Wednesday, October 14, 2026
Home Blog Page 14

Opinion: The untapped giants of the North

1

This article was first published by 907 Honest on August 10, 2026.

In an earlier article, we followed Harold Heinze from the secret decoding of the first North Slope discovery wells to the engineering breakthroughs that made Arctic oil production possible. His generation proved the resource was there and built the discipline to extract it without destroying the tundra. Fifty years later the same geologic province still holds some of the largest remaining undiscovered energy reserves in North America.

Extensive assessments from more than thirty independent sources confirm that Arctic Alaska and the adjacent Canadian margin contain staggering volumes of oil and gas with high geologic certainty. The Arctic Alaska Platform, the crown jewel, carries a geologic probability of 1.0 and a mean of 27.8 billion barrels of undiscovered oil plus roughly 160 trillion cubic feet of gas, driven by world-class source rocks including the Triassic Shublik Formation, Jurassic Kingak Shale, and Lower Cretaceous units.

Immediately offshore, the Canning-Mackenzie Deformed Margin adds another 6.4 billion barrels of oil and nearly 36 trillion cubic feet of gas at the same 1.0 probability. Inland, the Arctic Alaska Fold-and-Thrust Belt is predominantly a gas province with more than 61 trillion cubic feet of gas and 2.1 billion barrels of oil. On the Canadian side of the Amerasia Basin the passive margin, though higher risk at probability 0.54, still holds 2.4 billion barrels of oil and 15 trillion cubic feet of gas. Arctic Alaska alone points to nearly 30 billion barrels of oil and more than 220 trillion cubic feet of gas. The top three assessment units carry rock-solid geologic probabilities of 1.0. The hydrocarbons are there.

What remains unfinished is the same work Heinze’s generation began: converting a depletable Arctic resource into lasting value under the harshest conditions on earth. The operational environment, infrastructure gaps, and economics remain formidable. The engineering discipline that once solved the 140-degree “hot oil” problem and kept the tundra frozen must now be applied at a new scale. The foundations of data-driven exploration, Arctic engineering standards, and the principle that resource wealth must become permanent wealth still shape the choices ahead.

These Arctic “untapped giants” hold the potential to restore and expand that original promise for future generations. Nearly 30 billion barrels of oil and more than 220 trillion cubic feet of gas, with probabilities of 1.0 for the largest units, represent the next chapter of the story Heinze helped write. Under the Alaska Constitution, at least 25 percent of mineral lease rentals, royalties, and related payments, and 50 percent for post-1979 leases, must enter the Permanent Fund principal. Those deposits grow the principal, generate earnings in the Earnings Reserve Account, and support the Percent of Market Value draw that funds both state services and the Permanent Fund Dividend. Larger principal means larger sustainable draws and greater capacity for meaningful dividends.

Prudhoe Bay’s original 10–15 billion barrels of recoverable oil built the entire Fund that stands at more than $91 billion today. The Arctic Alaska Platform alone is assessed at nearly twice that volume. Even a fraction of these resources, once produced, would deliver royalty streams measured in tens of billions of dollars into the principal over decades. Gas from the Fold-and-Thrust Belt and Platform, well over 200 trillion cubic feet, would add revenues that currently do not exist and follow the same constitutional path.

For future generations the benefits are direct and quantifiable. New royalties enlarge the principal that belongs to children not yet born, the exact purpose of the 1976 constitutional amendment. A larger Fund supports higher, more stable draws, reducing pressure to treat the Dividend as a discretionary tool and making full statutory or higher payouts feasible. As existing fields decline, new Arctic volumes can keep the contribution engine running. Development would also multiply jobs, local spending, and rural activity; 90% of Dividend dollars already circulate inside Alaska, so a larger Dividend amplifies that effect for the next generation of families, education, and enterprise.

These resources remain undiscovered and only technically recoverable. Timelines from lease to first production routinely span 15–30 years. Infrastructure gaps, costs, permitting, and markets will decide how much is ever produced. Not every barrel or cubic foot will be economic. Yet the geologic certainty of the largest units is among the highest remaining on the continent.

In “Opinion: Oil & gas history every Alaskan should know,” I discussed the foundations Heinze helped build. In “Opinion: The great dividend diversion and its impact on Alaskan households,” I discussed how diversions have already transferred tens of billions away from households. The untapped Arctic giants offer a chance to reverse that trajectory, if the same discipline that once kept the tundra frozen for oil development is applied to exploration, development, and the strict constitutional deposit of royalties into the Permanent Fund. If even a meaningful portion comes online under the original ownership rules, future Alaskans will inherit a larger permanent endowment rather than a depleted one. More principal, more earnings capacity, and a stronger claim by every future resident on the wealth that still lies under the North. The hydrocarbons are there. Whether they become permanent wealth for the next generation remains our choice.

Verified: Homeless camps have not returned to 17 previously persistent homeless hubs in Anchorage

3

In March of this year, Anchorage Assembly Chairman Christopher Constant published a press release claiming Anchorage had zero major homeless camps for the first time in over a decade. He stated that he had personally driven to 17 sites where major homeless camps had persistently entrenched themselves. “What I found was amazing: the large, entrenched encampments are gone,” he stated. Must Read Alaska said we would visit those same sites in the summer to verify conditions. We found the claim checks out.

On August 27, 2026, Natalie Spaulding verified there are no visible homeless encampments at these 17 sites in the Anchorage bowl:

  • Third and Ingra at the old Alaska Native Services Hospital site.
  • Coastal Trail and Chester Creek Greenbelt
  • Sullivan Arena
  • Centennial Park
  • C Street Greenbelt near Central Lutheran Church
  • Campbell Creek Greenbelt
  • Taku Lake
  • AKDOT&PF rights of way including 36th Avenue and Seward Highway, Rogers Park, Greenbelt, Fireweed and Arctic, and many more
  • Ure Park
  • Northwood and 45th Avenue
  • Denali Park Strip
  • Cuddy Park
  • Post Road and Commercial
  • Russian Jack Springs Park
  • Fairbanks Street
  • Valley of the Moon Park
  • Davis Park and the Snow Dump in Mountain View

Individual homeless or potentially homeless persons were seen in several areas of Anchorage, primarily downtown. Encampments of two or more occupied tents were not observed at any of the 17 sites or any other location while traveling to these sites.

The Anchorage Police Department has played a major role in cleaning up homeless encampments through their Community Action Policing Team, whose job includes “addressing and enforcing illegal campsites, including coordinating Homeless Camp abatements and camp clean-up with Anchorage Parks & Rec.” Residents can use APD’s online reporting tool to report homeless camps and camp-related trash.

Since 2016, the Municipality of Anchorage has used general fund appropriations, federal grants, state aid, and revenue from the alcohol tax to redistribute taxpayer money for the benefit of the city’s homeless population. According to a fact sheet published by the Anchorage Assembly, a total of $279,555,062 has been used over the past ten years to address homelessness. From 2020-2025, 549 shelter units were funded by the MOA.

Special public meeting for Safer Seward Highway project

0

The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities is considering a $1.4 billion project to widen the Seward Highway between Bird Flats and Rabbit Creek to accommodate a median between north- and south-bound traffic lanes, extra space for falling rock and ice, additional turn pockets and travel lanes, and a separate multi-use passage for pedestrians and non-motorized use. The public is invited to an in-person meeting on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, or a virtual meeting on Wednesday, September 23, to discuss the Safer Seward Highway project details and current analysis.

The Safer Seward Highway project seeks to decommission the section of the highway between Bird Flats and Rabbit Creek as a Safety Corridor. It was first designated a Safety Corridor in 2006 due to a higher rate of fatal and major-injury crashes than similar corridors
in the state.

According to the project fact sheet provided by DOT&PF, the project mitigates safety concerns in this ways:

  • Curve flattening
  • Rock and ice fall mitigation
  • Wider shoulders
  • Divided highway
  • Increased line of sight
  • Adding turning lanes and acceleration/
    merge lanes

Total cost is estimated at $1.4 billion over 10 to 20 years, occurring in stages of approximately $150 million at a time. Funding is expected through the National Highway Performance Program and other federal grants.

Meeting Details

Date: Tuesday September 22, 2026
Time: 5:00–7:00 p.m., with a presentation at 5:30 p.m.
Location: Anchorage Loussac Library, Learning Commons, 3600 Denali Street, Anchorage, AK 99503There will be a presentation at 5:30 p.m., followed by Q&A. Snacks will be provided.
Virtual Public Meeting: Wednesday, September 23, 2026, from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m., with a presentation starting at 5:00 p.m. The same information from the public meeting will also be presented virtually.
Public comment period: September 22-October 22, 2026

View the details and submit comments at: safersewardhighway.com

Learn more or comment:

Opinion: The long quest for government realignment part II

2

The Vote We Missed and the Petition We Lost

While Eagle River–Chugiak residents believed they were part of a separate borough, the Greater Anchorage Area Borough proceeded with the process that would unify the borough and the City of Anchorage.

Because Eagle River–Chugiak was then regarded as being outside the Greater Anchorage Area Borough, its residents did not participate in the February 11, 1975 election selecting the Anchorage Charter Commission. After Abrams invalidated the separate borough, the area returned to the Greater Anchorage Area Borough while the unification process was already underway. Jordan v. Reed later held that the exclusion of Eagle River–Chugiak voters did not invalidate the charter process because officials had acted upon the borough’s apparently lawful separate status at the time.

This produced one of the enduring ironies of the Eagle River–Chugiak story. Residents were excluded from part of the Anchorage unification process because they were considered members of a separate borough, but their borough was subsequently invalidated and the area became part of the unified Municipality.

The point is not that Anchorage unification was therefore unlawful. The courts rejected that conclusion. The more restrained historical observation is that Eagle River–Chugiak entered the unified Municipality through an unusual sequence of legislative action, judicial invalidation, and municipal reorganization.

The irony is that Eagle River–Chugiak became part of the unified Municipality not through a clear and lasting vote to join Anchorage, but through an unusual sequence in which residents first voted for their own borough, were then excluded from part of Anchorage’s unification process because that borough was considered legally separate, and ultimately found themselves incorporated into the new Municipality only after their borough was struck down by the courts.

The 1975 Local Boundary Commission Petition

After Abrams, supporters did what the Supreme Court’s reasoning contemplated: they pursued the generally applicable Local Boundary Commission process.

In July 1975, petitions were submitted requesting detachment of the Chugiak–Eagle River area from the Greater Anchorage Area Borough and subsequent incorporation as a second-class borough. The Department of Community and Regional Affairs found the petitions to be in proper form in September. The Local Boundary Commission held a public hearing at Chugiak High School on October 29 and conducted its decisional meeting on December 11, 1975.

The Commission denied the petitions. It found that the proposed area was culturally, socially, and economically integral to Anchorage and therefore did not satisfy the applicable detachment and incorporation standards.

That decision closed the first sustained chapter of the effort. It did not, however, erase the underlying question.

The Commission evaluated a relatively small and developing community in 1975. Eagle River–Chugiak’s later population, tax base, schools, commercial centers, road systems, public institutions and service structures did not yet exist in their present form. A conclusion concerning integration and municipal capacity in 1975 was necessarily based upon the conditions of 1975.

Governmental boundaries may endure, but the facts underlying them do not remain frozen.

The Quiet Persistence of Local Distinction

For many years after the 1975 decision, the movement did not maintain a continuous formal organization. Nevertheless, Eagle River–Chugiak continued to develop institutions that reflected its separate geography and service needs.

Road maintenance, parks and recreation, community planning and other services came to be addressed through local service areas, advisory bodies or geographically distinct arrangements. The Municipality itself currently recognizes dedicated Eagle River–Chugiak institutions, including the Chugiak-Birchwood-Eagle River Rural Road Service Area, the Eagle River Parks and Recreation Board, and the Chugiak-Eagle River Advisory Board.

These arrangements did not create an independent government. They did, however, reveal a continuing practical reality: administering Eagle River–Chugiak often required structures different from those used in the Anchorage Bowl.

The resulting system became a partial accommodation. It allowed some localized services while leaving ultimate boroughwide authority over taxation, education, land use, public safety, budgeting and other major governmental functions within the unified Municipality.

That system worked well enough to endure, but not well enough to make the boundary question disappear.

The 2006–2007 Fiscal Inquiry

The issue resurfaced publicly in the mid-2000s.

In 2006, the Anchorage Assembly adopted Resolution AR 2006-152 supporting studies of the economic feasibility and financial effects of separating the greater Chugiak–Eagle River area from the Municipality. The resolution itself recognized greater Chugiak–Eagle River as a distinct geographic area.

The resulting 2007 fiscal study marked an important transition in the history of the effort. The question was no longer confined to community identity or political sentiment. It was examined through municipal revenues, expenditures, property taxes, education costs, debt, assets, liabilities, and the fiscal effect on both a prospective Eagle River–Chugiak Borough and the remaining Municipality of Anchorage.

The study described its purpose as providing an independent and impartial analysis of both the fiscal feasibility of detachment and incorporation and the effects upon the hypothetical remnant Municipality. It attempted an “apples to apples” comparison under which residents of the new borough would initially receive access to service levels comparable to those provided by the Municipality.

By 2007, the question had changed. Eagle River–Chugiak was no longer asking only whether it possessed a distinct identity or whether residents desired greater local control. The harder question was whether a separate government could actually work and what separation would mean for Anchorage as well.

The fiscal study did not answer every question, nor did it produce another petition. But it left behind something more consequential: a framework for the questions that any future effort would have to confront. In retrospect, each earlier episode had contributed something to the effort that followed. The 1974 borough demonstrated the depth of the community’s desire for self-government; Abrams established the necessity of proceeding through the generally applicable constitutional and statutory process; the 1975 Local Boundary Commission decision identified the standards a future petition would have to confront; and the 2007 fiscal inquiry forced the financial consequences for both Eagle River–Chugiak and Anchorage into the center of the discussion. More than a decade would pass before another generation attempted to bring those accumulated lessons together into a workable plan of government.

Previous in Series

HEX partners with Tyonek Native Corporation for oil and gas development on 5,000 acres of Tyonek lands

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — August 27, 2026 — Tyonek Native Corporation (Tyonek) and HEX LLC (HEX) have entered into a long-term Agreement to advance responsible energy development and opportunities in the Cook Inlet region. The agreement establishes a framework for responsible oil and gas exploration, development, and production activities on Tyonek-owned lands.

The agreement grants Alaskan-owned HEX access to over 5,000 acres of Tyonek surface estate while ensuring strong protection for environmental stewardship, subsistence resources, cultural values, and the interests of Tyonek shareholders.

“As a locally owned Alaska company with an existing presence on the Kenai Peninsula, we are excited to partner with Tyonek Native Corporation on this important initiative,” said John Hendrix, President and CEO of HEX. “We greatly value the opportunity to work with Tyonek and its shareholders as we advance exploration efforts, create potential economic opportunities for the region, and ensure that stewardship of the land, respect for subsistence traditions, and environmental protection remain at the forefront of our operations.”

“We are committed to pursuing economic opportunities that create value for our shareholders while protecting the lands, cultural resources, and subsistence traditions that are central to the Tyonek way of life,” said Stephen Peskosky, CEO of Tyonek Native Corporation. “This agreement reflects a balanced approach that supports responsible resource development alongside strong environmental and community safeguards.”

The agreement reflects a shared commitment to local economic growth, environmental stewardship, and long-term community benefit. The agreement includes provisions designed to maximize economic benefits for Tyonek shareholders and affiliated businesses. HEX has agreed to consider qualified Tyonek shareholders for employment and training opportunities and to provide contracting opportunities to qualified Tyonek subsidiaries and affiliates.

In recognition of the importance of subsistence activities to the Tyonek community, the agreement includes measures to minimize impacts on traditional hunting, fishing, and gathering practices and provides Tyonek with authority to impose additional protections where necessary.

About Tyonek Native Corporation

Tyonek Native Corporation is the Alaska Native village corporation for Tyonek, established under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). Tyonek operates a portfolio of businesses including aerospace and defense manufacturing and services. Tyonek is dedicated to protecting shareholder interests, supporting community development, preserving cultural traditions, and responsibly managing its land and natural resources.

About HEX LLC

HEX LLC is Alaska’s only 100% Alaskan-owned oil and gas producer and operator. The company operates strategic assets and critical infrastructure in Cook Inlet and is pursuing disciplined growth opportunities across Alaska to support long-term in-state energy security and responsible resource development.

In 2025, the company doubled its natural gas production, and its six wells provided 10% of the gas coming from Cook Inlet. Alaskans consume roughly 190 MMcf of natural gas per day on average, based on 70 Bcf in annual Railbelt demand.

HEX is headquartered in Anchorage, Alaska, with operations in Nikiski, Alaska.

Press release provided by HEX, LLC.

Opinion: The great dividend diversion and its impact on Alaskan households

1

This article was first published by 907 Honest on August 8, 2026.

In “Opinion: Oil & gas history every Alaskan should know,” we followed Harold Heinze from the North Slope discovery wells to the creation of the Permanent Fund. His generation treated Alaska’s oil as a depletable asset that had to be converted into permanent wealth for future residents. That philosophy became the Fund itself. The 1982 statutory formula that created the Dividend made every Alaskan a shareholder. It was ownership, not a government program.

That ownership has been dismantled.

The Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend was never a discretionary government program. Rooted in the 1976 constitutional amendment and the 1982 statutory formula, it was a universal ownership right—every Alaskan a shareholder in the state’s resource wealth. The formula delivered transparent, predictable income insulated from annual politics.

Governor Bill Walker’s 2016 line-item veto shattered that social contract. By unilaterally cutting the dividend, the state converted a formula-based entitlement into an ad-hoc appropriation. The result: a two-tiered fiscal reality.

Beginning with the 2016 veto, the state turned a formula-based right into a discretionary budget tool. What followed was the largest reallocation of resource wealth in Alaska history—maybe even American history—roughly $25 billion taken from household economies and redirected to the treasury.

The human cost is not abstract. A single year’s shortfall of nearly $2,000 per person lands as a 15 percent effective tax on a modest-income family of four and barely registers for the highest earners. The poorest Alaskans carry a burden ten times heavier than the wealthiest.

Children are taxed from birth. A child born in 2016 will lose more than $42,000 by age 18—seed capital that was meant for education and the next generation of Alaskan enterprise.

Rural communities feel it first. In places where the cost of living is already two to three times higher, the missing dividend has erased double-digit percentages of household income and pushed poverty higher.

The PFD money closed deficits, shored up pensions, and grew businesses and towns. Alternatives that would have shared the burden—progressive income or sales taxes—were set aside. The path of least resistance became the largest undeclared tax in American history: budgets stabilized by destabilizing family finances, while lining the pockets of NGOs, Unions, and Special Interest Groups.

Fifty years after the foundations Heinze helped build, the oil era’s easy over-achievement is over. The hard work of turning the remaining resource into lasting resident value remains unfinished. The Permanent Fund Dividend is not a free check from the sky. It is the product of decades of deliberate effort by people who understood that resource wealth must become permanent wealth.

Treating it as a discretionary budget tool severs the social contract those people wrote. The foundations are still here. The choice is still ours—though I have very little faith that the current legislature cares about the future of Alaska, and it shows.

Learn More About Alaska’s Permanent Fund Dividend

Check out Must Read Alaska’s series The Great Debate: The People of Alaska vs the Legislature by Jon Faulkner and Michael Tavoliero:

Global oil transports reach half pre-war volume with U.S. controlling southern lane of Strait of Hormuz

After sustaining high oil prices of over $120 a barrel, the United States has managed to maintain control of the southern lane of the Strait of Hormuz, boosting oil transportation volumes to approximately 10 million barrels a day— about half the pre-war volume. Prices have responded by lowering to around $85-$95 a barrel, approximately 25% higher than prices before the start of Operation Epic Fury.

According to reporting by Axios, a U.S. official with direct knowledge of the situation stated: “We have been controlling the southern lane of the Strait of Hormuz for two months now. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps can be a nuisance, but they don’t control the strait. We do.”

A task force operating out of the Army headquarters in Fort Bragg, North Carolina has coordinated with regional Gulf partners to move multiple tankers through the southern lane of the strait all together at a single inbound time and a separate outbound time each day. U.S. Air Force fighter jets protect the ships from Iranian cruise missiles and drones. The operation works in large part due to the U.S. Central Command’s success in degrading Iran’s radar and maritime surveillance systems, hampering Iranian visibility of transits. U.S. officials have said Iran is operating only a few radars and small IRGC fast boats to monitor strait activity.

President Trump launched Operation Epic Fury on February 28, 2026, alongside Israel, seeking to eliminate Iran’s ability to secure nuclear weapons and aid Iranian citizens in securing freedom from an oppressive regime. The operation successfully assassinated the Iranian tyrant Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as well as other Iranian military leaders.

During his thirty-seven years as Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei presided over a deeply oppressive authoritarian regime that systematically deprived the Iranian people of fundamental human rights, political freedoms, and personal autonomy. Under his rule, the regime brutally crushed domestic dissent through arbitrary detentions, widespread torture, and public executions, leaving no space for political opposition, a free press, or independent civil society. Through the violent enforcement of strict religious mandates by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the morality police, his government ruthlessly suppressed women’s rights, targeted religious and ethnic minorities, and violently put down popular uprisings—most notably the 2009 Green Movement, the economic protests of 2019, and the 2022 nationwide “Woman, Life, Freedom” demonstrations, where security forces killed thousands of peaceful protesters and imprisoned tens of thousands more.

Following Khamenei’s assassination, power has largely remained in the hands of the IRGC with increased oppression of civilians, highly restricted press, and increased economic hardship due to Iran’s refusal to relinquish control of the Strait of Hormuz.

Opinion: Christians, have we given up?

There is a growing number of conservative Christians who have decided they are finished with politics in America. They have stopped voting, stopped participating in the process, and in many cases grown apathetic toward governance altogether. What happens when Christians voluntarily surrender their voice?

The reasons are numerous and often understandable. Some are simply exhausted with modern-day politics. Some distrust the process or believe their vote does not matter. Some have watched candidates become turncoat politicians. Others cannot reconcile voting for candidates whose character, temperament, or past conduct is objectionable. Those concerns are real.

However, we must confront a more difficult question: Is withdrawing from the electoral process really the “Christian thing to do?”

Josh Howerton, Senior Pastor of Lakepointe Church in Texas, recently addressed this very question: “Are your conservative values above your Christian values, so that if the conservative thing is ever at odds with the Christian thing, you abandon the Christian thing and do the conservative thing? Or, are your Christian values above your conservative values so that it stands in authority over all?”

His answer is clear: “I’m sticking with the Christian thing.”

That must be our starting point. Our Christianity does not answer to our conservatism; our conservatism must answer to our Christianity. Christianity first. Conservatism second.

Scripture repeatedly addresses leadership, authority, and the consequences of righteous versus unrighteous leadership. Christians are instructed to respect legitimate governing authority. In America, we have something previous generations rarely possessed: a direct voice in determining who exercises that authority. Why would we voluntarily surrender it?

God established institutions of responsibility—the family, the church, and civil government. When responsibility is abandoned, it does not disappear. Someone else fills the space. When Christians abandon their responsibility in public life, Satan does not wait for our endorsement to take over. He is eager to exploit the spaces we surrender—whether our family, our church, or our government.

Government does not stop because Christians become frustrated. Laws are written, policies enacted, judges appointed, schools governed, and families affected. Someone will exercise that authority in place of your absence. As Howerton put it, “When godly people don’t exercise their choices, then godless people will do so.”

Failing to participate does not make an election disappear; it is simply a surrender of our influence over the outcome. When Christians abandon the process, those who reject our values take ground and advance their ungodly causes. They vote, they organize, they recruit candidates, they seek office, and they govern.

Another misconception must also be confronted: some Christians believe voting for a candidate represents blessing that person. It does not. A vote is not a sacrament.

Your ballot does not declare a candidate righteous, nor does it endorse everything that candidate has said or done. You are not choosing a pastor, a Sunday school teacher, or a best friend. You are choosing someone to govern—someone who will advance the values and principles that are dear to us.

The Bible describes many with dramatically different personalities. John the Baptist was hardly polished by modern standards, and Paul could be direct and confrontational. History, meanwhile, offers plenty of pleasant, polished politicians who advanced destructive policies. Politics is not about personalities, niceties, or personal preferences. It is about policies, governance, and the preservation of our values and freedoms.

Niceness is not righteousness. Personality is not policy. Character still matters. Integrity, accountability, a candidate’s record, and whether that person keeps promises all matter. But often we have candidates who fail to meet our ideal package. We are then left with this question: How do we vote for people who’s past and personalities are questionable?

Before Election Day, we must do our homework. It is our responsibility to choose which candidate on the ballot is most likely to advance policies that benefit our children, our communities, our state, and our nation—and vote against those who will most likely cause the most harm.

This is not perfection versus imperfection. It is available choice A versus available choice B.

Practically speaking, it does not matter how many righteous policies a politician may advance. If Christians will not vote, those policies will not move forward. Somebody will show up and vote. Will it be someone who is godly or someone who is ungodly?

Staying home does not “send a message.” Despite believing this is an effective form of silent protest, it is not. No one will hear your message. No one knows you are protesting the election.

If you want better candidates, participate earlier. Recruit them. Support them. Run for office yourself. But refusing to vote does not cancel the election. It simply means the decision is made without your input.

Intentionally or not, we are handing our children and grandchildren a cultural inheritance shaped by the policies resulting from our participation—or our refusal to participate. Candidates disappear, but policies endure for generations. The question is not simply, “Do I like this candidate or that candidate?” It is: Of the candidates available, which is most likely to leave my children and grandchildren a better inheritance?

Christ called us the salt of the earth. Salt does not eliminate decay; it slows it and preserves what is good. That is an important way to understand our responsibility in public life.

Politics cannot save America. Evangelism and discipleship remain more important than politics, but that does not excuse political withdrawal. As salt, we have a responsibility to preserve what is good and slow societal decay where we can. Your vote is one way we exercise that responsibility. Your vote is not a sacrament, it is not a declaration of perfection, nor is it an expression of affection. Your vote is an exercise of responsibility.

To Christians who have stepped away from civic participation: come back. A political party does not deserve your loyalty, and candidates do not deserve your admiration. Yet, your Christian values and responsibility must be greater than your disappointment with politics.

Participate in the electoral process. Help recruit better candidates. Support good candidates. Encourage good people to serve. Consider whether you should run for office. Vote. Vote. Vote.

When Christians withdraw from the electoral process, it simply moves forward without their voice. Our duty demands action. Vote for our children. Vote for our grandchildren. Take a stand. Reclaim the ground we have surrendered. Do not let evil prevail.

Alaska AG Mills announces historic multistate settlement with Meta, requiring implementation of child safety features and $17.1 billion in financial restitution

Today, August 26, 2026, Alaska Attorney General Mills announced a landmark $17.1 billion multistate settlement with Meta Platforms, Inc.—one of the largest state consumer protection settlements in history outside the Big Tobacco settlements of the 1990s. In addition to the payment, Meta must implement a sweeping set of safety features designed to protect children on Instagram and Facebook. The agreement resolves claims by 47 States and D.C., Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands that the company designed Instagram with addictive features, knowingly exposed young users to serious mental harms, and intentionally misled the public about the safety of its platforms, among other things. This settlement is a monumental victory for the protection of America’s children and will fundamentally transform how the entire social media industry designs products for kids and teens. Under the settlement, Alaska will receive around $16 million.

“This settlement was a necessary and imperative step to protect our children,” said Alaska State Governor Mike Dunleavy. “Social media promised us connection and the ability to productively engage with each other in life’s joyful and mundane moments. What social media gave us was a generation of children scarred by bullying, harassment, doom-scrolling and predation. This is a good first step towards protecting our children from online dangers, and I hope we see more actions like this in the future.”

The Department of Law Consumer Protection Unit represented Alaska’s interests in the settlement. Their work helped reach a settlement that included safety features as well as financial restitution.

“As a mom of two, I can’t tell you what a relief this settlement brings to me knowing there will be better safeguards on Meta’s platform to keep teens healthy and positively engaged,” said Acting Alaska Attorney General Cori Mills. “As Attorney General, I am incredibly proud of all the work our consumer protection team brings to Alaskans on these and many other issues. Regardless of political party, attorneys general across the United States have consumer protection teams communicating and working together to tackle some of the largest and most important issues faced by consumers, and it is only through that collaboration that settlements like this are possible. This truly is a historic moment, and I am hopeful it sets the precedent for social media platforms going forward.”

Attorney General Mills also acknowledged that this problem extends well beyond one company and credited Meta for being the first major platform to reach a comprehensive resolution on youth safety.

The settlement requires Meta to implement a series of safety features on Instagram and Facebook, including:

  • Hard cap daily time limits and “Productive Pauses” for children: for its two platforms, Instagram and Facebook, a combined two-hour daily time limit with mandatory pauses after 15 minutes of continuous use and again at 60 and 90 minutes to interrupt endless scrolling.  These limits remain in effect for five years. If Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube adopt comparable terms, the daily limit on each platform will drop to 60 minutes for 10 years.
  • “Nighttime blocks” restricting children’s access from 12:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m.
  • Limited school-time access for children, eliminating push notifications on weekdays from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. during the school year.
  • Robust age assurance measures to more effectively verify the age of young users.
  • Safer, age-appropriate content controls, including stronger safeguards against bullying, content promoting eating disorders, and content related to suicide and self-harm.
  • Stronger, more user-friendly parental controls.
  • Limits on social comparison features, including beauty filters and visible “like” counts, that have been linked to poor mental health outcomes in kids and teens.
  • Both the implementation and efficacy of the features will be regularly assessed by an independent auditor and the settling states.

These are groundbreaking changes to Instagram and Facebook and more significant and comprehensive than previously ordered by any court. And perhaps most importantly, this settlement represents a down payment toward an industry-wide social media experience that allows kids to connect in a healthy way.

Beginning in 2021, nearly every attorney general in the country cooperated to investigate the social media industry for designing and promoting platforms to children and teens despite known harms. After a bipartisan, nationwide investigation found that Meta designed Instagram’s features to addict children while internally documenting the resulting mental health harms and failing to warn parents, attorneys general across the country sued Meta individually or as part of a consolidated federal lawsuit. This settlement resolves those cases and claims by the other settling states and territories. The settlement also resolves the states’ claims against Meta for its sharing of nonpublic information about Facebook users with third parties, like Cambridge Analytica, leading up to the 2016 election.

“Social media has become a near-constant part of teenagers’ lives, and their mental health has declined as they struggle under constant social comparison,” said Assistant Attorney General Helen Mendolia. “This settlement equips parents to limit how Facebook and Instagram disrupt the school day and their kids’ sleep, creating safeguards that encourage teenagers to put down their phones and reengage with the world around them.”  

The attorneys general of Alabama, Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Northern Mariana Islands, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming joined the settlement.

The State encourages any person who believes they were subjected to unfair or deceptive business practices to submit a complaint to the Consumer Protection Unit.

Press release provided by the Alaska Department of Law.