treatments individuals can make personal decisions on how to respond.” 19.2 percent said OK to masks and social distancing mandates, and 6.7 percent said they could support the more draconian lockdown measures.
A few weeks ago, Julie and I, and many members of our family, were up at our fish camp on the Yukon River, as we are every summer. Being outdoors in Alaska is a great way to clear your head and focus on the freedoms that we enjoy in our state and our country.
It also gave me time to reflect on the last six months, since, thanks to so many readers of Must Read Alaska, I won a tough reelection last November, despite being outspent massively by national liberal Democratic money. To all of you, thank you for your support. And a special thank you to Suzanne Downing, who founded and runs MRAK, for providing a space for conservative voices.
In 2015, I was part of a wave of new Republican senators who retook the Senate majority, booting liberal Harry Reid from his position as Senate Majority Leader. For four of the six years of my first term, I worked closely with my Senate colleagues and President Trump and his administration to achieve historic accomplishments for our state and for our country. The list is long.
And, like many of you,I worked hard to keep the U.S. Senatein Republican hands and to reelect President Trump as co-chair of his campaign in Alaska this past November.
But this didn’t happen. Now, with the Democratic Party in control of the White House, Senate and House, the “anti-Alaska” agenda that I frequently warned about last year on the campaign trail is upon us. This is new territory for me as your Senator. I have never been in the minority. It can be disorientating, and I have been thinking a lot about what our strategy should be to deal with this more difficult time, politically, for our state and our country.
I told our legislators that, as a U.S. Marine and Korean War history buff, I found some inspiration from the past. I talked about one of the most epic battles of the Korean War—the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir—where 20,000 United States Marines, in thirty below zero weather, were surrounded by 120,000 Communist Chinese soldiers and had to retreat.
When the dismayed Marines asked their commanding officer how he would explain the retreat, the first in Marine Corps history, he remarked, “Retreat? Hell, we’re just attacking in another direction.” Colonel Chesty Puller, the Corps’ most decorated officer, remarked similarly, “The enemy is in front of us and behind us, they are on both of our flanks, those bastards can’t get away from us now.”
Through grit and determination, attacking and counterpunching, and sticking together, the United States Marine Corps won the Battle of the Chosin Reservoir against great odds.
One lesson from the Korean War is this: Even when all seems stacked against us, it is critical to focus and look for ways to gain ground where we can. For me that has meant to focus on Alaska’s economy.
No state’s economy has been hurt more by COVID-19 than ours. So my number one priority in the past six months has been on ways to bolster Alaska’s economy, small businesses, and working families, with a focus in three areas: tourism, oil and gas—especially the NPR-A Willow Project—and continuing the build-up of our military in Alaska.
We’ve made important progress in each:
A. Tourism: The summer of 2020 tourism season was on track to be one of our best. Of course, with the pandemic, it was our worst. With Canada shutting off its ports to cruise ships and its borders to overland travelers, this summer’s tourism season, just a few short months ago, was looking similarly bleak, risking the livelihood of countless small businesses and workers in this vital sector of our economy. When it became clear that Canadian officials were not going to work with us to help address requirements that stem from an arcane law that requires cruise ships to stop in Canadian ports before heading to Alaska,we got to work to pass legislation to change the law. Cruise ships are now arriving in Alaska, giving our pandemic-decimated small businesses a fighting chance to have a successful tourism season this summer.
B. Willow: The Willow Project in the NPR-A is probably the most important and strategic project for our state since the development of Prudhoe Bay. It is expected to produce upwards of 150,000 barrels of oil per day at peak production, generate $10 billion in revenue for state, local and federal governments, directly create approximately 2,000 construction jobs, with thousands more indirect jobs to support construction. The massive infrastructure of Willow should also open the rest of the NPR-A for further exploration and production opportunities for Alaska for decades to come.
I worked very closely with the Trump Administration to ensure final federal regulatory approval to start the construction phase of Willow this past January. We achieved that, but then like clockwork, the new Biden Administration put it on hold, and, of course, radical environmental groups sued to stop construction from beginning this past January. I raised the importance of this project with every single Biden cabinet nominee up for confirmation, and in so doing was able to convince the administrationto support Willow and defend a lawsuit against this project of vital importance to Alaska. I raised the project with President Biden himself during an Oval Office meeting with the rest of the delegation—including giving him a handout on the project’s importance. And, now Willow is on track to see first oil by 2025. This is a huge victory for Alaska and America’s energy security. But the battle is far from over. Far left anti-Alaska members of Congress recently askedthe Biden Administration to reverse its decision supporting Willow. I will fight such anti-Alaska Democratic policies with all I have.
C. Alaska’s Military: I have beenleading the charge against the Biden Administration’s defunding of our military with its inadequate budget for our troops and their families. Just last week, the Senate Armed Services Committee, on which I sit, delivered an overwhelming rebuke of the persistent attempts by President Biden, Majority Leader Schumer, and Budget Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (yes, it’s true, a socialist is in charge of the U.S budget!) to cut our military, when the Committee overwhelmingly passed a bipartisan amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which I co-sponsored, to require a real increase of 3 percent, or over $25 billion, to the Pentagon’s budget to take care of our troops and their families by making them more lethal.
I’m also glad to report that this NDAAincludes a number of vital provisions that I secured recognizing the strategic importance of Alaska to our nation’s defense, including a new Arctic Security Initiative and approximately $155 million in new military construction for our state. This, of course, is good for our national security, but also an important way to continue to bolster the Alaska economy and help our hard-working families and small businesses.
In fact, since I arrived in the Senate, I’ve been making the case, successfully, that for the defense of our country, we need to build up our military presence, including the Coast Guard, in Alaska. All told, we’ve been able to secure more than $1.7 billion in military construction for Alaska. And I expect that to continue even though many national Democrats would rather cut military funding and readiness.
I get a commitment from all Senate confirmed officials—whether Democrat or Republican—to come to Alaska and see first-hand why the father of the U.S. Air Force, Gen. Billy Mitchell, called Alaska the most strategic location in the world. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin was recently in Alaska, keeping this commitment to me, and was clearly impressed with what he saw. During Secretary Austin’s press conference, the secretary said that his trip served as a “keen reminder how strategically important Alaska is to our national security and defense.” He said that he intends to keep Alaska’s forces “as lethal and as ready as we can,” to “invest appropriately in the infrastructure needed to keep them ready and to keep them vigilant” and to “adapt and modernize our training and the tools that we give our troops up here.”
III. Long Term Battles Ahead
The above issues have been a focus of mine over the past six months because they are so critical to Alaska’s economy and working families. But as a U.S. Senator, I am also focused on the long term battles that are before us, being pushed by many national Democratic elected officials like President Biden, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi that have the potential to negatively impact our great nation for decades to come.
I’m particularly concerned with: The war on American energy production and jobs; the Biden Administration’s open border policies; the national Democrats’ reckless socialist tax and spend policies; the far left’s push to infiltrate American institutions and classrooms with their woke, anti-American culture; and the threat that Communist China posesto our country and the globe. I’ll be discussing these issues and many more in subsequent MRAK columns.
As I said earlier, so much of what we’re facing is new territory for me. I’m sure I’ve made some mistakes and I will no doubt make some more. And I’m just as sure when I do, you’ll continue to let me know, which I appreciate.
But I do want you all to know that everything I do is guided by fidelity to our Constitution, and by the conviction that we live in the best state, in the greatest country in the history of the world. As your Senator, together with all Alaskans, I am working hard to keep it that way.
Sen. Dan Sullivan is a Republican member of Alaska’s congressional delegation.
Last December, I penned an MRAK column challenging Gov. Mike Dunleavy to ensure his administration accomplishes a critical infrastructure project for Alaska, namely a ferry terminal at Cascade Point, 33 miles north of the existing Auke Bay terminal.
While the Dunleavy administration has made some limited progress on this project, the apparent lack of urgency by Gov.Dunleavy’s Department of Transportation is very troubling.
This project has been slow-rolled by DOT despite being fully funded and potentially construction ready. It makes one wonder if this is by design or by a lack of leadership.
Notwithstanding DOT’s extremely slow progress to date, Governor Dunleavy still has an excellent opportunity to not only exhibit leadership but to actually accomplish a ready-to-go critical infrastructure project that is of significant benefit to all Alaskans, not just those in SE Alaska. So, let’s review just why the Governor should make sure it happens without any further delay by asking a few critical questions.
Why is a Ferry Terminal at Cascade Point worth doing?
The principal reasons are:
It eliminates approximately 30 miles of a ferry run that parallels an already existing highway, most of which has been improved in the last several years. That shaves 60 miles off of each round trip;
It reduces operational costs for the Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS), allowing scarce state AMHS dollars to be spent on routes that do not have roads;
It shortens the travel time between Alaska’s State capital Juneau and the road system, as well as Haines and Skagway. That is a positive result not only for the residents of those three communities, but for all Alaska residents and visitors passing through SE Alaska.
It enables the Alaska Class Ferries, specifically designed for the routes between Juneau, Haines and Skagway, to be utilized as designed without expensive modifications; and
The resulting improvement to regional transportation will provide increased economic opportunities for the region and the state, since hard transportation infrastructure is always a critical element for and almost always leads to economic prosperity.
Just how will this project increase regional and statewide prosperity?
Southcentral and interior Alaska businesses already know that efficient and cost-effective transportation systems are critical to their economic health and prosperity. The AMHS is a critical element for their businesses, especially as it relates to tourist traffic. Reducing the travel time and increasing transportation reliability within the northern Lynn Canal corridor will allow for increased commerce between Southeast Alaska and the rest of the State as well as the Canadian Yukon and British Columbia. As such this necessary improvement to the operation the AMHS directly benefits the statewide economy, while putting Alaskans to work constructing the terminal and other related improvements.
Is there funding for a ferry terminal at Cascade Point?
Yes. Several years ago, the legislature appropriated $42 million of state funds to improve Juneau access. Those funds are still available to pay for this project. Right now. No additional legislative approval is needed. But some legislators would like to use those funds for projects in the own districts or to bolster the current unsustainable AMHS model.
Wouldn’t it be better to spend those funds to match federal funding for a road out of Juneau up Lynn Canal rather than a ferry terminal at the north end of the exiting road?
Unfortunately, inasmuch as that project has been proposed, discussed and worked on for more than 50 years without success, the reality is that it is highly unlikely that a road up Lynn Canal will be built anytime in the foreseeable future without a restart of the environmental permitting process.
In the near term, the Biden administration is likely to oppose it even if Juneau, Haines, and Skagway all agreed to support it. But even if a road up Lynn Canal were to move forward, a ferry terminal at Cascade Point would provide a backup should there be road closures for any reason, as called for in the Juneau Access scoping documents.
Cascade Point is owned by Goldbelt, an Alaskan Native Corporation, and not the State. So how can the State have a ferry terminal on Goldbelt’s land?
Goldbelt, as a willing and able partner for this project, has offered at a reasonable cost a long-term land lease to the State for the ferry terminal. In addition, at one point DOT asked if Goldbelt would be interested in building the terminal to lease back to the state. Goldbelt has advised the State that Goldbelt would be very willing to provide the State a such a proposal.
Has Goldbelt provided DOT such a proposal?
To provide a proposal, Goldbelt needed some terminal criteria from DOT. After many months DOT finally provided Goldbelt some criteria and Goldbelt is providing their proposal to DOT.
Absolutely. Governor Dunleavy’s Alaska Marine Highway Working Group lead by Admiral Barrett, the Juneau Chamber of Commerce, the Alaska Committee, First Things First Alaska, and the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 302, in addition to Governor Dunleavy himself, are all on the formal record as supporting this project. In addition, Senate President Peter Micciche, Senate Transportation Committee Chair Rob Meyer, northern southeast Sen. Jesse Kiehl, Juneau Rep. Andi Story, Haines Mayor Doug Olerud, and Juneau Mayor Beth Weldon have all expressed various levels of support. Previous DOT staff charged with analyzing the project have also been supportive.
Is there political opposition to a ferry terminal at Cascade Point? If so, why?
While I have not identified any formal opposition to the project, the ferry unions and those politicians who would prefer to use the funds elsewhere for their own benefit are the likely suspects.
The ferry unions and some politicians appear to want to throw money at an unsustainable ferry model rather than make necessary changes to improve service while reducing costs. But a terminal a Cascade Point does just that. It allows for improved service while reducing costs in both the short and the long term.
In addition, given DOT staff’s slow performance in moving the project forward, it appears that there is likely opposition to the project within the upper to mid-levels of the DOT bureaucracy.
Recently the governor stated on KINY Radio that he supports hard infrastructure projects. Well Governor, a Cascade Point ferry terminal is a fully funded, common sense, budget-wise, politically supported, and beneficial project that you, as Governor, can make happen.
Don’t let the naysayers convince you that Cascade Point is something that can wait for a second term. Successful leaders do not procrastinate or squander silver platter opportunities. This project can and should happen now. It is a win for all Alaskans, you and future generations. “Carpe diem,” Gov. Dunleavy. Exercise some leadership by ensuring your DOT bureaucracy makes it happen without any further delay.
Tom Williams is a 44-year resident of Juneau with both private sector and public sector management and financial experience, including 18 years of Alaska executive and legislative branch service.
“It’s a total win,” said Jim Crawford, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit Thompson vs. Hebdon.
The $500 contribution limit to candidates in Alaska has been struck down by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, after having been partially remanded back to that court by the U.S. Supreme Court.
“We have been at this thing for seven years, and one of the plaintiffs, Aaron Downing, died during that time, and District 18 Republicans withdrew as a plaintiff,” Crawford said. He began the lawsuit when he was chairman of District 18 Republicans.
All that is left to enjoy the victory for free speech is Crawford, who is former chair of the Republican Party and Dave Thompson.
“This evens up the game and that’s why we did it, to even up the game. You’ve got all sorts of liberal groups pumping money into the Democratic Party and their groups, and they limit conservatives to $500 per candidate,” Crawford said.
The men had challenged the State of Alaska’s statute that puts a $500 annual limit on an individual contribution to a political candidate, (2) the $500 limit on an individual contribution to a non- political party group, (3) annual limits on what a political party—including its subdivisions—may contribute to a candidate, and (4) the annual aggregate limit on contributions a candidate may accept from nonresidents of Alaska.
“I have run a lot of campaigns in Alaska. The labor community could always contribute $2,500 to a campaign and do that 87 times, and conservative candidates were limited to 500 bucks from conservative people. We took it all way to the Supreme Court, and they remanded it back to the Ninth and we just won,” he said.
“Plaudits to Robin Brena, a great attorney,” Crawford added. “It’s been seven years we have been on this trail. Based on today’s decision there is no limit to what a donor can contribute to a candidate in Alaska.
The lawsuit started seven years ago with three Republicans — Aaron Downing, now deceased, Jim Crawford, and David Thompson.
“We constantly pushed this thing because it is the right thing to do. Even up the money. then you take politics back to conceptualize and accomplish a program. Let them advertise what they believe. let conservatives advertise. We win almost every time.
They challenged the $500 annual limit on an individual contribution to a political candidate, (2) the $500 limit on an an individual contribution to a non- political party group, (3) annual limits on what a political party—including its subdivisions—may contribute to a candidate, and (4) the annual aggregate limit on contributions a candidate may accept from nonresidents of Alaska.
According to Brena, “the Ninth Circuit panel affirmed its earlier decision with regard to those matters not appealed to the Supreme Court. The Ninth Circuit panel affirmed its earlier decision, in the State of Alaska’s favor, upholding the Alaska $5,000 contribution limit for a political party to a candidate and it also affirmed its earlier decision, in Plaintiffs’ favor, striking down as unconstitutional the Alaska $3,000 contribution limit for total out‑of‑state contributions.”
Issues Reversed: In Plaintiffs’ favor, the Ninth Circuit panel reversed its earlier decision on both issues Plaintiffs appealed to the Supreme Court. The majority panel held that “[w]hen the government restricts speech, it bears the burden of proving the constitutionality of its actions.” It must do so by furthering a “sufficiently important state interest” to avoid “actual quid pro quo corruption or its appearance” and the restriction much be “closely drawn” to that state interest. The majority panel did a detailed application of the five Randall factors, designed to determine the constitutionality of restrictions on free speech imposed by campaign contribution limits, to the facts in Alaska. The majority held Alaska had failed to meet its burden of showing that the $500 individual‑to‑candidate contribution limit and that the $500 individual‑to‑political group contribution limit were not “closely drawn” to meet the state’s interest. In particular, the majority seemed concerned that (1) such restrictive campaign contribution limits would make it too difficult for challengers to raise sufficient funds and run competitive campaigns against incumbents, (2) the annual limits favored incumbents because challengers do not fund raise in off-election years while incumbents do fund raise in off‑election years, (3) there was no inflation adjustment on the campaign contribution limit making it more restrictive over time, and (4) there was no special justification for such restrictive campaign contribution limits. The minority judge on the panel dissented from the majority opinion.
Robin O. Brena and Laura S. Gould with Brena, Bell & Walker, P.C. and Erin Murphy and Paul D. Clement with Kirkland & Ellis LLP represented the Plaintiffs.
Brena said, “It is good day for free speech in Alaska. Alaska’s restrictive campaign contribution limits broadly restricted free speech without serving a legitimate state interest or being narrowly drawn to avoid imposing an unnecessary burden on Alaskan’s rights to free speech. In this age of Citizens United, when large donors may contribute unlimited funds to independent expenditure groups to influence an election, the restrictive campaign contribution limits in Alaska just mean the candidates have a harder time being heard while large, private independent expenditure groups dominate the discussion. We need to protect our rights to free speech and protect our election process for the candidates that are responsible to the voters. The majority on the Ninth Circuit panel provided an excellent constitutional analysis and protected Alaskan’s free speech rights.”
In May, the University of Alaska relaxed its mandate on masks, and said, in line with CDC guidelines, fully vaccinated University of Alaska employees, contractors, students and visitors would no longer be required to wear masks. People who were not fully vaccinated must continue to wear a mask while on university property, at university field sites, and in university vehicles.”
Now, effective Aug. 2, a new mask policy is the old policy:
The use of a face mask or face shield is required on all UAA campuses, regardless of vaccination status. Wearing a mask is of particular importance if in an enclosed room or university vehicle. In classrooms, masks are required at all times.
Masks are also required outdoors if it is not possible to maintain 6 feet of distance from other people and when mandated by an event- or location-specific mitigation plan.
Anyone who visits a UAA campus should wear a mask when entering and exiting facilities, when traveling to and from personal workstations and when work requires meetings or contact with other people. Masks are not required inside a private, on-campus residential unit or when an individual is alone inside a private office with the door shut.
If the state, local government or UA system institute more restrictive requirements, those requirements will supersede this policy. Chancellors may grant exceptions to the masking requirements, based on local conditions and CDC guidance. Chancellors will notify the president and HR of approved exceptions.
Th new policy relies heavily on the cooperation and personal responsibility of the entire UAA community, the university announced.
Whenever possible, concerns about face coverings should be respectfully addressed at the time such concerns arise by informing the individual about this policy and encouraging compliance in a courteous and considerate manner.
There are exemptions for those who can’t wear masks due to a medical condition or specific work requirement or hazard.
As a parent, I’m concerned about the proposed reinstatement of the mask mandates for our children, who will be returning to school in a couple of weeks.
As a public figure, I understand that Superintendent Deena Bishop of the Anchorage School District is in a tough spot. The pressure on her is enormous.
Both the teachers’ union and majority of the school board are bullying her to order children back into masks. It seems all but inevitable that she will do so next week, and masking of our children will be the new normal.
What can parents of public school children who object to this masking policy do?
It’s a series of tradeoffs, most certainly. If you feel the masking of your children has gone too far and will harm their ability to learn, socialize, and enjoy school, perhaps now is the time to find a group of like-minded parents who can co-educate in a shared-responsibility home-school format. It takes time to find such a community of home-schooling parents, and it’s a daunting responsibility. But in Alaska, we are very well adapted to a home-school and hybrid-schooling learning environment.
Not all students will like the stay-home solution. They long for their friends and miss out on the camaraderie of being part of a class moving through the grades together. Children are social beings and need to be exposed to a wide variety of points of view and safe-but-expansive experiences. As imperfect as a school day may be, it is a place for them to stretch, learn, and grow.
Parents can also rise up and refuse to mask their children. Civil disobedience has consequences, too. It subjects children to another kind of pressure – that of having to stand up for their own rights against the very authority that grades them. Bullying by teachers and fellow students will occur. Once a student makes the decision to unmask, he or she will be sent to the nurse’s office and then banished to their home.
Grandstanding is not for the faint of heart. We have to look no further than what government and corporate America has done to the workplace to see what happens to those who do not comply with masks, vaccines, and other mandates.
The pro-maskers are moving quickly so concerned parents who want their children’s faces to be free cannot organize.
This, even though the CDC and the World Health Organization cannot agree on masking children. WHOadvises against masking kids 5 and under, and only masking 6- to 11-year-olds under some circumstances.
The CDC advises masks should be worn by any unvaccinated person over 2 years old in all indoor public spaces.
WHO and CDC are giving completely different advice about masks on children.
The way this mask mandate racket worked last year was incremental and fundamentally incoherent. First came the lockdowns, then the masks combined with nonsensical, partial lockdowns. This year, it may occur in the reverse, as the Biden Administration, already mandating masks, appears perfectly willing to enact a national lockdown for an undetermined period of time, saying that the White House is just following the science.
We know better. It’s not science. This is naked politics. The Biden Administration would have closed the borders long ago if this was really about science. Biden is not quarantining the hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens coming into the country. The floodgates are open on the southern border, and meanwhile, Americans are being told to comply, comply, comply.
Rep. Dan Crenshaw of Texas has it right: “If the CDC, Biden, or any local leader recommends another lockdown, don’t comply. Businesses. Schools. Restaurants. No one should comply.”
Kenai Borough Mayor Charlie Pierce has it right: Don’t even think about putting masks back on children, since they rarely suffer any impact from the Covid-19 virus.
Mayor Dave Bronson also has it right: He has said there will be not be mask mandates on city property during his watch. I agree with him on that.
I also agree with those who believe that masking children is nothing short of criminal child abuse. Don’t do it, Anchorage School Board.
I call on all leaders in Alaska to stand against the masking of our innocent, children, who depend on us to defend them and their rights.
Parents, you can attend the school board meeting on Aug. 3 and voice your concerns. You can email all school board members at [email protected].
The time to weigh in is now, before it is too late. After the decision is made, your options as a parent get very narrow.
Chatter in Juneau is that the Aug. 16 legislative special session, the third this year, will become a coordinated effort between Bill Walker and the Democrats and Walker-aligned Republicans to ensure the Permanent Fund dividend is zero and the Power Cost Equalization is not resolved.
That would put Walker, now 70 years old, in a position to sweep in as the fixer — someone who promises to resolve the standoff.
This talk is in the background, while expectations grow in political circles that Walker, egged on by his former chief of staff Scott Kendall will announce for governor this weekend.
Many Republicans recall that Walker, who ran on saving the Permanent Fund dividend, was actually the one who cut the PFD, both unilaterally and through political bargaining. He put half of the dividend in the Earnings Reserve Account, saying the State needed it for government programs. It sat there, unspent. Ever since then, the dividend has been a political football.
Walker’s surrogates are lining up. Kendall has been suing Gov. Mike Dunleavy since he took office, and quickly organized the recall effort, starting in February of 2019, when Dunleavy submitted his first budget, which was Dunleavy’ first attempt to trim the sails of the budget. Kendall has sued the governor multiple times, most recently on behalf of Alaska Federation of Natives over the Power Cost Equalization fund, which the Legislature did not replenish this year.
Over at the Ship Creek Group, a restructuring has taken place. John Henry-Heckendorn, who ran Walker’s last campaign, is back at the helm, and he has rearranged the Democrat political campaign consultancy to be a plug-and-play team for a Walker campaign.
Heckendorn left the state after Walker’s stinging re-election loss in 2018 (Walker withdrew in the final few days of October), and went to work for AirBnB in San Francisco. But after the pandemic hit the hospitality market, he eased back into Alaska to return to political work.
Sources say he and Kendall have been in conversations with former boss Gov. Bill Walker and Donna Walker, who is a key player in Walker World.
Ship Creek Group landed on the scene in 2015 to turn Alaska blue. At the end of 2018, SCG had had a terrible run — backing some disastrous candidates who won, but then prematurely ejected from public life: Rep. Zach Fansler and Rep. Dean Westlake, both of whom were picked by Ship Creek Group as ways to control the rural Alaska vote. There was also Rep. Justin Parish of Juneau, who also left the scene quickly on the “me-too” wave with Westlake and Fanlser.
After Heckendorn left the state, the business continued with Managing Partner Allie Banwell and Operations Manager Jenny-Marie Stryker. Those two — and all the founders but Heckendorn himself — are gone now.
In the campaign consultancy world, consultants must “eat what they kill.” And so for 2022, Ship Creek Group is reorganized with four “managing partners.”
Kim Jones: Jones was Finance Director for Alyse Galvin for Congress in 2020 and worked as a fundraising consultant for municipal races in 2021. (Alyse was spotted recently hobnobbing with leftwing strategist Jim Lottsfeldt, who gave Heckendorn his political start in the state. The plot thickens.)
Alexandria “Alex” Murphy: She was a deputy treasurer for Ballot Measure 2’s Alaskans for Better Elections, a Scott Kendall production.
Ira Slomski-Pritz: He came to Ship Creek Group after five years working in municipal and state government in Alaska. He was a special assistant to the Gov. Bill Walker’s Chief of Staff Scott Kendall, who has led the recall campaign against Dunleavy. Pritz was the LGBTQ coordinator for the former failed mayorEthan Berkowitz of Anchorage.
Allie Banwell is gone as managing partner. Also gone are former founder Josh Corbett, and Rafi Bildner and Paula Delaiarro, who came in early held the firm together after Heckendorn headed for San Francisco.
Walker will be a tough sell. His crowning achievement was nationalizing the Alaska Gasline, and then nearly giving it away to the most oppressive regime in the world, the Chinese.
How will a guy like Walker do in a ranked-choice ballot environment, (also another deliverable by Kendall, who brought it to the ballot with millions of dollars of Outside money to convince voters to approve it) will be tested by pollsters in the weeks ahead. Meanwhile, while Walker has maintained a low profile, he has been lining up support of some of the heavy hitters with deep pockets.
Dunleavy’s approval rating among voters has rebounded to well over 50 percent, in part because he took a more DeSantis (Florida governor) approach to managing the pandemic, balancing personal freedom with public safety and health.
Is this the weekend Walker will announce? Must Read Alaska readers, what are your thoughts?
