Sunday, April 26, 2026
Home Blog Page 1140

Rep. Kurka explains why he wore his muzzle mask on the House floor

25

Alaska House Rep. Chris Kurka explained in a statement Friday why he turned the House into a circus with his political message mask that reads, “Government Mandated Muzzle.”

He said the drama was included by the House Speaker, Rules chair, and Sergeant of Arms.

“This is a teachable moment,” said Kurka. “Leadership has perfectly illustrated what I said on Monday, that the mask mandate is manifestly not about public health, but about power. Despite the fact that my mask was in full compliance with COVID protocols, now the Speaker wishes to strip me of the ability to dissent.”

Rep. Kurka said he has worn the “Government Mandated Muzzle” mask since his floor speech on Monday, when he took off his mask and was told to leave the House Chambers. He said he has received no objection or complaint until the Friday floor session.

In his statement, Kurka said it’s his believe that “owing to the paucity of science to back up the mask mandate, that masking is itself a political statement. Blocking any alternative messages is an attack on free speech. 

“The Speaker’s power play in shutting down House Floor Session today was especially egregious because the public has already been banned from the building, and this protest is an important public sentiment that needs to be heard as representative of a large group of District 7 constituents, and an even larger group of Alaska voters,” Kurka said.

“Alaskans need to ask themselves why the Speaker of the House would hold the business of the whole State hostage because one Representative expressed dissent. Nothing is more fundamental than our ability to dissent. Shutting down free speech is unacceptable. This is a dangerous game. If the Jefferson Muzzle Awards were still being handed out, I would personally nominate the Speaker,” Kurka said.

Rep. Kurka, Speaker Stutes turn House into clown car over political face mask

31

If Rep. Chris Kurka (Wasilla District 7) wanted to make everyone in the Alaska House of Representatives uncomfortable, he did so on Friday.

Kurka, who opposes having to wear a mask in the Capitol, appeared on the House floor with one that had words on the front: “Government Mandated Muzzle.”

Speaker Louise Stutes decided that was inappropriate attire for the House, according to Uniform Rules, and she told him to either change masks or leave. Kurka refused, and after 45 minutes of House members wasting their time, Stutes adjourned, and said the House will meet on Saturday instead. And Sunday, if necessary, according to sources.

House members in the Republican Minority were deeply embarrassed by the Kurka antics, and said a certain decorum is required to be a legislator, and that Kurka was behaving like a child, demanding that there be a vote on whether or not he could remain in the House Chambers with his special message mask.

“He may not like the rules, and some of us don’t like the rules, but this is a rules-based government. We do things through rules,” said an aide. “He also can’t show up on the House floor dressed like a clown, or with a mask that says ‘F*ck this mask’ if the presiding officer says so.”

But now that horns have been locked between Kurka and the House Speaker, the standoff could proceed through the weekend and beyond, costing the State of Alaska hundreds of thousands of dollars a day.

Some legislators wear cloth face masks with a legislative seal printed on it, while others wear plain black, printed, or surgical masks.

Rep. Sara Rasmussen has begun wearing a clear shield that has cloth bunting around the bottom of it to provide a filter for Covid particles.

The fine set by Legislative Council for violation of the Legislature’s mask mandate is $250 a day. Second fine is $500, but to date no one has been fined.

Last year, Rep. David Eastman was the only House member to wear a face mask, and he chose an N95 mask, and goggles. Some in the building derided him for it. This year, Eastman is wearing a cloth mask that frequently slips out of place, and no goggles.

There is no exact rule on what the mask must look like, and on Ashley Johnson-Barr Day last week, some legislators wore purple masks to honor the memory of the Kotzebue girl who was brutally killed. But the Uniform Rules prohibit political messages on attire on the House floor.

Felix Rivera uses ballot as a campaign brochure to avoid his recall

6

While the Recall Rivera campaign was limited by the Anchorage Municipality to focus its ballot sponsor statement on the narrow substance of its legal recall complaint against Assemblyman Felix Rivera, the assemblyman himself was able to go “off topic” on the ballot statement. Way off topic.

Rivera used the ballot to boast of the many great things he has done while on the Assembly.

Rivera went so off topic, in fact, that he turned the ballot into the equivalent of a campaign brochure. The legality of his statement is now being questioned by critics.

On ballots that went out to voters in his district, Rivera used the ballot to talk about how he was rebuilding the police force, revitalizing the Anchorage economy, and to clean up encampments and house the homeless.

“I have been working hard for you every day and getting results,” Rivera said.

“The global pandemic has affected all our lives. I worked hard to effectively utilize millions of dollars in economic relief for neighbors affected by the pandemic and rental relief to keep families in their homes,” he was allowed to write to persuade voters to vote “no” on his recall.

The actual reason for the recall has nothing to do with police, homeless, or the economy. It has nothing to do with the CARES Act money, or how it was spent, a subject that is now part of a targeted federal audit.

The reason for the recall is that Rivera, as chair of the Assembly, invited chosen people to come into the Assembly Chambers in violation of the Emergency Order that prohibited gatherings of more than 15 people last summer. As protesters stood outside objecting to the closed meetings, Rivera invited selected people to gather inside to testify. After he was informed the meeting was in violation of the mayor’s emergency order, he shrugged and continued to have his select people in attendance.

Recall Rivera advocates say the ballot language allowed for Rivera to defend himself inappropriate, because he discusses aspects wholly unrelated to the recall.

But, in fact, using the ballot this way is allowed by Alaska Statute, which only says,

Sec. 29.26.330. Form of recall ballot.
A recall ballot must contain
     (1) the grounds for recall as stated in 200 words or less on the recall petition;

     (2) a statement by the official named on the recall petition of 200 words or less, if the statement is filed with the clerk for publication and public inspection at least 20 days before the election;

     (3) the following question: “Shall (name of person) be recalled from the office of (office)? Yes [ ] No [ ]”.

The Recall Rivera group gathered signatures and fought the municipality in court to get the question before the District 4 Anchorage voters. The court agreed that the voters must have a right to recall the second-term Assemblyman, who is a former aide to former Mayor Ethan Berkowitz.

Chinese diplomats diss Anchorage and U.S. as a world power during tense day of meetings at Captain Cook Hotel

45

The first day of diplomatic meetings between China and the Biden Administration were contentious, but China got its message across: It no longer considers America the pre-eminent world power that has the moral authority to criticize China for anything.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan met with the diplomats at the Captain Cook Hotel in the first high-level US-China talks for the Biden Administration.

Blinken and his Chinese counterpart were to give two-minute opening remarks. Blinken gave his two minutes, but the Chinese remarks went on for nearly 20 minutes, while Blinken sat and listened to complaints and insults about U.S. policies, and the faults of America’s seemingly fragile democratic system.

“We will … discuss our deep concerns with actions by China, including in Xinjiang, Hong Kong, Taiwan, cyber-attacks on the United States, economic coercion of our allies,” Blinken told the Chinese in his opening remarks. “Each of these actions threaten the rules-based order that maintains global stability.”

China has said it wants a fresh start with the US, after relations had become icy under President Donald Trump. That fresh start was embarrassing to the Biden Administration.

China’s top diplomat Yang Jiechi responded by shaking his head and giving an extended retort in Chinese, which was translated by one of his aides, in which he lashed out at the United States and blamed it for having a struggling democracy, bad treatment of minorities, and lousy foreign and trade policies.

“Well, you can’t blame this problem on somebody else,” Yang said.

“The United States uses its military force and financial hegemony to carry out long arm jurisdiction and suppress other countries,” Yang said. “It abuses so-called notions of national security to obstruct normal trade exchanges, and incite some countries to attack China.”

“I have to tell you what I’m hearing is very different from what you described,” Blinken said. “I’m hearing deep satisfaction that the United States is back, that we’re engaged with our allies and partners. I’m also hearing deep concerns about some of the actions your government is taking.”

Some of the tense exchange was recorded and broadcast by mainstream media:

The Chinese were not particularly happy to be in Alaska, reportedly complaining that it was cold. Anchorage temperatures dipped to -11 Fahrenheit overnight and are expected to reach 18 degrees on Friday, when the talks were said to continue.

“So far, the US’ aggressiveness and disregard for diplomatic protocol, and rapid and sharp counterattacks by the Chinese delegation, have made the world take notice,” the Times noted. It complained that Washington choosing Anchorage as a diplomatic host city was uncomfortable, as it is “one of the coldest places on US soil with a freezing temperature of minus 19 degrees Celsius [-2.2ºF],” the Global Times reported.

Chinese news outlets said the Chinese diplomats considered Alaska neither hospitable nor was the location good diplomatic etiquette.  

“We thought too well of the US; we thought the US would follow the necessary diplomatic protocol… In front of the Chinese side, the US side is not qualified to speak to China from a position of strength,” Yang said to Chinese news outlets.

“The old habit of the US hegemonic behavior of willfully interfering in China’s internal affairs must be changed,” Wang said.

The Global Times lauded Wang and Yang for their “vigorous counterblows to condescending U.S. representatives.” It assessed that the opening remarks of the talks, which will reportedly remain ongoing, were “beyond the expectations of observers” in their severity and bitter tone, blaming President Joe Biden’s diplomats for the acrimony.

Senator Sullivan is on track for Alaska

28

By BOB BELL

I have read several letters to the editor in the Anchorage Democrat Daily News demonizing Sen. Dan Sullivan for being a Republican Party lapdog and other nefarious activities.

They chastise him for voting with the GOP over 90% of the time. Not sure what the other 10% was, but I intend to talk to him about that.

I would like to point out that Sen. Sullivan ran for office on the Republican ticket because he agreed with the Republican platform. It would seem to follow, at least for anyone with common sense, that he would vote to support that platform.

The people of Alaska elected him based on his beliefs in those political ideals and his pledge to vote accordingly. so far he is right on track and all indications are he will continue on that path. There are still some people in politics who represent the people who elected them. They are mostly called Republicans.

So, let us take a look at this party lapdog issue. First, we had the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court vote. All but one of the senate democrats voted no. It would seem that more of them would have had some misgivings about a 30-year-old accusation with no witnesses, no location and no timeline. I am sure many of them did but voted the party line. That would seem a bit lapdogish.

Then we have impeachment one and two. There is the video of then vice-president Biden bragging when he threatened to hold up one billion dollars in aid to Ukraine unless they fire a prosecutor who was investigating his son. So that was not an impeachable offense, but President Trump asking the new Ukraine president to investigate the situation was? All the democrats voted yes.

Now I am not a diplomat, and there are a large number of people in Alaska who will attest to that, but still seems to be a double standard. Again, could this be lapdogism?

Next, we have the second impeachment coming from the house with no investigation, no witnesses and no activation of brain cells. This farce went to the senate where the house prosecutors offered no facts as to President Trumps involvement, showed video of a bunch of brain-dead fools attacking the capitol and then spewed crocodile tears all over the sitting senators. Many of whom were asleep or playing video games on their cell phones. Also, there was the issue of it even being constitutional.

Chief Justice Roberts took a pass on overseeing this sham. Probably because judges tend to not want to be involved in political stunts. Somehow not one democrat was concerned about this, so they all voted yes. Not sure if this is a case of lapdog or just stupid, probably some of both.

I could go on with examples of Democrat party line votes such as Obamacare, but I think the point is made. Those accusing Senr Sullivan of being a lapdog need to look in the mirror and then try to deal with what they see. Living in a glass house has some downsides. The nattering nabobs of negativity can revel in the fact that they now have an incompetent machine democrat in the White House and a spendthrift congress. What more could they want?

I think it is time to dial back the hypocrisy. Sen. Sullivan is voting the way Alaskans want him to. That is why we sent him to the swamp. Also, because none of the rest of us wanted to put up with all the Washington D.C. BS. So, we talked him into doing it. I am sure he will keep up the good work.

Bob Bell is a civil engineer who ran for House in 2012 and is the author of Oh No! We’re Gonna Die Too: More Humorous Tales of Close Calls in Alaska’s Wilderness

Anchorage Assembly sets schedule to spend $100 million from American Rescue Plan Act

The Anchorage Assembly is preparing to receive what it believes will be roughly $100 million from the American Rescue Plan, and has established a public process to keep the public informed about how decisions will be made in spending the money. The Assembly plans to get 20-25% of the funds out the door quickly, but the rest of the process will continue through at least April 27.

The draft schedule of the public process and how you can watch or participate in it:

Friday, March 19, 11:10 am to 5 pm

In-person work session in the Assembly Chambers with meeting live-streamed on YouTube and GCI Channel 9.

  • The Assembly will review assessments of previous allocations and the framework for how the CARES Act money was spent in 2020.
  • The Assembly will meet with various stakeholders, including program operators, business associations, and individual businesses on major programs impacting small business relief, tourism relief, nonprofit relief, and community institutions relief.
  • The Assembly will also discuss initial allocations of about 20-25% of the dollars expected, getting a portion of the federal funding out the door quickly.

Tuesday, March 23, 5 pm

The Regular Assembly Meeting in the Assembly Chambers takes place. During the meeting, the Assembly will introduce a resolution with the initial allocations and set it for a public hearing and a vote, for a special Assembly meeting to take place on Thursday, March 25.

Thursday, March 25, 6 pm

Special Assembly Meeting, in person in the Assembly Chambers, will include a public hearing and vote on a resolution with an initial allocation of 20-25% of the dollars expected.

Friday, March 26, 5-9:30 pm

An in-person work session and town hall in the Assembly Chambers is scheduled, with the meeting live-streamed on YouTube and GCI Channel 9.

  • 5-8 pm, the work session will review federal guidelines and begin discussion to determine allocations aof the remainder of the funds.
  • 8-9:30 pm, a town hall discussion.

Friday, April 9, 5 pm-9:30 pm

An in-person work session and town hall will take place in the Assembly Chambers with the meeting live-streamed on YouTube and GCI Channel 9.

  • 5-8 pm, meeting to discuss and finalize allocations
  • 8-9:30 pm, a town hall discussion

Tuesday, April 13, 5 pm

Regular Assembly Meeting, in-person will take place in the Assembly Chambers with the meeting live-streamed on YouTube and GCI Channel 9.

  • Meeting to introduce the resolution or ordinance with final allocations and set for a public hearing, and vote for a Special Assembly meeting, time uncertain.

Friday, April 23, noon-1 pm

In-person work session and town hall will take place in the Assembly Chambers with the meeting live-streamed on YouTube and GCI Channel 9.

  • Review of resolution or ordinance with final allocations

Tuesday, April 27, 5 pm

Regular Assembly meeting in person will take place in the Assembly Chambers with the meeting live-streamed on YouTube and GCI Channel 9.

  • Public hearing and vote on resolution or ordinance with final allocations.

Win Gruening: The State of the Union is a needed American tradition

9

“Well done is better than well said.”
– Benjamin Franklin’s Poor Richard’s Almanack, 1737

By WIN GRUENING

Polarization and divisiveness continue to define our politics, yet Americans still hope that President Joe Biden will make good on his promise to unite the country.

The president’s Inaugural unity theme and his recent primetime speech were consistent with his campaign rhetoric and how he conducted himself during his long political career – as a moderate, not a rancorous partisan.

But, since the election, many members and supporters of the new administration don’t appear to be getting the same message, as vitriol is hurled at anyone who worked with and for, or even supported, former President Donald Trump. 

Indeed, Biden’s apparent intention of ruling almost exclusively by executive order, the total lack of bi-partisan support for his progressive agenda, and the dismissal of sitting non-partisan appointees run counter to fostering the harmony he claims to promote. 

Compounding this, President Biden’s reluctance to hold press conferences or answer questions about his agenda has further concerned many Americans and a growing number in the media.

This has focused attention on the tradition of the State of the Union Address (or SOTU, as it is sometimes referred) as a way for President Biden to communicate his willingness to heal the divide and improve the state of the union.

Historically, U.S. Presidents have used the SOTU to reassure the nation during times of conflict or dissension and announce new initiatives.

The SOTU is usually delivered in late January to early February.  In the first year of a presidency, it’s officially called an “address to the joint session of Congress” not a State of the Union, although most people still refer to it as the latter.

There’s no set length for the speech. George Washington’s first annual message was the shortest (in words), at 1,089 words. Bill Clinton’s 2000 address was the longest in-person speech, lasting 1hr:28min:49sec.

While the Constitution mandates that the President “shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient” (Article II, section 3), this duty has been performed in many ways. The first two presidents, George Washington and John Adams, appeared before Congress to read the Annual Message themselves.

In 1801, Thomas Jefferson set a new precedent by sending the Annual Message as a document. Clerks read the message into the record to largely empty chambers. Later presidents merely summarized the annual reports of the executive departments rather than offering policy recommendations. 

Over a century later, on December 2, 1913, Woodrow Wilson revived the tradition of delivering the Annual Message to Congress as an in-person speech. He expanded the scope of the annual message, transforming it from a departmental report into a tool to promote his policies.  

The name “State of the Union” began informally in 1942, under Franklin Roosevelt and has been the official title of the address since 1947. 

In 1966, Senator Everett Dirksen and Representative Gerald Ford made a televised joint Republican response to President Lyndon Johnson’s message, an opposition party practice that has since continued.

Ronald Reagan began the tradition of inviting citizens who have recently distinguished themselves in some field of service or endeavor to be personal guests. The President introduces them and recognizes their contributions to the country.

A Biden State of the Union address this year would be unique, both because of the new administration and because it would be the first since the onslaught of the coronavirus pandemic. Regardless of its label, Biden’s address to the nation before a joint session of Congress is sorely overdue.

It’s been a rough year for the country.  During WWII, FDR would gather Americans around their radios to reassure and inform them.  With the pandemic nearly behind us , our new President should similarly summon Americans to their screens (TVs, computers, phones) and use the SOTU platform to clearly identify for them how he is making things better and what specific steps he is taking to unify the country.

We’ve heard Biden talk the talk, now the country needs to see him walk the walk.

Win Gruening retired as the senior vice president in charge of business banking for Key Bank in 2012. He was born and raised in Juneau and graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1970.

Reclaim Midtown: How did we get here in Anchorage? Through repression of dissent

6

By RECLAIM MIDTOWN

For anyone paying attention over the last 10 months, it’s clear the Anchorage Assembly meetings have become an absurd caricature of democracy, a kabuki theater of progressive grandstanding, where the players had locked arms and were dancing quickly stage left toward their predetermined plot points, occasionally interrupted by the pleas of naive citizens full of rage and pathos. 

The comically tragic behavior of the Assembly over the last 10 months have spawned a Superior Court lawsuit over Open Meetings violations. It has spawned expulsions and/or arrests, and a bi-weekly Bingo game in which the progressive Twitterati viciously mock members of the public who attend the meetings.

How’d we get here? 

Was it because Felix Rivera, the Assembly chair with student loan liens who had never held a 9-5 job outside of a Mayor Ethan Berkowitz-appointed position, was in charge? 

Or was it because a core group of hard-left politicians, many of whom were elected by less than a few thousand people, were dolling out $156 million dollars of federal money under the skin-color lens of “equity” to a slew of nonprofits and public projects that had nothing to do with stabilizing failing Anchorage industry?

Like many things in politics, the answer to that question is found in a witches’ brew of competing self interests. The summer cauldron, however, was being heated by a swamp of attorneys, apparatchiks, grifters, and unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. 

It was also being stirred by both a local and national debate among the Woke Supremacists that view America as incapable of self-correcting its history of racism by any means other than dissolving a history of traditions, and customs.

The competing views of the “vocal minority” and their associated concerns of “liberty and freedom” were painted as selfish and mostly incompatible rhetoric, given the more pressing concerns of social justice, equality, and at least initially, sensible public health mandates.  

By summer of 2020, that vocal minority had effectively rallied around three intricately intertwined three events : The Assembly shutting the Assembly chambers to the public during increasingly partisan legislation, diverting millions of CARES act funds to place transient shelters in Midtown, and a surprise end run around the the current protections found in the zoning laws. 

The group also became more visible in the biweekly Assembly meetings, where the previously unchecked actions of the highly partisan, agenda-driven Assembly members (many who only gained office by the vote of less than 10,000 people) were undergoing increased public scrutiny. 

That pushback from the Assembly majority was very public and plainly stated: If you don’t like “our reading of the law,” you’ll have to sue, according to Assemblyman Chris Constant, who had taken time off of making national news harassing a local rabbi, to proffer an interesting new take on inclusive public debate.

But also by that time, the radical core of progressives had shown their ace in their sleeve – the ever-renewing emergency mandates. They rigged the game with an effective quarantine of both Covid-19 and meaningful public involvement in the Assembly meetings.

Also, a cynical reading of municipal code allowed a Torquemada-level torturing of the word “shall,” as in “shall have a special election” into “may.”

That same group of Assembly members happy to divert millions in CARES Act funds suddenly became fiscal conservatives when the possibility of a $650,000 special election was floated. 

Since the emergency mandates were the perfect cover for advancing that hard-left agenda, the proper, prompt vote to replace the empty mayoral seat would have been an unwelcome interruption.

It’s easy to see why. Added to that grievance was the consequences of District 3 voters lacking their lawful representation in the Assembly. This was because the acting mayor’s seat was not replaced. 

Given the amount of rumors surrounding a possible Biden appointment awaiting the acting mayor, there is a real chance those same voters will not get a say in who represents their interests again, as the Assembly will likely appoint that replacement for Austin Quinn-Davidson as well.

In the meantime, the “vocal minority” persists. They are labeled racists. They are labeled homophobes. They are labeled anti-science.

The complicit local news media has begun the same twisting of the “facts” toward that group to swing the mayoral race, reminiscent of the recently outed Washington “Democracy Dies in Darkness” Post that fabricated the actual words spoken by the previous president in a headline-grabbing Georgia elections phone call. 

Facts, meet fact check.

In the end, it’s likely that neither the actual platform of the mayoral candidates will drive the results of the pending election, nor will the facts be what decide the fate of Felix Rivera.

It is a fact, per the Superior Court of Alaska, that as Chair of the Assembly, Felix Rivera can face recall for his failure to address the violation of the COVID mandates during the August meeting. 

Also a fact: Democrats Assemblywoman Meg Zaletel, Sen. Elvi-Gray Jackson, and Rep. Andy Josephson helped finance the court case that attempted to block 4,999 midtown residents from getting their complaints to the ballot.

It’s indisputable that angry demonstrators of the summer were loud and visible when it came to their racial justice cause. Many on the right were angry and quiet about what was going on in their city.

Now it appears that the roles have reversed. And that’s how we got here – one group of people attempting to silence the other.

Reclaim Midtown is a group that arose after the Anchorage Assembly locked the doors to the Assembly meetings and prevented participation by the public in 2020. Over 1,000 Anchorage residents are part of the group.

What does Dunbar mean when he says he wants the city ‘back on track’?

By ANCHORAGE DAILY PLANET

We noted with more than a little interest a headline over a story about Anchorage Assemblyman and mayoral candidate Forrest Dunbar that said he wanted to get the city “back on track.”

Dunbar, one of 15 candidates vying for the city’s top executive post, is an odds-on favorite with the usual suspects on the political Left, and, of course, the city’s unions, whose political action committees invest where they think the money will do the most good. An acolyte of disgraced former Mayor Ethan Berkowitz, he is a blue as blue can be, even saying he believes the U.S. Constitution is “shot through” with racism.

Over the past few years, the city’s small businesses have taken a terrible beating because of city-ordered shutdowns and interminable COVID-19 emergency orders the Assembly – Dunbar included – refused to block or end. The city’s homeless problem has gotten only worse. The Assembly adopted a gasoline tax, and a new alcohol tax went into effect with the Assembly’s blessing. The list goes on.

He appears to believe throwing more money at problems is the answer. One of his campaign aims to is to distribute federal handouts more quickly. Nothing about tax breaks. Nothing about improved services or more efficient government. Nothing about making Anchorage a place that works, with more opportunity and less crime.

And he says he wants to get the city “back on track.”

Our question: Isn’t he – along with the other Left-leaning members of the Assembly – largely responsible for the city wandering off track in the first place?