Sunday, April 19, 2026
Home Blog Page 16

Sullivan Touts “Alaska Comeback,” Historic Opportunities, in Annual Address to Legislature

Todd M Lindley
-
1

U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), in his annual address today to a joint session of the Alaska Legislature in Juneau, laid out a vision for the “Alaska Comeback,” highlighting the state’s resilience and its historic opportunities to grow after several years of federal policies that targeted Alaska’s economy and jobs. Sen. Sullivan detailed progress being made toward long-sought goals, including an energy renaissance on the North Slope, advancing the Alaska LNG project, and strengthening Alaska’s central role in national defense through a historic military and Coast Guard build-up. He also emphasized major wins for Alaskans delivered by the Working Families Tax Cuts Act, outlined efforts to confront the fentanyl crisis and improve public safety, highlighted continued work to support Alaska’s fishermen and coastal communities, and underscored a historic federal investment to transform Alaska’s health care system to better reflect the realities of delivering care in the nation’s most rural, high-cost state.

Key themes from the address:

  • Alaska Comeback Theme Alaska has overcome challenges like statehood, the 1964 earthquake, and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline through unity. Now recovering from 70 Biden-era executive orders stifling the economy, a new era of progress begins with energy renaissance, gas line development, military buildup, and tailored health care.
  • Making it Happen: Alaska EO and the WFTCA The Trump administration’s Day One executive order unleashes Alaska’s resources, ending federal restrictions. The Working Families Tax Cuts Act (WFTCA), dubbed the “Alaska Opportunity Act,” delivers major wins, including mandatory leases and revenue splits. Sullivan’s team conducted over 60 town halls to explain and implement it.
  • Resource Development The WFTCA stabilizes investment by mandating leases in NPR-A, ANWR, and Cook Inlet, aiming for nearly 1 million barrels/day by 2034 via projects like Pikka and Willow. It shifts federal revenue to 70-30 state-favoring split by 2034 and boosts timber and minerals.
  • AK LNG Sullivan promotes the Alaska LNG project internationally and with federal leaders, highlighted in the executive order and supported by DOE financing. Recent progress includes Air Force data centers on bases to boost gas demand. He urges bold collaboration for affordable energy, jobs, and revenue.
  • Taxes and Child Care Comeback The WFTCA allows first-year business write-offs, prevents $4T tax hikes, saves families $7,500-$11,000 annually, deducts $12,000 for seniors, and eliminates taxes on tips/overtime. It enhances child tax credits, dependent care, and business incentives for child care facilities.
  • Military Build-up
    • Alaska Military Comeback Reversing drawdowns, Alaska sees billions in investments: expanded 11th Airborne Division, F-35/F-22 squadrons, tankers, missile defense radars, Ted Stevens Center, new runway, Nome port, and Adak Navy base reopening. Marines plan expansion.
    • Coast Guard Comeback Historic $25B investment funds 16 icebreakers, 22 cutters, 40 helicopters, and infrastructure in multiple communities, including $300M for Juneau. Potential for four more Alaska-homeported icebreakers spurs shipbuilding jobs in Kodiak, Seward, Ketchikan.
  • Safer Communities Crime rates drop, but fentanyl overdoses killed 400 Alaskans last year. WFTCA’s $100B border security reduces supply; Sullivan’s “One Pill Can Kill” campaign addresses demand through education.
  • Fisheries Legislation like Save Our Seas cleans oceans; bans on Russian/Chinese seafood combat unfair practices. Salmon Task Force and Bycatch Reduction Act tackle declines via research and tech.
  • Health Care Obamacare failed Alaska; reforms include PBM curbs and premium credits. WFTCA’s Rural Health Transformation Program delivers $1.4B over five years, doubling the fund and prioritizing rural needs.
  • Two Visions D.C. Democrats targeted Alaska provisions in WFTCA; Republicans fought to preserve wins. Alaskans should recognize allies.

Echoing TAPS builders, Sullivan calls for unity to build gas lines, military, health care, and jobs for future generations, fulfilling Alaska’s promise of opportunity.

Flipping the Assembly: Our Not-So-Secret Weapon

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
10
Flipping the Assembly: Our Not-So-Secret Weapon

By THERESA BIRD

In less than a month, ballots for Anchorage’s Municipal election will be mailed to homes.  Once ballots start to arrive, people will begin filling them out. Traditional polling places will not be open and are not an option for voting on April 7th, “Election Day.” Hence, we have approximately 26 days to make sure our friends and neighbors are aware of our opportunity to flip the Anchorage Assembly from radical Leftist to a conservative majority.

Since recommending who to vote for in each district three weeks ago, I’ve heard a mix of optimism, skepticism, and outright pessimism that conservatives in Anchorage will be able to pull this off.   

Voter apathy is real, and the behavior of our Municipal officials has only encouraged its metastasis.  Not many trust local Anchorage elections anymore, beclouded as they are with mail-in voting, ballot curing, and computer tabulation of votes. The ability of election observers to effectively oversee vote counting has been severely limited by the Municipal Clerk and the Assembly’s Marxist Nine since they rewrote Title 28 of Municipal Code in 2021.  This occurred – coincidentally, I’m sure – shortly after Anchorage elected a conservative mayor.

Add to these coincidences the operations of dark money groups such as 907 Initiative and Ship Creek Group.  These benevolent political mercenaries canvass Anchorage with their seemingly neutral “report cards.”  I am sure it is coincidental that their “report cards” all laud liberal causes and bash conservatives.  In 2025 the voter turnout in Anchorage’s municipal election was an abysmal 25.38% of registered voters.

I can’t blame anybody for being skeptical of our chances of flipping six seats on the Assembly this year. The Left and its union allies are consistently outperforming us by working together without infighting and apparently convincing their constituents to vote in large enough numbers to maintain their iron grip on our local government.

Do we give up? Mope our way through the next 40 days, resigned to imminent failure?

Admitting defeat is not an option in my book. But I do admit that we cannot succeed in reclaiming Anchorage if we trust solely in our own efforts.  We need God’s help.

Entrusting political causes to Almighty God and asking His help in ordering human affairs is, and should be, the norm in the United Sates of America. From the first Continental Congress to the 119th Congress convened in January 2025, our representatives have opened their meetings with a prayer (not a land acknowledgement!).  No less than us, they needed God’s help, protection, and guidance as they sought to order the civic life of a new nation.

Our nation is rooted in love and gratitude to God, from Whom we derive our inherent dignity and rights under the Natural Law. As President Trump noted in his February 18th Ash Wednesday Presidential Message: “the practices of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving have been foundational to our strength from the earliest days of our national story. From the Colonists who turned to prayer and fasting in the heart of the Revolutionary War to the unmatched compassion and generosity of America’s churches, hospitals, and charitable institutions, these righteous acts have always stood at the center of our identity, our heritage, and our way of life.”  

If this battle for Anchorage seems hopeless because there’s a mountain of manmade obstacles, let’s turn it over to God who made both mountains and men.  Abraham Lincoln once said, “I’ve been driven to my knees many times in my life by the overwhelming conviction that I had nowhere else to go.” In addition to political action, pray in the privacy of your home, pray with your families, pray with your friends. Pray with your fellow parishioners when you gather at church, pray in the public square, pray before you begin any endeavor with the political action group to which you belong. If you’re running for public office, pray every day with your campaign team.

Ask God to forgive our sins and shower His mercy upon us as we seek to re-order our civic life in Anchorage. We’ll be in good company.

Theresa Bird is a wife and homeschooling mother of nine. She earned her BA in Philosophy at Thomas More College of Liberal Arts in Merrimack, NH. She lives in Anchorage.

Understanding Lisa Murkowski

SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
-
10
Understanding Lisa Murkowski

By GREG SARBER

Lisa Murkowski continues to oppose the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, despite overwhelming support from the American people and her RINO partner in crime, Senator Collins (R-MA), flipping in support of it. We know Senator Murkowski is being dishonest when she argues that she is boldly standing up for the US Constitution by opposing this bill, leaving us to wonder what her real motivation might be. It could be that she hates President Trump so much that, since he is supporting the SAVE Act, she is willing to be on the wrong side of an 80/20 issue to hurt him politically.

Maybe she secretly hopes that by opposing the SAVE Act, she is enabling the Democrats to take control of the House in November so that they can fulfill their promise to impeach the president. If this is what she desires, it could happen. Historically, the political party that opposes the president typically picks up seats in midterm elections. The current House majority is only 5 seats (218/213), and the president’s party typically loses 28 House seats. If this year follows that trend, the House will flip to Democratic control. You might think this unlikely, but in the 2018 midterm election, the first time he was in office, Democrats took 41 seats and control of the House away from the Republicans. It could happen again.

Perhaps this is what the Machiavellian Murkowski is counting on. Last month, Congressman Shri Thanedar, a Democrat from Michigan, introduced articles of impeachment against President Trump. With the current Republican majority in the House, that impeachment attempt will go nowhere. However, if history holds, and after the November election, the Democrats hold a 235/198 majority in the House, you can certainly expect another impeachment attempt that the House will approve, and the Senate will have to consider.

I do not believe that this impeachment would successfully remove President Trump from office, but that isn’t the point of it. If the House votes to impeach him again, it would be a successful strategy in attacking the President’s agenda, which may be what Murkowski is counting on. If the House votes to impeach the president, forcing the Senate to conduct an impeachment trial, it will effectively halt any further implementation of the president’s programs.

One example of how this would work is the number of open US Attorney positions. There are 93 US Attorneys in this country, who are appointed by the president and require confirmation by the Senate. As of today, 51 of those positions are filled with interim or acting US Attorneys awaiting confirmation. They can only serve for a limited time without Senate approval. Multiple interim US Attorneys have failed to get a Senate confirmation hearing and have had to resign. Halting approval for US Attorneys is an effective tool the Senate can use to halt any prosecution of crimes committed under previous administrations.

If the House should impeach the president, the Senate would stop approval for any new US Attorneys. They would use a faulty excuse, like it would be inappropriate to proceed with the president’s appointments, knowing that President Trump might be removed from office. They will say this knowing full well that there is no way there will be enough votes in the Senate to remove President Trump. They have already tried to do this twice, with no success, and this will simply be a tactic used to impede the president.

Lisa Murkowski is a smart politician and knows that a tactic like this will tie up the president in impeachment hearings for the next two years, effectively stopping his presidency in its tracks. However, it all depends on Democrats winning control of the House, something that might not happen if the SAVE Act passes. That may be why she does not support it.

I have no idea why Murkowski hates the president to such an extent. Maybe it is because she benefits from voters who can’t prove their citizenship to win elections in Alaska. Perhaps it was because President Trump supported Kelly Tshibaka in the last election against her, and now she wants to pay him back. Maybe Lisa is just a liberal who hates strong conservatives because they oppose her worldview. Whatever her reasons, if Murkowski is successful in stopping the SAVE Act from passage, it will not only flip the House to Democratic control but will effectively end Donald Trump’s presidency. That may be all the motivation that a staunch leftist like Murkowski needs to do what she is doing.

It is hard to believe, but the fate of the nation rests on the opposition of one feckless liberal idiot from Fairbanks. God help us all.

Greg Sarber is a lifelong Alaskan. He is a petroleum engineer who spent his career working on Alaska’s North Slope. Now retired, he lives with his family in Homer, Alaska.

Follow the Money: How a State-Funded Study Is Being Used to Advocate for Tax Increases in Alaska

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
2
Follow the Money: How a State-Funded Study Is Being Used to Advocate for Tax Increases in Alaska

By MARCUS MOORE

A recent report from the Alaska Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER), funded by Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s administration at a cost of $90,000, has sparked debate over potential fiscal solutions for the state. The study updates a 2016 analysis and evaluates 11 options to address Alaska’s structural budget deficit, including reductions in spending, adjustments to the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD), and the introduction of income taxes, sales taxes, or increases in taxes on oil and corporations.

The report concludes that increases in oil and corporate taxes would have the least economic impact, potentially resulting in 40 to 140 job losses per $100 million raised. In contrast, reductions in government spending or the PFD could lead to greater effects, with up to 1,000 jobs lost per $100 million in deficit reduction.

The study acknowledges that PFD cuts are regressive, disproportionately affecting low-income households, as the dividend represents a significant portion of income for some Alaskans. It also examines progressive income taxes, which would result in higher-income individuals paying substantially more—ranging from 35 to 2,000 times the amount paid by lower-income residents.

No wonder conservative voices are pushing back. An editorial in the Anchorage Daily News commended our Republican Gov. Dunleavy for proposing a broad-based tax such as a seasonal sales tax (4% in summer targeting tourists and 2% in winter). However, it highlighted concerns about linking this to a guaranteed PFD, which could maintain a deficit by taxing residents while distributing funds.

Gov. Dunleavy’s omnibus plan, outlined in Senate Bill 227, includes modest adjustments to oil taxes, the elimination of the corporate income tax to encourage business growth, and reliance on major oil and gas projects for revenue increases. The sales tax component, however, is described as regressive in the report. The plan also depends on a constitutional amendment to guarantee the PFD, requiring two-thirds legislative approval.

Democratic Sen. Bill Wielechowski, who has previously advocated for larger PFDs through legal action, commented at a news conference last week: “As I sit here, I’m not even sure there’s 50% approval for anything on the PFD. You’ve got some people who support a much higher PFD. You’ve got some people who support no PFD.”

In early February 2026, Alaska faces a $1.5 billion deficit in the proposed FY2027 budget, with $7.75 billion in spending and limited strategies to address the gap beyond projections on oil prices. Even with revisions to the 10-year plan, annual shortfalls of $200-300 million are anticipated after revenue measures, according to legislative analyst Alexei Painter.

The ISER report notes that inaction has reduced GDP by 2-3% over the past decade due to fiscal uncertainty. Lead economist Brett Watson described an “Alaska Disconnect,” where economic growth can strain the budget by attracting new residents who require services without corresponding broad-based revenue sources. For instance, an influx of 100,000 tech workers would necessitate additional PFD payments, schools, and infrastructure without proportional tax increases.

Remember the 2016 ISER study that helped birth the Percent-of-Market-Value (POMV) draw from the Permanent Fund? It showed similar proposals, PFD cuts regressive, oil taxes low-impact, but back then, we used it to cap draws and fund services without new taxes.

Long time policy and budget commentators like Brad Keithley have analyzed Gov. Dunleavy’s sales tax proposal, noting that 24-26% of revenue could come from non-residents, but it would still burden families unless exemptions are included. Even with adjustments, shortfalls persist, and alternatives like income taxes would primarily affect Alaskans.

The report’s data indicates that wealthier households would pay five to fourteen times more in sales taxes than the poorest, though the latter would lose a higher percentage of their income. It suggests options like seasonal sales taxes to shift 2-5% of the burden to non-residents and eliminating corporate taxes to stimulate economic activity, aligning with elements of Gov. Dunleavy’s plan.

The deep-pocketed elites and their legislative puppets, across both parties, block real reform because they benefit from no personal income tax, a gift from the Permanent Fund’s creation. Meanwhile, they philosophically oppose taxing to fund dividends, seeing PFD cuts as the easy out. But that’s cowardice! True conservatives like Dunleavy fight for the PFD as a return of resource wealth to the people, not government coffers.

Look at the history from Gov. Bill Walker’s 2016 veto slashing the PFD in half amid a $3-4B deficit, to Dunleavy’s 2019 standoff where he vetoed $444M to push for a full $2,910 check, only to get forced into $1,606.

Enough is enough. Dunleavy’s right to sacrifice political goodwill for a plan that stabilizes finances without socialist income taxes. But let’s go further, and axe wasteful programs, protect our oil sector (which funds 90% of unrestricted revenue), and enshrine the PFD constitutionally before the Democrats and RINOs turn it into another entitlement slush fund.

Alaska’s future relies on restrained government spending rather than expanded taxes or distributions.

6 Alaska Communities Receive Federal Funds for Infrastructure Improvements

Natalie Spaulding
-
2
6 Alaska Communities Receive Federal Funds for Infrastructure Improvements

On Friday, February 13, U.S. Representative Nick Begich’s office announced secured federal funds for “critical Community Project Funding (CPF) investments and infrastructure funding” for six Alaska communities.

The funding is part of the Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill.

Receiving the most amount of money is the City of Kodiak, who has been granted $5 million to upgrade its St. Hermans harbor.

Next, the City of Soldotna will receive $2.387 million to improve transportation infrastructure for Marydale Avenue.

The Petersburg Borough will receive $2 million to improve harbor protections and reduce storm damage.

$1.75 million goes to the Municipality of Anchorage to construct a new electric substation as part of the Port of Alaska Modernization Program.

The City of Ouzinkie will receive $1.1 million to modernize its harbor infrastructure.

Lastly, the City of Homer will receive $250,000 to replace aging float systems critical to operations at Homer Port Freight.

Congressman Begich Secures Key Community Project Funding for Alaska Through FY26 AppropriationsDownload

Opinion: Every Baby Has a Right to Life; HB 64 is a Good Start

SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
-
2
Opinion: Every Baby Has a Right to Life; HB 64 is a Good Start

By Michael Tavoliero

Alaska Watchman’s piece on baby boxes confronts a specific horror: a newborn left outside in an Alaska winter. That danger is real. The article notes HB 64 expands safe-surrender options through secure, climate-controlled baby boxes to keep panic and secrecy from becoming a death sentence. If lowering that final barrier, fear, saves even one life, it is a tool worth taking seriously. 

But the article’s power, its focus on shocking and rare cases of infant abandonment, risks narrowing the public imagination. The last twenty years of infant loss in Alaska is not defined by abandonment (as few as 3 by some records, Alaska Public Media, 10/13, KTOO, 01/22, and Anchorage Police 11/24).

Alaska’s broader reality is quieter and larger. Infant death overwhelmingly comes from neonatal complications, congenital conditions, and from post-neonatal causes like sudden unexpected infant death. These deaths do not spark the same immediate outrage as a baby found outside, but they fill the real ledger of loss. If we only respond to the most visible tragedy, we protect our feelings more than we protect Alaska’s children. 

Then there is the other ledger, upstream, quieter, and year after year numerically dominant: abortion. Alaska’s own reports put induced terminations in the low thousands annually. Regardless of one’s moral framework, any serious “life and death” discussion must admit the largest volume of life ended in Alaska is not a newborn left in the cold, but lives ended before birth. For some, that comparison will be morally decisive. For others, it will be contested. But it cannot be ignored if the conversation is to be about reality rather than rhetoric. 

Alaska’s modern abortion regime has two distinct roots: statutory legalization and later constitutional entrenchment.  

Statutorily, Alaska was an early mover. In 1970, Alaska joined a small handful of states that repealed major anti-abortion restrictions and permitted abortions more broadly often described at the time as allowing abortion “on request” (typically prior to viability and, in Alaska’s early framework, with a residency requirement). That legislative shift matters because it places Alaska among the pre-Roe states that liberalized abortion law through state action rather than federal compulsion. 

The second foundation is judicial and constitutional.  

In Valley Hospital Association v. Mat-Su Coalition for Choice (1997), the Alaska Supreme Court struck down restrictions by a quasi-public hospital by treating abortion as protected under Alaska’s privacy clause (Article I, Section 22). Yet the opinion’s “chicken-and-egg” schizophrenia remains: it talks as if reproductive rights are fundamental, as if abortion is constitutional, and then as if it exists only because it is folded into privacy: three rationales for the same result. This move ridiculously locks the issue into constitutional interpretation rather than ordinary legislation. 

In terms of “levels” by trimester, Alaska’s official Induced Termination of Pregnancy (ITOP) reporting organizes gestation by weeks, but the picture converts cleanly. In the last 20 years, Alaska Department of Health records disclose over 29,000 induced terminations occurring. The week-bands show that 26,000 to 27,000 were at or before 13 weeks, 1,700 to 2,300 occurred at 14–20 weeks, and very small number later than that.  

When the State opens the door to meandering morality, when it treats fundamental duties as negotiable, reframes evil as “complex,” or replaces clear norms with procedural loopholes, human nature rarely rises to the occasion. It adapts downward. People tend to do what is permitted, then what is tolerated, and eventually what is normalized. The boundary of conscience shifts to match the boundary of law; responsibility is externalized (“the system allowed it”), and the exceptional becomes routine.  

In that environment, tools like baby boxes are not merely compassionate conveniences, they are emergency guardrails erected because we already know what human beings do when shame, fear, or desperation meets moral ambiguity: they look for the quiet exit, the hidden solution, the path of least resistance. A society that wants fewer tragedies cannot only build softer landings after the fall; it must also restore moral clarity so fewer people approach the ledge in the first place. 

A sober takeaway is this: baby boxes are not the answer; they are an answer to one specific kind of failure: the moment a frightened or coerced parent believes there is no safe exit. In that sense, the Watchman article is right to treat baby boxes as a emergency off-ramp intervention: they do not solve the upstream crisis, but they can prevent a worst-case outcome. 

If Alaska wants to be serious about the sacredness of human life, the ethic must be comprehensive, not selective. It should include baby boxes as a harm-reduction safeguard. It should also include relentless work on the dominant causes of infant death, prenatal care access, maternal support, neonatal resources, and safe-sleep education. And it should include a clear-eyed confrontation with why so many pregnancies end in abortion, and whether Alaska’s institutions are offering women in crisis anything more substantial than slogans. 

The moral test is not whether we can be shocked by a newborn abandoned in winter. The test is whether we can build a society that makes that act less likely, makes infant death less common, and makes choosing life, before and after birth, more possible for the desperate, the poor, and the frightened. 

Survey Series: Gubernatorial Candidates Share Specific Amount They Would Propose for Education Funding

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
2
Survey Series: Gubernatorial Candidates Share Specific Amount They Would Propose for Education Funding

By Nathaniel Herz

Editor’s Note: This piece was originally published in Northern Journal, a newsletter and news website. Nathaniel Herz is an independent journalist and the founder and editor of Northern Journal. Nathaniel has given Must Read Alaska express permission to republish his gubernatorial candidate survey series.

We’re back with a new edition of our recurring survey of the more than dozen candidates running to be Alaska’s next governor.

This week’s survey explores a subject that has commanded huge amounts of political debate and discussion at Alaska’s Capitol in recent years: How much money should the state share with school districts on a per-student basis?

We also asked about what kind of car each candidate drives — because a car can tell you a lot about a person.

Republicans Bernadette Wilson, Nancy Dahlstrom, Adam Crum, Treg Taylor and independent Jessica Faircloth did not respond to the survey despite multiple requests.

Question 1: Education Funding

The Alaska Legislature last year passed a law boosting the state’s baseline per-student schools spending by some 12% to $6,660, up from $5,960, and overrode Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of the law. Lawmakers also overrode a separate line-item veto by Dunleavy of some of their added schools spending.

A pair of school districts, meanwhile, sued the Dunleavy administration last month, alleging that spending on schools is inadequate even after last year’s increase — which came after the baseline spending level rose barely 2% during the preceding decade. Inflation eroded purchasing power by some 37% during that same period, the districts said.

As governor, what specific amount would you have proposed for per-student spending — known as base student allocation, or BSA — in the budget for the upcoming fiscal year? Response must be a whole number. Then, please explain your answer.

Question 2: Cars

What kind of vehicle do you drive (make/model/color), and why did you choose it? If you don’t drive a car/truck, how do you get around?

Answers from the Candidates

Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins, Democratic Former State Representative

Q1: $6,900.

With the Permanent Fund, all we care about — and *should* care about — is the “real” value of the fund, in inflation-adjusted terms, in order to protect the fund for future generations of Alaskans. It’s why accounting for inflation (and not relying on “nominal,” non-inflation-adjusted figures) is so important for making the Permanent Fund permanent.

It’s no different for public education: in “real” terms, we have cut funding for our schools over the last decade (by flat-funding in nominal terms). I haven’t math’d out where $6,900 would put us in real, inflation-adjusted terms, but we should get back to levels of education funding where families feel confidence in their neighborhood school and their kids’ future in Alaska.

Q2: 2001 Toyota Rav4, manual transmission. 227,000 miles and going strong!

Shelley Hughes, Republican Former State Senator

Q1: $6,660.

K-12 education is of utmost importance. Tying any increase to $6,660 to policies to increase student outcomes is the right thing to do when 70% of students are below grade level. Alaska ranks high in spending, yet student performance lags at the very bottom. Per pupil costs range from $6,200 for correspondence to over $60,000 in some districts, but this increase doesn’t correlate with an increase in outcomes. An inflation adjustment and/or BSA increase in law should go hand in hand with laws re: accountability, funds routed to teachers and proven approaches (like the Reads Act), expansion of proven, cost-effective educational choices, admin/instruction cost ratio reductions, and districts joining state’s health insurance pool to save money.

Q2: Our vehicles are simply to get us from point A to point B safely, nothing fancy, just functional. My husband and I share our 2010 Ford Ranger and 2020 Acura RDX. The must-haves when it comes to a vehicle? They have to hold the road well in winter (and that means 4-wheel drive – and sandbags in truck bed) and have space to haul gear for summer fun.

Anchorage Doctor Matt Heilala, a Republican

Q1: $6,660.

Should the need for additional funding arise after last year’s BSA showdown, I would work directly with legislators to set clear, achievable student outcome standards tied to any future funding such as reading proficiency by 3rd grade and algebra proficiency by 9th grade. Public schools deserve adequate support, and increased funding must come with accountability for measurable results, not unchecked spending. I’d also emphasize that public education is rapidly decentralizing and will look very different in the coming decades. This shift can benefit families and communities by using technology to find efficiencies, making more learning possible in less time and at lower cost through modern, decentralized teaching platforms.

Q2: I drive a Toyota Land Cruiser for Alaska’s tough winters. When weather permits, I drive my Tesla Model S Plaid. It’s exhilarating to drive, and its Full Self-Driving AI is remarkably advanced, proven 6-10x safer than human driving. As a technophile, I love its 90% well-to-wheel efficiency (vs. ~25% for gas), the forefront of innovation.

Dave Bronson, Republican and Former Mayor of Anchorage

Q1: $6,000.

Alaska already spends among the most per student in the nation, yet our student outcomes rank near the bottom.

Continuing to raise spending without demanding clear educational improvement is not responsible to students, parents, or taxpayers. Any future increase must be directly tied to specific, measurable reforms that improve reading proficiency, math performance, graduation rates, and career readiness.

Our priority must be measurable results, not just higher budgets. Before asking Alaskans to spend more, we must ensure existing education dollars are being used effectively.

Funding increases should be tied to proven progress in the classroom, not just throwing money at administrative bloat.

Q2: Red 2024 Ford F-350 – I chose it for functionality and towing capacity.

Republican James William Parkin IV

Q1: $10,000.

Alaska’s “spend it or lose it” budget is a system that breeds short-sighted, wasteful spending! For over 30 years I have witnessed the waste that this kind of directive has caused. No more! Clear directives, one page budget accountability, and allowances for saving, investing and long term financial decisionmaking without future budget penalties will guide funding to where it rightfully belongs. To the children and their teachers and not to administrative costs. Alaska was once a magnet state for the nation’s best teachers and brightest students! Alaska’s education funding is ranked 6th highest in the nation! A lawsuit is unwarranted. A budget system that gives the ed department more control over funding will solve the problems. Much more.

Q2: Whatever is running at the time. My fun car (not drivable most of the year) is my red 2007 Saturn Sky Redline Turbo convertible. Not practical but sometimes you need to just enjoy life. My kids enjoy driving it too.

Matanuska-Susitna Borough Mayor Edna DeVries, a Republican

Q1: $0.

I believe my answer is pretty clear. I am not proposing or supporting any amount until public education in the state of Alaska completes some reforms.

Q2: 2022 SUV

Former Anchorage State Sen. Tom Begich, a Democrat

Q1: $7,360.

This would be the 1st of 2 increases to bring us to $1,200 over 2 years. According to Legislative Finance, this covers erosion from inflation over the last 2 decades. I was instrumental in both the Kasayulie and Moore lawsuits ensuring that our state would fully and adequately fund education. The Reads Act set out good policy, but good policy – universal PreK, Reading, Math – must be fully funded. This administration has not done that. If reform is going to work, you have to pay for it. Coupled with early funding and inflation indexing of education, this would stabilize our education budget and would be paid for by 1) adopting the internet fee; 2) eliminating the Hilcorp exemption; and 3) eliminating oil and gas tax credits on our 3 legacy fields.

Q2: Grey All Wheel Drive MiniCooper Countryman (2013) — bought in Portland when my old car died. Drove up the Alcan Dec. 2012 at -40 F. The car wasn’t happy, but heated seats worked for me. It continues to carry me — well over 100,000 miles — up and down the Alcan in Winter and Summer. Good mileage, reliable, warm — and surprisingly high clearance.

Republican Former State Senator Click Bishop

Q1: $7,894.

As senator, I would have voted to override Governor Dunleavy’s veto of education funding. As governor, I will bring together stakeholders and experts to craft a durable solution to Alaska’s long-term education funding challenges. The $6,660 per-student figure was a compromise focused on one number, but districts across organized boroughs and REAAs face different realities. We must revisit the district cost factor, stagnant for 20 years, to ensure safe, reliable schools for every child. I would also add career and technical education to the formula. Alaska needs a predictable funding system so educators can focus on students—not politics in Juneau.

Q2: Blue Ford F-350 diesel crew cab. It’s my “do-it-all” truck— perfect for hauling my grandkids and Ruby, my dog. It has 340,000 miles and still running, but I do spend the money to keep it up in shape. It fits me like a glove!!!

Democratic State Sen. Matt Claman

Q1: $7,000.

A bright future for Alaska starts with education. For too long, we’ve undermined our schools, asking for more while funding less. $7,000 is an increase higher than inflation, and it must come with better results. Schools must work smarter to improve performance for students, the workforce, and our communities. Accountability is key to improving K-12 education, keeping young people working in Alaska, and growing the economy so the next generation can succeed. And we must start now. As senator, I introduced SB 46 to shift the focus from the flawed Base Student Allocation to a comprehensive budget approach that ensures predictability, transparency, and effective student-teacher ratios for our children to thrive. Our families deserve no less.

Q2: 2007 Subaru Tribeca. It’s a great car for us—all-wheel drive, reliable, and room to carry gear for our Alaska adventures. Plus it has comfortable seating for Lucy, our dog, to join the journey!

Republican Commercial Fisherman Henry Kroll

Q1: $10.

We have a 7% inflation of the dollar, and everything costs more. Some schools could be consolidated, and the buildings could be either rented or shared with other schools.

Q2: I drive a Ford 150 for my fishing business and a Ford car to get around because it is economical.

More in Series

Survey Series: Which Candidates for Governor Support Increasing Taxes on Oil and Gas, Which Don’t, and Why?

Survey Series: Candidates for Governor Share Their Favorite Fish Recipes!

Survey Series: Which Gubernatorial Candidates Prioritize Alaska LNG Project?

Meet the Anchorage School Board Candidates for April 7 Election

Natalie Spaulding
-
4
Meet the Anchorage School Board Candidates for April 7 Election

Editor’s Note: This story was updated on 3/8/26 to correct the mistaken claim that Rachel Blakeslee taught at the Anchorage School District. Blakeslee was a teacher in Texas and Colorado before moving to Alaska.

Two seats on the Anchorage School Board will be voted on this year on April 7. Here is who is running:

School Board – Seat C​

Rosales, Alexander​: a conservative-minded, retired Air Force Vet with 20 years of service. He states, “I envision safe, supportive schools with robust parent involvement and true school choice.” His priorities include school safety, parental choice, quality education, local control, and U.S. values in education. Learn more about Rosales here: Alexander Rosales for Anchorage School Board | Vote April 7 2026.
Blakeslee, Rachel​: a former teacher in Texas and Colorado whose priorities include environmental justice, equity and inclusion in education, and growing and retaining a diverse teaching workforce. Learn more about Blakeslee here: Rachel Blakeslee for School Board | Support Strong Schools Today.

School Board – Seat D

Gibbons, Sharon: ​former Chair of the Eagle River Community Council and current Delegate to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women. Gibbons does not have a campaign website.
​Darden, Dustin: a journeyman carpenter. He states, “I’m running to promote the health, constitutional rights, and equal justice of all our residents.” Learn more about Dustin Darden here: Dustin Darden.
​​McDonogh, Paul​: a former ASD teacher who prioritizes ending the teacher retention crisis, advocating for more state funding for education, advancing whole-student learning, and seeking equity solutions for Anchorage’s diverse community. Learn more about Paul McDonough here: Paul McDonogh for Anchorage School Board.

1...151617...1,775Page 16 of 1,775

About us

Must Read Alaska is news of people, politics, policy, culture, and happenings in Alaska.

Contact
4021 West Hill Road,
Homer, AK 99603
[email protected]

The latest

Americans Across the Country Gather to Read the Entire Bible Out Loud This Week

Faith Watch 0
Starting at 5:00 a.m. Alaska time tomorrow, April 18,...

Opinion: Why We March for Life

The Social 0
By Jim Minnery, President of Alaska Family Council This story...

Opinion: Alaska GOP Needs Better Political Strategy  

Columns 0
By Michael Tavoliero Currently, the Alaska’s 2026 governor’s race fields at least 16...

© Must Read Alaska