Friday, February 20, 2026
Home Blog Page 151

Randy Ruedrich: Just say ‘no’ to statewide mail-in elections for Alaska, as envisioned by Senate Bill 64

By RANDY RUEDRICH

Senate Bill 64 is enabling legislation for future statewide mail-in voting that the Anchorage municipal Democrats have already adopted.  

This legislation paves the way to end in person voting on Election Day.

Ballots would be mailed to every voter currently registered at your residence.

Mail-in voting has been found to create significant voter fraud in other states. The video “2000 Mules” documented thousands of harvested mail-in ballots flowing into drop boxes for the 2020 General Election.

The bill would establish permanent absentee-by-mail ballot distribution, which sends a ballot to the voter’s old temporary address. 

Prior Alaskan experience revealed less than 20% of these ballots were returned by someone, hopefully (but not necessarily) the voter.

The remaining 80% or more of the missing ballots present even more opportunities for fraudulent ballot harvesting. 

The bill also removes the witness signature from the absentee-by-mail ballot envelopes.    

Democrats say the witness signature is inconvenient. Well, so are voter ID, voter registration, and voting itself.

The witness signature affirms the identity of the voter. Removal of this voter identity affirmation clears the way for required voter signature verification, another mail-in voting cornerstone. 

The bill’s “cure” process for Alaska absentee-by-mail ballots is not needed.  

The 2024 ABM ballots statewide and especially from the four western rural districts were high-quality with less than 1.6% defects.   

The cure process advocates argue voters need multiple chances to get their ballot submitted correctly.  

The 2022 Special Primary Election and the prior 2020 Covid-impacted elections are the only examples of voters having witnessing issues.

The 2020 Covid saga created fear for everyone. Getting a witness signature could lead to your death was hype at its finest.

The bill’s drop boxes are a critical part of future vote harvesting and voter fraud in mail-in voting, as noted above.

Without evidence of a reoccurring need, why adopt these changes and huge expenses that go with them?    

The only real reason is to have drop boxes, cure processes and no witness signatures available for thousands of future mail-in voting ballots.

Another major error in SB 64 is the destruction of the Alaska right to vote for those who are are outside of Alaska, by requiring the voter to return to the person’s place of “physical habitation.” There are many people who are out of state for all kinds of reasons — medical, family emergencies, education, or work station. Some of these are military voters.

The Democrats have historically pushed to eliminate military voters from Alaska’s elections.   

Since a military voter cannot claim to return to their prior on base housing when they return to Alaska, they are automatically removed from the voter roll by this bill.   

If a soldier or airman plans to retire to Alaska at the conclusion of his or her career, they do not return to their prior base housing. Hence, the military member’s plan to return is not adequate to maintain voter registration.

This Democrat ploy will eliminate our registered enlisted personnel who have viewed Alaska as their only home during more than decades-long military careers.  

Similarly, when Alaskans leave for education, professional training, or career enhancing experience, the requirement to return to your prior residence is unrealistic. Family size and housing requirements change. To inhibit their Alaska voter registration with this ploy, discourages Alaskans from returning to their home state.

Furthermore, the bill rolls the Alaska Redistricting Board into the Open Meeting Act, which is inappropriate and another key reason to kill the bill, currently known as CSSB 64B.

SB 64 is extremely harmful to Alaskans and Alaskans’ Elections and must not become law.  

Email your legislators and the governor to voice your opposition to SB 64.

A list of legislators is at this link. For senators, the email address style is: [email protected]. For House members, the email address is: [email protected]

Randy Ruedrich is a former chairman of the Alaska Republican Party and is considered one of Alaska’s most knowledgeable elections experts.

Red tape patrol: Trump orders agencies to speed up environmental reviews through modern technology

President Donald Trump has issued a directive ordering federal agencies to streamline environmental reviews and permitting processes for energy and infrastructure projects, emphasizing the “maximum use of technology” to reduce delays and improve efficiency.

In a presidential memorandum released Tuesday, the president ordered a shift away from the traditional, paper-heavy approach to environmental reviews conducted under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

The change could have important outcomes for projects ranging from energy transmission lines and highways to manufacturing facilities and power plants, which are often bogged down in regulatory bureaucratic processes for decades.

“The Government does not properly leverage technology to effectively and efficiently evaluate environmental permits, causing significant delay to important infrastructure projects that impact our economic well-being,” Trump explained in the memorandum.

The president’s directive encourages agencies to modernize and digitize their review systems, integrating technologies that can streamline data collection, analysis, and public feedback. The move is part of a broader effort by the administration to cut bureaucratic red tape and accelerate the rollout of key infrastructure projects.

Supporters of the initiative say that using modern tools like GIS mapping, data visualization, and online platforms for public comments can make reviews more accessible, accurate, and timely.

The memorandum did not set a specific timeline for implementation, but it calls on agency heads to report progress and outline how they will integrate technology into their review systems.

Trump’s directive aligns with his administration’s ongoing push to overhaul the nation’s infrastructure, a central campaign promise that includes reducing regulatory burdens and increasing private-sector investment.

The details of the directive include:

Federal agencies are directed to make maximum use of technology to:

  • Eliminate paper-based application and review systems.
  • Speed up project processing without compromising the quality of reviews.
  • Shorten and simplify documents while improving public accessibility.
  • Reduce redundant data submissions by applicants.
  • Share analyses across agencies for related permit applications.
  • Improve interagency coordination and eliminate bottlenecks.
  • Increase transparency and predictability in project timelines.
  • Strengthen agency legal defenses for environmental and permitting decisions.
  • Streamline the overall federal review process and support state, local, and tribal decision-making.
  • Maintain a clear, accessible record of permit-related information for potential judicial review.
  • Within 45 days, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), in collaboration with the National Energy Dominance Council, must develop a Permitting Technology Action Plan.
  • The plan will include:
    • Common data and technology standards for permit applications under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
    • Minimum tech requirements for agency systems, such as automated reviews and case management.
    • A roadmap to build a unified interagency digital permitting system.
    • An interagency governance structure to oversee implementation.
    • A timeline for agencies to adopt the new standards.

Agencies will be required to begin implementing the new technology standards within 90 days of the plan’s release.

  • Within 15 days, the CEQ will establish a Permitting Innovation Center to design and test new digital tools to support the action plan.
  • These tools will include case tracking systems, online application portals, automated processes, and data exchange platforms.
  • The General Services Administration’s Technology Transformation Services will support the Innovation Center’s development efforts.

Appeals court upholds federal approval of Alaska LNG exports, rejects environmental challenge

A federal appeals court has rejected a legal challenge from environmental litigation nonprofits seeking to overturn the Biden Administration’s approval of liquefied natural gas exports from the proposed $44 billion Alaska LNG Project.

In a unanimous decision, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the Department of Energy did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act when it approved the exports from the Alaska LNG Project, despite its inability to quantify the project’s contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions.

The ruling affirms DOE’s 2023 decision to greenlight exports to countries without free trade agreements with the United States, marking the culmination of a years-long regulatory journey that began in 2014.

The Alaska LNG Project, proposed by a consortium that includes the State of Alaska, involves constructing a gas treatment plant on Alaska’s North Slope, an 800-mile pipeline crossing the state, and a liquefaction facility on the Kenai Peninsula. From there, natural gas would be shipped by tanker to international markets, primarily for use in power generation.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy has been engaged with numerous leaders in Asia to promote Alaska natural gas.

In 2015, the Department of Energy had conditionally approved exports to non-free trade countries, pending further environmental analysis. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission later conducted an exhaustive review, culminating in a 1,500-page environmental impact statement in 2020.

That review addressed a wide array of ecological and socio-economic factors, including impacts on wetlands, wildlife, permafrost, and even the scenic quality of Denali National Park.

The Sierra Club and Center for Biological Diversity sued the final approval that was issued in April 2023, arguing that the agency misinterpreted the “public interest” requirement under the Natural Gas Act and failed to fully assess the environmental impacts, particularly those related to climate change.

The court rejected those arguments and said that DOE’s reliance on the earlier FERC impact statement, which was already upheld by the DC Circuit in a 2023 decision, was lawful. The judges agreed with the agency’s conclusion that certain analyses, such as estimating emissions from LNG use in foreign countries, would be too speculative to inform regulatory decisions.

The court also noted that DOE’s supplemental 275-page impact review, released in January 2023 to comply with President Biden’s Executive Order 13990, did not indicate any defect in the original environmental review.

“Congress has expressed a preference for natural gas exports, provided domestic supply remains abundant,” the court stated, citing the Natural Gas Act’s presumption in favor of export approvals.

While the environmental litigation industry may pursue additional legal avenues, the court’s ruling presents a significant roadblock. The decision effectively clears another major legal hurdle for one of the most ambitious energy infrastructure projects in US history.

Democrats push to establish a ‘Welcoming Office’ for immigrants, refugees and newcomers to Alaska

As the Alaska Legislature continues to debate the coming year’s operating budget, some lawmakers are proposing yet another layer of government. It’s a so-called “Welcoming Alaska Office” that would be aimed at supporting newcomers, including foreign-born workers and immigrants.

But with the state barely able to afford its existing commitments, some Alaskans will question the timing and necessity of such an expansion, especially because the concept of “welcoming cities” and “welcoming states” has been used as a “Sanctuary State Light” label, meaning that it offers services to illegal immigrants but does not directly fight immigration enforcement by the federal government.

The welcoming office would “provide to new immigrants and newcomers employment information, referrals to employment services, including job placement services, and information about how to use labor unions, administrative agencies, and court actions to pursue claims or charges of job discrimination, illegal termination of employment, sexual harassment, and unsafe working conditions” and more.

The legislation was introduced last week by Rep. Genevieve Mina and Sen. Loki Tobin, both Democrats from Anchorage. House Bill 188 and Senate Bill 169 would establish the Welcoming Alaska Office inside the Department of Labor and Workforce Development. An executive director appointed by the governor would lead the office, with guidance from a nine-member advisory council.

At its core, the office would coordinate services for people relocating to Alaska including immigrants, refugees, and individuals moving from other states or countries, and help them apply for public benefits. It would pave the way for what the two lawmakers envision would happen next: the creation of an Alaska Welcoming Center, complete with staff to act as a centralized hub for support services, union organizing, and entitlements.

The proposed Welcoming Office would replace the Office of Citizenship Assistance, a defunct program that was revived only recently, nearly 20 years after it was first authorized. Now, instead of a modest restart, the legislation seeks to blow it up into a full-blown agency with sweeping responsibilities and long-term financial implications, which are still not yet known.

Amendment passes to prevent state from using tax dollars to pay for gender-bending services

On a party-line vote, an amendment to the state operating budget passed that house that prevents state money from being expended for “gender dysphoria” services that are not mandated to be covered by state law or a binding order of the court.

The amendment was made by Rep. Sarah Vance, and agreed to by a vote of 21 to 19.

“The money appropriated for the Department of Health may be expended only for mandatory services required under Title XIX of the Social Security Act, unless a U.S. Supreme Court decision provides new precedent, and for optional services offered by the state under the state plan for medical assistance that has been approved by the United States Department of Health and Human Services,” the amendment says.

All Democrats and undeclared Democrats like Rep. Alyse Galvin voted against the amendment, which must still pass the Senate and may still be killed there, as the Senate is increasingly hardline progressive dominated.

Failing the future: Amendment to operating budget would have said no state-funded abortions of convenience, but one key Republican voted no

Amendment 10 to House Bill 53, the state operating budget, failed on Monday to protect the unborn in Alaska. Offered by Rep. Sarah Vance, it had language to prevent money to be used for most abortions.

“No money appropriated in this appropriation may be expended for an abortion that is not a mandatory service required under AS 47.07.030(a). The money appropriated for the Department of Health may be expended only for mandatory services required under Title XIX for optional services offered by the state under the state plan for medical assistance that has been approved by the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

The amendment failed on a split vote of 20/20.

Sponsors and yes votes were Rep. Vance, DeLena Johnson, Cathy Tilton, Kevin McCabe, George Rauscher, Jubilee Underwood, Frank Tomaszewski, Rebecca Schwanke, Jamie Allard, David Nelson, Bill Elam, Dan Saddler, Justin Ruffridge, Mia Costello, Alexi Moore, Will Stapp, Jeremy Bynum, and Mike Prax.

The only Republican to vote no was Rep. Louise Stutes of Kodiak. Hers was the pivotal vote that keeps taxpayer dollars funding the violent taking of a human life.

The no votes also included all Democrats: Robyn Burke, Ashley Carrick, Maxine Dibert, Bryce Edgmon, Ted Eischeid, Zack Fields, Neal Foster, Alyse Galvin, Andrew Gray, Carolyn Hall, Sara Hannan, Rebecca Himschoot, Ky Holland, Nellie Jimmie, Andy Josephson, Donna Mears, Genevieve Mina, Cal Schrage, and Andi Story.

Alaska is one of 17 states use state funds to cover “medically necessary” abortions under Medicaid beyond the federal Hyde Amendment restrictions (which limit federal funding to cases of life endangerment, rape, or incest). Medically necessary is an elastic term that is open to interpretation. In addition to Alaska, the following states also use taxpayer money to pay for abortions. Most of them are heavily Democrat: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia.

Congressman Nick Begich sets campaign fundraising record for first quarter

Congressman Nick Begich raised $2.8 million for his election in 2024, winning against a much better funded former Rep. Mary Peltola, who had at least $13.8 million in her campaign, plus the money of side groups like unions.

This cycle it’s different for Begich. On Tuesday the Republican from Alaska announced he has raised a record amount in the first quarter of 2025, with more than $824,279 coming from 21,644 individual contributors, for an average contribution size of $38.

During the same quarter in 2023, Peltola had set the Alaska record by raising $375,000.

“I am deeply grateful to the thousands of supporters who made our record-setting quarter possible,” Begich said. “This strong start puts us in a solid position to hold this seat next year so we can continue to deliver results for all Alaskans. Under President Trump’s leadership, we can and will unlock Alaska’s vast potential and bring prosperity to our state while providing the resources America needs.”

Although House members come up for reelection every other year, their campaigns are busy even on the off years building the support to win in the following year. Begich’s strong showing is a signal to the Democrats that he will be tough to beat in 2026. He has, however, been placed on the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee’s target list. The Democrats believe that Alaska’s only congressional seat is “in play.”

In 2024, that same Democrat group put Peltola on its “rescue” list, but was unable to pull her over the finish line first, as Alaska voters were able to see how she performed in Congress with their own eyes. She was one of President Joe Biden’s most ardent supporters, and he lost the state by a margin of over 13%.

For 2026, the center-left Cook Political Report puts Begich in the “driver’s seat” for keeping the seat, as of February. However, it’s still unclear who the Democrats will put up against Begich, with Peltola appearing to be uninterested in returning to the campaign trail, as she is reportedly making more than $400,000 as a consultant with the law firm Holland and Hart.

Bob Bird: Holy Week, Holy Shroud

By BOB BIRD

In an amazing turnaround from the Biden era, the Trump White House issued Holy Week greetings to the entire country. As a flawed human being, and one who has escaped death by a hair’s breadth, as well as the preposterous dirty tricks of the Deep State, it appears that Trump is discovering something that every person must come to grips with: the soon-to-be experienced Divine Judgment.

We live in a culture that sweeps such soul-chilling realities under the rug, but within every soul exists the basic understanding of right and wrong. There is no escaping it. You do not have to study or be schooled in this truth. The Bible says that God has implanted it in everyone’s heart. We will be called to account, and we are all guilty.

Why is Holy Week necessary to be understood and commemorated? Because to have any chance at eternal life, the Son of God had to become Man, preach to us, demonstrate His powers and accept the preposterous suffering that a Roman crucifixion entails. In our time, we have used the medium of books and movies to impart to us how this may have been like, 2,000 years ago. All are different, all recognize that their version may not be entirely accurate, and yet we can be utterly slammed when we see the following list of non-fiction books or motion pictures:

The Day Christ Died by Jim Bishop.

The Last Hours of Jesus by Ralph Gorman.

The Founding of Christendom by Warren H. Carroll.

But it is the motion picture that our culture has come to chiefly rely upon. Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ and Franco Zeferelli’s Jesus of Nazareth take very little artistic license, and must be classified technically as fiction, yet are based upon solid Biblical narrative and researched facts. Currently an animated feature is out, The King of Kings, and appears to be worthy. Many have seen Risen, starring Ralph Fiennes, a fictionalized yet plausible story of a Roman tribune who encounters the risen Christ.

But what if we could get into a time machine and be there? At the foot of the cross, on Friday, April 7, 30 AD? Or at the moment of resurrection on April 9? What would it really have looked like? How did people react? What about the two disciples on the road to Emmaus? Mary Magdalen’s encounter in the cemetery? What is it like to actually see an angel, as the women coming to anoint the body did? Or the 10 apostles on Easter evening, when Jesus walked through a locked door? Or when Thomas placed his hands into Jesus’ wounds a few days later?

Well, we actually can. Sort of. And you can do it today. On the internet are hundreds of documentaries, brief interviews and talk-show discussions about the Holy Shroud of Turin. It may be from the BBC, National Geographic, the History Channel. If you encounter the opinions of the fast-evaporating skeptics, they are probably hopelessly outdated. 

These discussions involve its scientific properties, its history and current theories — which are constantly being revised by honest science. The Holy Shroud is the most scrutinized artifact in human history, exceeding the Rosetta Stone, moon rocks, the Zapruder film or photos from Mars.

What does this artifact tell us? Whenever I lecture on it, with a life-sized replica in the room, you should see what I see: the eyes of the audience, whenever its properties begin to communicate the dynamics of the self-torture of crucifixion. Or the pain of hematidrosis, the sweating of blood. The BB-studded whips of the Roman flagrum. The carrying of a 100-pound cross beam on the shoulders, and the bruising of the knees and head from the face-plants that follow each stumble. Or the fixture of a helmet of thorns.

Only God could leave us His photograph, implanted on linen, and in the medium of a photographic negative. As Lord of Time, only He could reach His loving hand across the centuries to blast our layers of complacency away, in our age that worships anything and everything but Him.

Truly, in every century, mankind is a flock of lost and scattered sheep, ripe for easy picking by wolves. Likely our imagination of the demons and goblins of hell pale before the reality. The voice of the Shepherd calls us, for only He can protect us. The rage of the demons screams at every soul that accepts, with humility, the admission, confession and cost of our sins. 

The Holy Shroud silently awaits the investigation of those who have chosen to regard the Bible as a fairy tale. Our electronic age makes it possible to do so without going to Italy or attending a lecture. Only God could be so loving, and so patient, with his sheep. 

Go to www.shroud.com and begin the search.

Bob Bird is former chair of the Alaskan Independence Party and the host of a talk show on KSRM radio, Kenai.

Murkowski blasts Trump over defunding of middleman program coordinating migrant legal aid

Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Democrat Sen. Jon Ossoff of Georgia co-wrote a letter of criticism to the Trump Administration over an immigration policy decision to defund a legal representation program for unaccompanied minors.

Murkowski, one of the most vocal Republican critics of Trump, condemns the Department of Health and Human Services for halting the program after the last contract came to an end in March.

In her April 15 letter, Murkowski urged HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to immediately reinstate legal representation for over 26,000 unaccompanied minors currently in federal custody.

There is no indication that these minors will not get representation through the usual means, but Murkowski seems to think the worst will happen. Some nonprofits, like Kids in Need of Defense, as well as state-run programs continue to provide legal aid to unaccompanied minors.

Her letter expresses “serious concern” over what she calls a “reckless and harmful” move that directly violates the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008. Yet the funding of this program did not start until 2023, raising a question about how the law had been violated throughout the Obama Administration.

“Terminating legal representation for more than 26,000 unaccompanied children flouts this mandate,” the letter reads. “Without legal representation, children will face significantly higher risk of predation by traffickers.”

The termination of what has been a two-year-old program started by President Biden occurred shortly after the contract with the Acacia Center for Justice ended on March 21. The center had been funded by the Biden Administration since 2023 and has some philanthropic sources of funding.

The termination of the federal contract represents a shift in border priorities that includes stronger enforcement. Trump has also now sent the military to the southern border to beef up protection.

The Amica Center for Immigrant Rights and other nonprofit organizations filed a federal lawsuit against HHS, arguing the termination violated the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which mandates access to legal counsel for unaccompanied children to the greatest extent practicable.

The lawsuit claims the decision leaves vulnerable children without representation, risking deportations without due process. But before the $200 million annual funding for the program, youth were represented, but without the middle man of the Acacia Center.

A temporary restraining order was granted on April 1 to halt the termination’s effects until at least April 16, indicating the federal judge will side with the complainants and set up another case to be fought at the Supreme Court.

According to Murkowski, many of the minors are now left to navigate complex immigration proceedings alone, which is a falsehood.

She imagines that toddlers will be standing in front of immigration judges without an advocate or without even understanding the language of the court.

“This population has no meaningful alternative to ORR-administered legal representation,” her letter states, referring to the Office of Refugee Resettlement. “Without restoration of these legal services, too many unaccompanied children will be on their own.”

Her latest move is the most recent flashpoint in Murkowski’s increasingly strained relationship with the Trump Administration. Although a registered Republican, Murkowski has a record of being anti-Trump nearly to the point of obsession, most certainly harming her Alaska constituents by creating hostilities.

In Anchorage this weekend, she told a group of nonprofit leaders that “We are all afraid. It’s quite a statement. But we are in a time and a place where I certainly have not been here before. And I’ll tell ya, I’m oftentimes very anxious myself about using my voice, because retaliation is real. And that’s not right,” according to a report by the Anchorage Daily News. Notably, she does not repeat these statements to other groups, but nonprofits in Alaska are a major siphon of federal funds and have become one of her main constituencies.

Murkowski is one of the leaders of the resistance to Trump, who won the state of Alaska by 13.13 percentage points over Kamala Harris, doing better last year than the 10.06 percentage point win he had in Alaska in 2020, when he was challenged by Biden.

Murkowski’s letter was also cc’d to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Angie Salazar, acting director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement. Here’s the letter: