The second effort to repeal ranked-choice voting began its next big phase on Saturday, with the signature-gathering effort launched at the Governor’s Prayer Breakfast in Anchorage. Petition books have been distributed across the state by the group REPEAL NOW, which is headed up by Bernadette Wilson, Bethany Marcum, and Judy Eledge.
The first effort to repeal ranked-choice voting was vastly outspent by opponents with Outside dark money, yet came within a few hundred signatures from repealing the novel voting method put in place — again, with dark money supporters — in 2020.
REPEAL NOW’s campaign focuses on educating voters about the complexities inherent the RCV system, which is confusing and ends up with many more spoiled and uncounted ballots than regular voting. This time, the REPEAL NOW group is doing a straight repeal of the 2020 law that voters passed through initiative.
The signature-gathering process is formidable. To succeed, REPEAL NOW must collect signatures from at least 10% of the number of voters who participated in the last general election, distributed across three-fourths of Alaska’s House districts. This equates to approximately 35,000 valid signatures statewide.
The next big event where signatures will be gathered will be the Mat-Su Outdoorsman Show, Arpril 11-13 in Wasilla. But other signature books will be circulating in communities from Ketchikan to Utqiagvik.
Once collected, these signatures will be submitted to the Division of Elections for verification. If validated, the repeal measure will appear on the 2026 ballot, allowing Alaskans to vote on whether to retain or discard the RCV system.
The group is now planning to raise funds to educate the public about the choice between the current system of voting in Alaska, which Democrats and Sen. Lisa Murkowski support, and the regular method of voting that American voters have used since voting began in 1788’s with the election of George Washington as the nation’s first president.
Carmela Warfield, chairwoman of the Alaska Republican Party, has issued a forceful call to action in a letter addressed to Senate President Gary Stevens and House Speaker Bryce Edgmon.
In the letter, Warfield expresses urgency and frustration over the lack of legislative movement following President Donald Trump’s executive order titled, “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential.”
Signed more than two months ago, the executive order rescinded over 70 prior sanctions on Alaska’s resource industries and aimed to accelerate responsible development.
Despite this, no tangible progress has been made in the Alaska Legislature to capitalize on the opportunities the order provides, Warfield says in her letter.
“Why hasn’t anything changed in Alaska?” Warfield asks the two leaders of the Democrat-led House and Senate. “Why aren’t hearings on the Executive Order for Alaska, on permitting, and to find ways to unleash Alaska’s extraordinary resource potential being called by committee chairs in the State Senate and State House?”
Warfield emphasizes the necessity of working alongside Gov. Mike Dunleavy to advance projects such as Alaska’s long-debated natural gas pipeline.
She also criticizes the Legislature for focusing on bills she deems less impactful, such as those addressing climate change commissions and bans on disposable food service items, instead of prioritizing economic growth and resource development.
Earlier this month, a bill was filed that would mandate the Governor’s Mansion be rented out like a VRBO rental, whenever the governor is not using it or if the Legislature is not in Juneau.
“We are at a crossroads,” Warfield states, invoking former President Ronald Reagan. “We have an outstanding opportunity before us… Now is the time to choose the path of economic prosperity, quality education, and freedom for Alaskans.”
The letter reflects the growing divide between pro-economy Alaskans wanting rapid resource development and the environmental litigation industry and its adherents, who want to make Alaska more of a national park.
Warfield calls for eliminating new taxes and regulations that she believes are hindering economic progress. She argues that a thriving private sector, fueled by responsible resource development, will provide the necessary revenue to fund education and infrastructure without overburdening Alaskan taxpayers.
Her letter comes as Interior Secretary Doug Burgum recently announced federal steps to expand exploration and development opportunities in Alaska. Yet, Warfield expresses disappointment that state leaders have not taken more proactive steps to collaborate with industry partners and maximize these opportunities.
The letter also highlights concerns over Alaska’s struggling education system. Warfield insists that legislative efforts should be focused on improving outcomes rather than approving spending without a clear path to funding.
“Our students are among the very last in the nation for educational outcomes,” Warfield writes. “We must find ways to responsibly pay for the education our children desperately need.”
Of course, the letter will not be considered by either Stevens or Edgmon, both of whom do not align with Republican values. Nevertheless, Warfield’s letter reminds Alaskans that state leaders must decide whether to act on Alaska’s behalf, or bend to the no-development Democrats who now control the Legislature.
The US Supreme Court is set to hear a case on April 2 that could transform how states like Alaska distribute taxpayer dollar funds to Planned Parenthood, the nation’s and Alaska’s largest abortion provider.
The case, Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, originates in South Carolina, where in 2018 state officials attempted to exclude Planned Parenthood from the state’s Medicaid program. The decision was challenged by pro-abortionists.
Now, the Supreme Court ruling, which would not likely come until late summer, could have national implications, including in Alaska, where past efforts to defund the organization have faced legal hurdles.
In 2019, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy attempted to veto $334,000 in state Medicaid funding for Planned Parenthood, citing taxpayer opposition to subsidizing abortion services. However, the Alaska Supreme Court overruled his decision, reaffirming that state Medicaid funds must cover abortions under the court’s interpretation of the Alaska Constitution’s privacy protections. If South Carolina prevails at the US Supreme Court, it could set a precedent empowering states like Alaska to take similar action.
South Carolina’s argument is that states should have the authority to determine which healthcare providers receive Medicaid funding, particularly when it comes to organizations that perform abortions. Alliance Defending Freedom, representing the state, contends Medicaid payments for Planned Parenthood’s general overhead indirectly free up other funds for abortion services.
Planned Parenthood asserts that excluding it from Medicaid violates the program’s free-choice-of-provider provision, which allows patients to select their own healthcare providers. The organization points to its broader range of services, including cancer screenings, contraception, and pregnancy counseling, as essential resources for low-income Medicaid recipients.
However, data shows that Planned Parenthood’s focus has shifted in recent years, with a decline in cancer screenings and an increase in transgender-related services. In 2022, the organization reported performing 392,715 abortions nationwide—a 5% increase from the previous year. Cancer screening have dropped. In the past decade, total cancer screening and prevention services at Planned Parenthood dropped by approximately 71%, including a 72% decline in breast exams and a 74% decline in Pap tests from 2010 to the 2021-2022 service year. The big growth area for Planned Parenthood is transgenderism.
The Supreme Court case comes as Planned Parenthood faces financial difficulties. The organization’s Greater New York affiliate recently closed five clinics in a year due to budget constraints, and Planned Parenthood of Northern New England has projected an $8.6 million deficit over three years.
In Alaska, Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest has already scaled back by one third. The closure of the Juneau clinic in November 2024 left only two locations in the state — one in Anchorage and another in Fairbanks. Like other affiliates, Alaska’s clinics rely heavily on Medicaid reimbursements and federal Title X funding.
Adding to the financial strain, the Trump Administration recently announced a $20 million freeze on Title X grants as part of a broader $120 million review of Planned Parenthood’s DEI policies.
While abortion remains legal in Alaska due to state court rulings, many Christians and libertarian-leaning Alaskans oppose using taxpayer dollars for abortion services. If the Supreme Court sides with South Carolina, it could provide Alaska’s leaders with new legal leverage to restrict Medicaid funds from flowing to Planned Parenthood.
Planned Parenthood, however, remains a financially powerful entity and spends much of its money on political lobbying and advocacy. It received nearly $700 million in taxpayer funds in 2022-23, mostly through Medicaid. Despite its financial dependency on US taxpayers, the national organization still holds $2.5 billion in assets and pays its CEO more than $680,000 annually.
Last Friday, Rep. Ky Holland stood up on the House floor to sound the alarm about the so-called “civic economy.” He warned that cutting federal jobs — like President Trump has promised — will cripple communities, tank the free market, and send us all into economic free fall.
Let’s look at that a bit. Alaskans don’t fall for scare tactics without evidence, and history tells us that a leaner government doesn’t kill the economy; in fact, it strengthens it.
First, let’s start with a definition. What is a “civic economy”? It’s not some new DC buzzword, it is not an economic term, and it is not one that economists or scholars use.
Generally speaking, it’s just people getting things done together — whether it’s a Kenai Peninsula co-op selling local beef or Big Lake neighbors pitching in to build a boat ramp. It’s regular folks, not bureaucrats, improving their communities without government handholding.
The free market? That’s the bigger animal in the discussion. It is not, as Holland suggested, subservient to a civic economy. The free market is supply, demand, competition, and the freedom to turn hard work into success. The civic economy is actually an ancillary part of that, not the thing keeping it alive.
The big fear of many people right now is that cutting federal jobs — maybe as many as 200,000 if Trump sticks to his past plans – will gut local projects and send the free market into a tailspin. The Democrats, liberals, and big-government independents claim federal workers and grants are the glue holding communities together.
Sorry, folks, history proves that’s nonsense. Let’s look at the cuts of a famous Democrat president in the 1990s.
Under President Bill Clinton, the government slashed over 377,000 federal civilian jobs — some estimates put it as high as 426,000. That’s 17-20% of the federal workforce. Most of those cuts came through buyouts, early retirements, or voluntary exits. In fact, only about 20,000 federal employees were forced out.
Did the economy crash? Hardly. The private sector actually boomed, adding 22.7 million jobs. Unemployment hit a 30-year low, GDP grew 35%, and we had four straight years of budget surpluses—the only ones since 1969. The national debt? It shrank from 47.8% of GDP in 1993 to 31.4% by 2001. Instead of collapsing, the free market thrived. America thrived!
Fast forward to today. The federal workforce is still sitting at 2.1 million civilians—a tiny fraction of the 155 million workers in America. A 10% cut (about 200,000 jobs) barely moves the needle in a $27 trillion economy. To put it in perspective, 20 million jobs were lost in a single month in 2020, and the economy still bounced back. I know it hurts some of our friends and family, and I understand the angst in a government town like Juneau or even a government state like Alaska, but if a real crisis like that didn’t destroy the free market, some federal job cuts won’t either.
And the civic economy isn’t dependent on federal paychecks. In 2023, US nonprofits pulled in $2.6 trillion, and only a third of that came from government funding—mostly at the state and local level, not DC. The rest came from private donations, local businesses, and good old-fashioned hard work. Co-ops and community projects don’t need a bureaucrat in Virginia to survive; they run on members, markets, and local initiative.
Clinton’s job cuts came alongside tax hikes on the wealthy and spending reductions in defense and welfare. The result? The economy grew, revenues climbed, and businesses thrived. The civic economy didn’t collapse—people adapted, just like they always do and America boomed.
I have heard some argue, “But what about federal grants? Won’t cutting them kill local projects?” Not likely. After 2008, when the feds tightened spending, private crowdfunding exploded. By 2012, crowdfunding had hit $1.6 billion—funding everything from community centers to small businesses. Less government doesn’t mean people give up; it means they step up. That’s freedom, not failure.
And let’s not forget that a smaller federal government actually strengthens the civic economy. Fewer regulations mean it’s easier to start a co-op, pool local funds, and launch new businesses. Less interference from Washington means communities lean on each other, not bureaucrats. That’s the Alaskan way. Less government equals more liberty. Why do progressives have such a hard time with that concept?
Rep. Holland and others can wring their hands and worry all they want; publishing lists of jobs lost, and offices affected, but the facts are clear – the civic economy isn’t held together by federal jobs, and the free market isn’t fragile. Trump’s reductions in force might shuffle some desks in Washington, or even in Alaska, but they won’t sink Main Street or Wall Street. If anything, they’ll open up more opportunity for innovation, local control, and private-sector growth. Clinton’s cuts trimmed government waste, fueled economic expansion, and even reduced the national debt. There’s no reason to believe history won’t repeat itself.
Change can make people nervous — I get that. But this country wasn’t built on government paychecks. It was built on self-reliance, hard work, and the drive to make things happen without Washington’s permission. That’s the Alaskan way, and it’s the American way too.
Rep. Kevin McCabe serves in the Alaska Legislature for Big Lake, District 30.
Tim Walz, the former Democratic running mate with presidential candidate Kamala Harris, told a crowd on Friday that it’s time to form a “shadow government,” and hold alternate press conferences.
TIM WALZ: "I think we need a shadow government so when all these things come up, every single day, we have an alternate press conference telling the truth about what things are happening."
“We see one of the first things they do is try and restrict the vote,” the Minnesota governor said. “This is one of the things, though, that this is going to take power industry to — I don’t know what the answer is on this, but I’m kind of — I’ve been saying this: I think we need a shadow government, so when all these things come up every single day, we’ve got an alternate press conference telling the truth about what things are happening, tell them what’s going on.”
In other words, this is not the first time Walz has said there needs to be a shadow government. It’s something, he says, “I’ve been saying.”
Walz was speaking in Eau Claire, Wisconsin at a town hall meeting, where he doubled down on unpopular Democrat policies.
“We let them define the issue on DEI. And we let them define what woke is. We got ourselves in this mess because we weren’t bold enough to stand up and say ‘You’re d*** right, we’re proud of these policies. We’re gonna put them in, and we’re gonna execute them,’” he said. He went on to suggest that all Democrats need is a coordinated messaging strategy that can reach the masses.
In an era when leftists vandalize historic statues, national monuments, and even Tesla cars, a recent House Bill by State Representative Will Stapp to rent out the Alaska Governor’s Mansion during periods of non-use has opened up a debate, particularly regarding the security risks such a measure could introduce.
House Bill 139 aims to generate revenue by allowing short-term rentals of the historic residence when the governor is not present and the Legislature is not in session.
The primary concern centers on the security of the governor and his family. The Governor’s Mansion is not merely a residence but a secured facility designed to protect the state’s highest executive and his or her loved ones and guests.
Introducing short-term tenants into this environment could compromise security. Even with thorough background checks, the transient nature of short-term rentals increases the risk of unauthorized individuals gaining intimate knowledge of the property’s layout and security measures, and poses a significant risk to the governor.
Multiple types of misuse could occur, including:
Surveillance and intelligence gathering: Individuals with malicious intent could use a stay to gather sensitive information about the mansion’s security systems, potentially planning future breaches or attacks. A bug placed in the mansion might go undetected after the building is swept for bugs after the renter leaves.
Unauthorized access, theft, vandalism: Renters might attempt to access restricted areas within the mansion, leading to potential theft or damage of state property. There are numerous works of art in the public areas of the mansion that have enormous value.
Illicit substances, poisons, hallucinogens, or bedbugs: Persons with intent to harm could leave behind substances such as cocaine, methamphetamine, fentanyl, or even poisons like anthrax or cyanide. Someone could smear LSD on flatware or silverware. A bad actor could bring in cockroaches, fleas, ticks, or even rodents, and leave them behind.
The possibility of renters engaging in inappropriate behavior or conducting illegal activities could tarnish the reputation of a sitting governor and the state itself. A person might rent the mansion for a “wedding,” when in fact the person intends to film a porn video or use the occasion to deface or desecrate the property.
Beyond security concerns, the mansion holds historical significance, having served as the governor’s residence since its construction in 1912. Frequent turnover of occupants increases wear and tear, potentially compromising the preservation of this landmark. The state would have to budget for a complete sweep of the property, inside and out, to cover every possible mischief that someone could cook up.
While the intent behind Rep. Stapp’s bill is to monetize an underutilized asset, the bill may get amended by others as it goes through the committee process. It’s been assigned to House State Affairs and to the House Finance Committee.
Should it ever pass the House and Senate, it may draw a veto from the governor.
The board of the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation met in a special meeting on Thursday and voted to allow the corporation’s President Frank Richards to sign a major project development agreement with Glenfarne, the company that had earlier signed an earlier letter of intent to build the Alaska Gasline.
AGDC and Glenfarne, with its subsidiary 8-Star, signed definitive agreements for Glenfarne to become majority owner of Alaska LNG, which is the only federally permitted LNG export project on the US Pacific Coast.
Under the agreement, AGDC divests 75% of 8 Star Alaska, a subsidiary that AGDC created to hold and manage all Alaska LNG project assets, to Glenfarne.
Glenfarne assumes the role of Alaska LNG’s lead developer and will lead all remaining development work of Alaska LNG from front-end engineering and design (“FEED”) through to a final investment decision (“FID”).
AGDC remains a 25 percent owner of 8 Star Alaska and a key partner to Glenfarne on the project.
Alaska LNG is designed to deliver North Slope natural gas to Alaskans and Alaska utilities and export up to 20 million tons of LNG per year, AGDC said.
AKLNG’s three sub-projects are an 807-mile 42-inch pipeline, the LNG export terminal in Nikiski, and a North Slope-based carbon capture plant to remove and safely store 7 million tons of carbon dioxide annually.
In light of steadily declining gas production from Cook Inlet, which has historically been Alaska’s primary in-state natural gas basin, phase one of the project will kick off immediately, prioritizing the development and final investment decision of the pipeline infrastructure needed to deliver North Slope gas to Alaskans as rapidly as possible, AGDC said.
This means a lot of activity could happen within weeks with front-end engineering and design, with the final investment decision due in the fourth quarter of this year. Gas could be available for export by 2030-31.
The AKLNG project could add 12,000 construction jobs to Alaska. Jobs would include 1,566 pipe fitters and welders, 1,864 engineers, 2,311 laborers, 447 iron workers, 397 electricians, 295 carpenters, and others, particularly those who are in supply chains and logistics.
The gasline is a priority for President Donald Trump, who singled it out in his address to a joint session of Congress.
Meanwhile, Gov. Mike Dunleavy has been on an extended trip throughout Asia to help establish customers for the export of Alaska LNG. He phoned into a press Q&A on Thursday evening to add details and context to the news of the agreement approval.
Dunleavy said he met with the leaders of Taiwan, Thailand, South Korea and Japan, some of America’s closest allies in Asia, who also have some of the world’s leading trade surpluses with the US. He has obtained a letter of intent from Taiwan to purchase Alaska natural gas.
“Today is a historic day for Alaska. Oil was discovered in Prudhoe Bay almost exactly 57 years ago and since then Alaskans have never given up on finding a way to also benefit from our North Slope natural gas,” Dunleavy said in a statement. “Alaska has made a significant investment to develop Alaska LNG to the point where we can engage Glenfarne, a well-qualified industry leader, to bring this great project to the finish line. Alaska LNG will strengthen the U.S. geostrategic position in the North Pacific, provide vital energy security for our residents, our military bases, our businesses, and our Asian allies, and unlock billions in economic benefit at home and abroad.”
The next step involves Richards finalizing legally binding development agreements. He said the most accelerated part of the project will be to get the natural gas to Alaskans first.
“I’m incredibly proud of the ADGC team that has worked tirelessly over the past eleven years to develop Alaska LNG. Through persistence, hard work, and the determination that characterizes the Alaska spirit, Alaska LNG has successfully advanced through the design and permitting gauntlet to ignite global market momentum and attract a world-class developer, Richards said. “Alaska LNG will ensure a brighter future for generations of Alaskans and I look forward to working with Glenfarne as they lead Alaska LNG forward.”
The Legislature will still have to approve the final investment decision from the state’s side.
Glenfarne Chief Executive Officer and Founder Brendan Duval said, “Glenfarne’s financial, project management, and commercial expertise is well matched to lead this vital project forward. Alaska LNG will provide desperately needed energy security and natural gas cost savings for Alaskans and give Glenfarne unmatched flexibility to simultaneously serve LNG markets in both Asia and Europe through our three LNG projects. Glenfarne strongly believes in the benefit of partnering with the communities where we work, and we are already building our Alaska team to bring Alaska LNG to life.”
Currently, AGDC is updating engineering and design work, aided by a $50 million line of credit approved in late 2024 by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority.
AKLNG is advancing and this is an important step, but until dirt is turned, Alaskans will not be blamed for taking a wait-and-see approach to the stage-gated process.
Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat (VOICE), which has consistently maintained that the Biden Administration overstepped its authority when it cancelled seven oil and gas leases in the Arctic, has applauded the ruling by US District Court Judge Sharon Gleason that those cancellations were illegal.
“With a standing resolution from our Board to support the exploration and development of the 1002 area in ANWR, we are pleased to see Judge Gleason correct the Biden administration’s overreach on the canceled leases,” said VOICE President Nagruk Harcharek. “This proves yet again that the only way to create stable, durable policy in the North Slope is by engaging in consistent, meaningful consultation with the North Slope Iñupiat.”
The ruling has significant implications for the economy of Alaska, as it effectively revives the leases that were issued under the prior Trump Administration. The Biden administration had cited environmental concerns in its decision to cancel the leases, but the court found that the action lacked sufficient legal justification.
As the Trump Administration is now into its third month, early executive orders signal a return to the recognition that responsible resource development in Alaska is critical to the state and nation.
“It is important that the Trump-Vance administration meaningfully engage with and respect Kaktovik—the only community within ANWR—when it comes to policies affecting our lands and people,” said Kaktovik Iñupiat Corporation President Charles Lampe. “We look forward to working together to create lasting policy that benefits our community, the state of Alaska, and the nation.”
The ruling has been met with praise from Alaska Native corporations and regional leaders who support resource development as a means of economic self-determination for North Slope communities. Environmental litigants that make a living from lawsuits are expected to challenge the decision.
VOICE is a nonprofit organization established in 2015 by the region’s collective elected Iñupiat leadership. Dedicated to preserving and advancing North Slope Iñupiat cultural and economic self-determination, its members include local governments, Alaska Native Corporations, federally recognized tribes, and tribal non-profits across the North Slope of Alaska. In 2017, VOICE’s board passed a resolution in support of opening the 1002 Area of ANWR to oil and gas exploration and development.
Every year when March comes around, there is the same fanfare for Women’s History Month—a 31-day period when Americans are encouraged to celebrate the contributions of women past and present.
It’s a noble idea that started with the goal of correcting historical oversights and honoring trailblazers who fought for equality.
But in 2025, it’s worth asking: Has this annual recognition outlived its usefulness? Maybe it’s time we let Women’s History Month fade into history itself.
The concept started modestly — Women’s History Week in 1978, expanding to a full month by 1987.
Back then, it made sense. Women’s stories and capabilities were sidelined in textbooks, boardrooms, and ballot boxes. Highlighting their achievements was a radical act, and a needed one.
But nearly five decades later, the landscape has shifted. Women aren’t just footnotes anymore — they’re headlining. Amelia Earhart to Tulsi Gabbard, from CEOs to senators, scientists to cultural icons, their impact is undeniable and increasingly woven into the everyday fabric of our society. Even the Alaska State House is more than 50% female now.
Do we still need a designated month to remind us?
Now, the challenge is to actually recognize that girls and women are different from boys and men. We are not just hair and makeup, heels and handbags. Any man can wear those.
Women in this century are seeing their very identities stolen by men competing as women on the basketball courts, in swimming pools, and on track fields.
While Women’s History Month feels like a relic from a different century, it would be a more sincere gesture for the Alaska Legislature to pass legislation that — once and for all — protects the rights of women and girls in this century, where their ribbons and awards for their individual accomplishments are indeed being stolen.
I have filed legislation to do just that –- protect our female competitive athletes in Alaska. It didn’t pass the Senate last year but I have refiled it this year (HB 40.)
I hope all who support Women’s History Month will join me in getting this legislation through the House and Senate and on the governor’s desk for his signature. And I thank all who have supported it, even though sometimes they are bullied.
Let’s be honest — there’s a scent of tokenism in the air. If we’re not willing to protect our female competitors in their sports endeavors, we need to abandon the idea that we honor women.
So unless we’re willing to act to protect the rights of women, let’s make March 2025 the last Women’s History Month. It’s time to stop marking the moment and start living it. History is not confined to a month. It’s made by what we do every day.
Rep. Jamie Del Fierro Allard serves District 23, Eagle River, in the Alaska House of Representatives.
