Monday, August 4, 2025
Home Blog Page 1641

Alaska’s budget and you: A few hard facts

BY NICK BEGICH, GUEST CONTRIBUTOR

Anchorage was recently rated as the Hardest Working City in America among 116 of the nation’s largest cities.

The ranking was determined by an assessment of hours worked, labor participation rate, and other factors.

We aren’t just working hard, we’re working harder than the rest of the United States.

As Alaskans, we display our work ethic as a badge of honor, pulling far more than our expected weight in our households and our communities. Of course, all our hard work isn’t only a reflection of our values, but is a matter of practical reality.

It should come as no surprise that Alaska has the fifth highest cost of living among US states, according to the Council for Community & Economic Research. Unfortunately, after adjusting for cost of living, Alaska ranks in the bottom 34 percent of states for household income. This high cost of living erodes our quality of life and diminishes our ability to save for the future.

Now, facing an imbalanced fiscal outlook, we are told that all our hard work is not enough and that it’s time to establish a new tax on Alaskan workers. Are we being asked to dig deeper in order to support a high functioning, efficient set of government services or are we simply propping up a wasteful bureaucracy in desperate need of overhaul?

One data point can be seen in our education spending. Alaska spends more per K-12 student than any state in the country outside of New York. Yet Alaska ranks 45th in school system quality according to this panel of national experts.

Further, despite real per-student spending having increased by over 70 percent over the past 45 years, Alaska’s SAT scores are actually 3 percent lower, according to the College Board. The increased spending, as structured, has not delivered.

These facts have not escaped this session’s Senate Education Committee. The group is working through SB 96 and other measures to improve upon the current system in ways that realize efficiencies while improving outcomes, including efforts that:

  • Increase access to virtual education
  • Redirect spend from administrative overhead to classroom instruction
  • Provide grants to local districts that realize budgetary cost savings, and
  • Explore the merging of schools that are too far below their capacity

Alaska’s budgetary number as a simple figure is impossible to understand without some context. Here are a few unfortunate facts related to the present size of our state budget:

  • Alaska has budgeted more annual spending per capita than tax headliners New York or California.
  • The 49th State ranks #1 in annual budget per capita nationwide.
  • Alaska has the dubious distinction of budgeting nearly $10,000 per man, woman, and child in total spend for this fiscal year.
  • The equivalent of over 43 percent of Alaskan’s household income is currently earmarked for State government spending, which is an unsustainable and irresponsible level.

The data make it clear that as Alaskans we’re already doing all that we can and perhaps more than we should to keep the heater burning, gas in the tank, and food on the table.

In spite of all of this, we’ve been told that Alaskans aren’t giving their “fair share.” Rather than a rush to add more burdens to Alaskan families, let’s make sure we are doing the hard work to make government more efficient and effective for those it serves.

Nicholas J. Begich III is a technology executive, entrepreneur, and investor. He serves on the board of MTA, Baylor University’s business accelerator LAUNCH, and committees of the Alaska Republican Party. Nicholas holds an MBA from Indiana University’s Kelley School of Business with concentrations in Information Technology and Decision Support Modeling, and a BBA in Entrepreneurship from Baylor University’s Hankamer School of Business. He lives in Chugiak with his wife Dharna Begich, Pharm.D, and their son, Nicholas IV.

Bedbugs, comfort cats, transgender toilets — all end up at Rights Commission

WHY THE APPOINTMENT OF DREW PHOENIX MATTERS

It was about the bedbugs. And yes, it was about the cats.

Bedbugs, three cats, some possibly developmentally challenged children, a family of publicly subsidized renters, a too-lenient landlord and an eviction notice all ended up in a collision of perspectives before the Alaska Human Rights Commission.

The cats (and the bedbugs) won.

The 2013 case illustrates why it is important who is appointed to the Human Rights Commission. The questions that commissioners face are formally adjudicated, and the judgments they make have profound impacts on people’s lives. (The panel is considered “quasi-judicial,” but in fact it does make case law by its decisions.)

In this situation, which we’ll call Bedbugs vs. Common Sense, a family of six moved into a rental unit managed by an Anchorage man who had several rentals as his business. The man didn’t allow pets on his properties, but he made an exception for this family. He said they could have their one cat. The mom was evidently very persuasive.

But soon the one cat became three cats. The landlord didn’t like it but he didn’t work hard enough to get them to get rid of the cats. He told them that he had only approved one cat. But he didn’t document that he tried to force them to downsize their litter.

Then, when the apartment became infested with bedbugs, he asked them to take their cats to a vet and have them certified as vermin-free. Mitigation for bedbugs is costly and he wanted to be sure the infestation didn’t return. None of the other units had bedbugs and none of the other units had pets. He was deducing the two were connected.

What the mom did instead was to bring back a letter from a psychiatrist saying these cats were comfort animals that were necessary for the well-being of three of her four boys, who have been diagnosed with attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder. Yes, that is now considered a disability — a mental disability.

Eventually the landlord said he wanted to remodel the unit from top to bottom and the family would have to move out. That’s when the mom took the case to the Alaska Human Rights Commission. She asserted he was picking on her kids’ comfort cats.

The commission found in favor of the mom. The family was allowed to stay, cats, bedbugs, and all. One member of the Human Rights Commission dissented, but she was outnumbered.

Drew Phoenix, in blue, is Gov. Bill Walker’s nominee for the Human Rights Commission. He is an LGBTQ champion. (Photo from Catholic Anchor newspaper)

THE ACTIVIST APPOINTEE TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

In February, Gov. Bill Walker appointed a person to the Human Rights Commission who has stated very publicly and unequivocally that he is an advocate for the expanded rights of transgendered people — those who have switched from one gender to another.

This activist was once a woman known as Ann Gordon, a Methodist pastor in Baltimore, MD.

From accounts in church documents, Pastor Gordon was well-loved by her congregation. But there’s little trace of Ann before she went through hormone treatment, invested in some psychological counseling and various surgeries, and emerged as Drew Phoenix, a man. That’s not as important as the fact that he has stated that he wants to be the face of transgender rights. He is a cause-driven activist.

It’s also his business now. Phoenix works as a diversity consultant out of Fairbanks. For a couple of years he served as the executive director of Identity, the pro-gay advocacy group in Alaska.

Identity hosts events such as one coming up in May-June: Alaska Youth DRAG Workshop,  “to create a community of support for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) youth and their allies through the Art of Drag. The Workshop will be a 3 day…event celebrating gender expression, creativity, and performance. Through education, group activities, and socializing, we hope to empower the youth and further embrace themselves in order to be greater change agents in their communities. We will focus on character development, song choices, costuming, hair and make-up, and lessons in Drag Herstory. The third day will also end in a Variety Show, where participates will have the opportunity to share a performance with a live, all ages audience, during Pride Fest!”

Identity is very much an in-your-face group, and Phoenix is cut from the same cloth.

With Gov. Walker’s appointment and the approval of 31 members of the Legislature, Phoenix would be serving on the commission that would most likely make decisions about the gender-fluid world we are living in: Whether men should be allowed to use women’s bathrooms (or the reverse) and whether boys competing on girls’ sporting teams are playing fair. Whether a conservative Christian wedding photographer must take photos of a gay wedding, or a Muslim baker provide a wedding cake celebrating the union of the same gay couple.

Just as nominees for the U.S. Supreme Court are deeply vetted and examined about their beliefs and their past decisions, Phoenix should face scrutiny, because he has made activism his cause and he’s been stating his opinon on these matters for many years. He would bring a clear, self-avowed bias to the Alaska Human Rights Commission.

Must Read Alaska left a message for Drew Phoenix but has not heard back. It’s important that Alaskans know where he stands on the big issues he’ll likely face if confirmed. Right now, Alaskans don’t know for certain how he would judge issues, but a reasonable person can guess that based on his statements and his work as an LGBTQ activist and diversity consultant, he will favor sexual and gender identity rights over rights of faith.

And that’s a hill many conservatives will defend to the bitter end. It is a hill Phoenix must charge in his legislative confirmation process.

LAWS, REGS AND VOTER INITIATIVES

In Washington State, the Legislature didn’t act to open locker rooms and bathrooms to transgendered individuals, so the Washington Human Rights Commission there made the law through regulation.

In 2015, Washington guaranteed access to restrooms, locker rooms, and other such facilities according to an individuals sense of which gender they identify with, and that means all buildings, public and private.

In Anchorage, a two-year-old law on the books is being challenged by backers of a ballot initiative who want voters to decide whether people should use bathrooms according to what is on their birth certificates. The “Protect Our Privacy” initiative would restore bathroom order in a world where organizations like Identity are encouraging people to re-evaluate their gender identity on a daily basis.

Time will tell as to how Phoenix’s appointment fares in end-of-session legislative deal-making. That, in turn, will influence the outcome of a multitude of commission cases, such as those pitting Bedbugs against Common Sense and those pitting political correctness against private property rights, wedding services, and religious freedom.

Someone has to blink or we shut this government down

OUR MOST CANTANKEROUS CONTRIBUTOR THINKS ABOUT THE ‘S’ WORD

By ART CHANCE

Allow me to engage in a fantasy where once again I’m the State’s director of labor relations. I work for a Republican governor who has at least a little courage and we have a State Senate controlled by Republicans who are more interested in governing the state effectively than in getting re-elected or getting a lobbying contract.

We all know how likely all that is.

It is late April, the clock is ticking on the 120-day constitutional limit on the legislative session and there isn’t a hope in Hell that there can be a budget before adjournment.

A May special session has us knocking up against the June 1 deadline for giving layoff notices to State employees, should there not be a budget at midnight June 30.

In this fantasy scenario the only way there can be a budget before June 30 is if the Republican governor and Senate capitulate to the Democrats/unions, or if the governor and Senate can make the Democrats/unions blink.

So, how do I, the labor relations director, make the Democrats/unions blink?

The factual predicate of all this is that they’re under contract, so my tool bag for bringing them to heel is pretty limited.

The only move on the board really is the Queen’s Gambit: A government shutdown for the State is a real shutdown, not the fake media events the federal government stages from time to time.

Now, if I have those conditions I set out in the first paragraph, I threaten the shutdown.

But back to reality: In the current conditions, it is the governor and the Democrat/union House threatening it.

Right now, I’d start talking about how there will be no money for back pay for employees who miss work because of a government shutdown.

Government shutdowns are usually a pretty comfortable thing for public employees; they get some time off and they ultimately get paid for it.

A government shutdown is a paid vacation for government employees that doesn’t even cost them any leave.

In reality a government shutdown is a paid vacation for government employees that doesn’t even cost them any leave.   You have to make it hurt or it is meaningless.

I’ll admit that even with the relatively favorable conditions I set out in my first paragraph, I’m struggling with this because the shutdown threat is just about the only tool I have left in my tool bag.

The only real advantage I have is knowing a shutdown will hurt the unions at least as much as it hurts me.

It doesn’t matter if they make $30,000 or $130,000, State employees have no savings; they live from paycheck to paycheck because they have the confidence of their leave cash-outs and ultimately their SBS and retirement funds.

If you shut it down on July 1, they get one more paycheck for their work for the last two weeks of June and then the wolf starts sitting outside their door — and they’re on the phone to the union in no time.

If you’re a hardball governor and they really do go through with a shutdown, you could make that last paycheck really hard to get as well; it’s a nasty one, but it’s a tool.

I always assumed that the 8,000-odd member General Government Unit couldn’t keep many of their members on strike as soon as the members were told they couldn’t take leave to go on strike, and most of the lower level members have little or no leave; at that level alarm clocks don’t work, cars don’t start, and babysitters don’t show up, so it is hard to have much accrued leave.

So, union leaders are catching Hell from their about-to-be broke members just like politicians are catching Hell because nothing in the State is going to work after 12:01 July 1, 2017.

Rest assured, one is scared and the other is glad of it, and I don’t mind admitting that were I making this play, I’d be scared.

I don’t think there is an elected official in the world who’d go through with this, and union leaders are elected officials too.   A credible threat starting with a plain language statement that if the Democrats/unions shut down the government there will be no money until there is actually a budget and they go back to work is a good start; it actually gives the Republican side a reasonably useful tool.

Right now, they have an empty tool bag.

The governor and the Democrat-controlled House can force the Senate to a standoff that leads to a shutdown, and, folks, unlike the federal government, a State government shutdown is very, very real; the government has almost no authority to operate and Granny might really go over that cliff.

The Senate has already shown that it will move toward the House and the governor; now we’ll find out how far they’ll move to avoid a shutdown.

This game ain’t for sissies.

Art Chance is a retired Director of Labor Relations for the State of Alaska, formerly of Juneau and now living in Anchorage. He is the author of the book, “Red on Blue, Establishing a Republican Governance,” available at Amazon. He gets kicked off of Facebook now and then for using the word “hermaphrodite” to describe politicians who don’t know what political party they stand with.

Earth Day quiz: Which of these predictions came true?

Children holding balls made of plastic are the symbol for Earth Day at the organizers’ web site. It will take 70-450 years for those balls to decompose, according to our research. 

 

Listen up, all you illiterates: The theme for this year’s Earth Day is Environmental and Climate Change Literacy. There will be a quiz.

If you voted for Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, you should feel exonerated and just sleep in. But for all the rest of us, there is going to be some shaming:

“We need to build a global citizenry fluent in the concepts of climate change and aware of its unprecedented threat to our planet. We need to empower everyone with the knowledge to inspire action in defense of environmental protection,” says the earthday.org site.

We hope there are no Tyvek banners involved. Those things take so long to decompose.

“Environmental and climate literacy is the engine not only for creating green voters and advancing environmental and climate laws and policies but also for accelerating green technologies and jobs.”

“Engine” seems like the wrong word here, but we’ll let that go for now. It’s the green voters that have us concerned.

Earth Day.org created a “teach-in toolkit” that gives everyone a blueprint for holding a successful Earth Day event. Because the science is settled: The climate is changing.

“Scientific fact is under threat,” the tool kit says. “Lawmakers and business leaders are turning a blind eye to the impending environmental crisis caused by human actions. Environmental justice demands an educated citizenry capable of defending science and reason.”

Maybe it’s just us here in the peanut gallery, but “science” is what got us here in the first place. Before science, we were happy cave dwellers who died young and didn’t invent great stuff beyond, say, a dreamcatcher.

“Environmental education is the first step towards progress… to tackle the unprecedented challenge of climate change,” according to earthday.org.

In other words, there is one version of the facts in front of us. Learn it. Recite it. Don’t dare to doubt it.

The scientists — some of them, at least — will be joining in the fray, as the March for Science is also on Saturday (10 am on the Park Strip in Anchorage), a convenient intersection of interests that will most certainly be an anti-Trump, anti-Republican event. Bring on the henna tattoos.

The day, curiously, is also the birthday of Vladimir Lenin. We must bake a cake. That part about one of the first Earth Day activists killing and composting his girlfriend? Wrong. He packed her in Styrofoam pellets. Environmental pig.

One might say that Earth Day has been an unparalleled success. After all, the Earth is a much better place than it was back in the late 1960s, when the nascent environmental movement was predicting our imminent destruction. More people live here. More of them live pretty good lives. There seems to be less starvation in places like India and Africa. Even the Russians and Chinese are better off in 2017.

That’s either inconvenient or something Earth Day can hang its hat on.

Enough already, on to the quiz.

THE QUIZ

Here, then, compiled by American Enterprise Institute’s Mark J. Perry, are 18 predictions about humanity’s demise, as told to us by scientists in 1970.

The quiz is: Which of these predictions came true?

1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

2. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal Environment.

3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”

4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 issue of Mademoiselle. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”

5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay titled “Eco-Catastrophe! “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”

6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.”

7. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” declared Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.

8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

9. In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”

10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

11. Barry Commoner predicted that decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate.

12. Paul Ehrlich chimed in, predicting in 1970 that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” Ehrlich sketched a scenario in which 200,000 Americans would die in 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles.

13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970 issue of Audubon that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” Ehrlich warned that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. (Hint: According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.8 years).

14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”

15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated the humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990.

16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look that, “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

17. In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that “since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so, it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”

18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending Ice Age in a speech. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

You can trade papers now and grade each other.

To participate in the annual affair, head to the Anchorage Museum at 11 am on Saturday. To participate in the March for Science, be on the Delaney Park Strip at 10 am sharp. We’ll be phoning it in, mired in our shame.

Dispatch searches for its digital roots

In better days: Tony Hopfinger and Alice Rogoff in this USA Today photo labeled “handout.”

STOP THE PRESSES

The Alaska Dispatch News newspaper enterprise started out as the homegrown Alaska Dispatch internet news startup, with scrappy Amanda Coyne and brooding Tony Hopfinger working out of their home, pounding out long-form stories, and beating the stuffing out of the McClatchy-owned Anchorage Daily News.

The Dispatch was compelling, edgy, but unprofitable as an online publication, until Alice Rogoff discovered Alaska, discovered the Dispatch and discovered she could wield a heap of influence in our frontier outpost. She became its angel investor and majority owner in 2009.

They staffed up. They made waves and the media establishment across the country paid attention.

By May 2014, Rogoff couldn’t see how to be profitable. So she bought out the Anchorage Daily News at the price of $34 million, and they merged the operations. Little Digital had purchased the Big Print news operation. It was quite a story, and the media world was enchanted.

[Skip over this section if you can tell this enchantment story in your sleep.]

Soon thereafter, Coyne left to continue blogging independently. Hopfinger stayed for a while, but he was losing influence in the newsroom as executive editor. He left and much of the brilliant original digital media staff is now elsewhere. The print mafia had won.

CHECKING FOR A PULSE

It has been a bumpy three years.

First, Rogoff needed to move her presses out of the old Airport Heights building, which she had sold to GCI. But there was nowhere to put the behemoth offset, and so she began paying premium rent to GCI to keep her presses housed.

At some point this year, the millionaire publisher will get her new press from Indiana running down on Arctic Blvd at her newspaper’s new location, and will remediate her way out the door of the GCI building.

Second, Rogoff and Hopfinger are now in a nasty business divorce that will head to trial in August or, more likely, be settled in July.

Meanwhile, the print circulation of the Alaska Dispatch News appears to still be flagging, although no accurate numbers are being made public any longer. The industry has gone into its shell, hoping no one will notice.

Wikipedia calls the circulation at between 57,622 daily and 71,223 on Sundays, but others say the number is less than that by tens of thousands.

Must Read Alaska calculates the actual print circulation at about 18,000 daily based on old audits and a 6 percent average yearly decline in print readership nationwide. Add in the 10,000 Wednesday mailbox stuffer, and Rogoff might claim 28,000 readers.

The online circulation is falling too, although the ADN is still the top digital news property in the state.

UP AND DOWN THE PAYWALL

Rogoff started out at the Daily News-Dispatch  by taking down the Dispatch paywall, which required a paid subscription in order to access the site. She told KUAC radio in January of 2015, ““It’s just not something that we have ever thought made sense.”

It would have been one thing, she said, if news readers had always paid for online news. But to get them to suddenly start paying for what they were used to getting for free just wasn’t likely. “And the way your news product gets seen by the people you want to see it, and read it, is by letting it be out there for free.”

But information dessemination is a cruel business. By January of this year, the paywall was back up. Sort of. It’s an on-again, off-again paywall, which some readers encounter and others do not. There is no real logic to it, but in any case, former Dispatch reporter Craig Medred has publicized ways to defeat it, and such information is readily available to those who know how to use the Google search function. Otherwise, it’s $9.99 a month.

This month, the Dispatch was thrown a lifeline to help it get its digital act back together. It’s a Rogoff walk-of-shame back to where she started in news in Alaska. The Poynter Institute announced that the Dispatch would be among 21 news companies that will get help learning to lead with their online foot first.

Or for Rogoff, relearning.

Poynter’s Local News Innovation Project, funded by the Knight Foundation, is a three-year program. There will be seminars and coaching involved. Perhaps there will even be targets and milestones to meet.

Coincidentally, three years is the same amount of time it took the Dispatch to dismantle itself to where it is today. It went from being a digital news leader, with talent like Coyne, Hopfinger, Craig Medred, Scott Woodham, Sean Doogan, and Kyle Hopkins (all now off doing other things) to this: Going Outside for help in rebuilding that digital pioneering spirit it dismantled when it combined operations.

LOOKING FOR HER MOJO

But will it be profitable? Rogoff certainly would like that.

Of course, it was a headier time back in 2014, when she was quoted in the Columbia Journalism Review saying, “This has to make money.”

This January, when she announced the paywall was going back up, she realigned expectations: “We don’t need to make money, but we have to stay afloat.”

 The return to its digital roots may not solve the company’s core problems.

Today, the economy in Alaska is mired in a deep economic recession.  Advertising is going to remain soft for some time.  And, from the department of just desserts, an argument can be made that the Alaska Dispatch News, with its focus on changing public policy, had something to do with crashing the economy by pushing for the election of anti-oil, tax-it-if-it-moves Gov. Bill Walker and slanting the news coverage against the state’s primary economic engines.

The format may change and the company may limp forward with digital.  But the larger question remains: does the Dispatch understand its readers or is it mired in journalistic hubris that “knows better” than the people it would serve? Remaining stubbornly misaligned with the economic interests of its readership seems a poor way to turn the circulation corner.

And finally, will three years of remedial digital therapy with the Poynter Institute bring profitability, or has the spine of the Dispatch business model been broken beyond repair?

Environmental group sues over Alaska predator control rollback

0
Grizzly approaches fishing gear along the Kenai River. (Fish and Wildlife Service photo)

WOLF AND BEAR PROTECTIONS — STATE OR FEDERAL MANAGEMENT?

No sooner was the ink dry on House Joint Resolution 69, rolling back Obama-era prohibitions on predator control across Alaska’s federal lands, when the environmental groups had their lawsuit up and running.

Today, the Center for Biological Diversity filed that lawsuit in the District Court of Alaska in Anchorage, claiming that Congress doesn’t have a right to use the Congressional Review Act to turn over rules rushed through during the final days of the Obama Administration, which took game control authority on federal refuge land out of the hands of the State of Alaska.

The Center for Biological Diversity wants the rule reinstated that prohibits Alaska Fish and Game predator control measures, which the environmentalists have claimed allows game managers to kill wolves and their pups in dens and gun down grizzly bears at bait stations.” Those types of predator control are extremely rare in Alaska (see Q and A below).

In 2016, U.S. Fish and Wildlife enacted what’s known as the Refuges Rule. The lawsuit says that in the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Congress delegated to the Department of Interior authority for managing the National Wildlife Refuge System and directed that such refuges in Alaska be managed to “conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity.”

That last part is a point of contention. Rod Arno of the Alaska Outdoor Council says Alaska was exempted from the “diversity” portion because the size of our refuges already takes care of diversity.

The lawsuit says that if Congress wants to constrain Interior, it’s going to have to go through the usual means, which involves passage of a new bill.

Instead, the Republican House and Senate used a measure passed during the Newt Gingrich “Contract With America” era, which allows it to undo Executive Branch rule-making that happens during a president’s final months.

“Such Congressional overreaching undermines the separation of powers that must be maintained between the legislative and executive branches, in violation of the U.S. Constitution,” the lawsuit claims.

The Congressional Review Act has not been used widely in its 20-year existence, so few are ready to declare whether it can pass constitutional challenge.

The lawsuit, however, underscores the need for the Trump Administration to quickly fill out Department of Interior political appointments as they pertain to Alaska.  Several key posts remain unfilled three months in to the new Administration.

“If not, then the lawyers will come up with the arguments all by themselves,” said a congressional aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The Assistant Secretary for Wildlife and Parks has yet to be appointed, and could play an important role in defending the Trump Administration against the Center for Biological Diversity’s lawsuit. Also pending is the Alaska Assistant to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, a position that is still being discussed with candidates, even today.

Despite opposition from the State of Alaska, Native Alaskans, and the hunting community, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service finalized regulations that limited or ended predator control on national wildlife refuges in Alaska.  These rules went into effect on September 4, 2016 and change long-standing practices related to wolf and bear populations, as they impact caribou and moose availability for hunters and subsistence users. Those FWS rules that were rolled back are here.

In March, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game published this Q and A about Alaska’s predator control program:

TRUTH ABOUT ALASKA’S REFUGE RULE REPEAL

The (HJR 69) repeal nullifies regulations that allowed the federal government to override state wildlife management authority on Alaska’s 16 wildlife refuges. Contrary to what some activists claim, it does not allow hunters to gas wolf pups in their dens, to shoot bears and wolves from airplanes, or allow bears to be taken in steel-jawed traps.

FACTS:

Q. DOES THE STATE OF ALASKA PERMIT AERIAL GUNNING OF BEARS?
A. Aerial hunting of bears is prohibited under general hunting regulations. Bears may be taken from the air in state-approved intensive management programs in limited areas by state staff only. The state is not conducting intensive management for bears on any federal lands, nor was it prior to the FWS rule.

Q. DOES THE STATE OF ALASKA ALLOW AERIAL HUNTING OF WOLVES?
A. Aerial hunting of wolves is prohibited under general hunting regulations. Only agents of the state in approved intensive management programs in limited areas may hunt wolves from the air. There are no state intensive management programs on National Park Service or FWS lands.

Q. DOES THE STATE OF ALASKA PERMIT THE GASSING OF WOLF PUPS?
A. This is prohibited under general hunting regulations.

Q. DOES THE STATE OF ALASKA ALLOW HARVEST OF BEARS AND/OR CUBS IN DENS?
A. The harvest of black bears at dens is allowed in a limited area under state and federal regulations where it is considered a customary and traditional practice for obtaining food.

Q. DOES THE STATE OF ALASKA ALLOW HARVEST OF WOLVES OR WOLF PUPS IN DENS?
A. No. This can occur only in approved intensive management programs and only by state staff. It was done in one program in 2008 and 2009.

Q. DOES THE STATE OF ALASKA PERMIT THE TAKING OF BEARS OVER BAIT?
A. Yes. The harvest of bears over bait is a form of regulated take in many areas of Alaska and the Lower 48 states. The Federal Subsistence Board also allows federally qualified subsistence users to harvest bears over bait on federal land.

Q. DOES THE STATE OF ALASKA ALLOW BEARS TO BE TAKEN IN STEEL-JAWED TRAPS?
A. No.

Q. WILL THE STATE BOARD OF GAME AUTHORIZE PREDATOR CONTROL IN REFUGES?
A. No, only the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service can authorize predator control programs in refuges.

For more, visit http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/index.cfm?adfg=hottopics.res69

Don Young files for 24th term in Congress

Congressman Don Young and Ann Young stand in front of the Division of Elections on Gambell Street in Anchorage after he filed for his 24th term of office. He faces re-election in 2018.

True to his word, Congressman Don Young filed for re-election yesterday in Anchorage. If successful in November, 2018, he would serve an historic 24th term, and would become the longest-serving Republican in Congress in U.S. history.

[Watch Young file: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HR1RWCkmTwQ&feature=youtu.be]

Young, from Fort Yukon, Alaska, moved to Alaska before Statehood and was a commercial fisherman, trapper, and gold miner. He also taught Native students at a Bureau of Indian Affairs log-constructed school. He captained his own tug-and-barge operation and delivered supplies along the Yukon River. He is the only licensed mariner in Congress to this day.

He was elected mayor of Fort Yukon in 1964.  In 1966 he was elected to the State House, where he served for two terms, before being elected to the State Senate in 1970.

In 1973 he became Congressman for Alaska, and led the battle for the Trans-Alaska Pipeline.  Don and Lu Young were married for 46 years before she died in 2009. On June 9, 2015 he married Anne Garland Walton, a Fairbanks-area nurse.

Young recently saw his 78th piece of legislation become law. That is HJR 69, which overturned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule that took game management away from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game on federal refuge land. He has introduced more than 1,000 bills since taking office in 1973.

In June, Young will turn 84 years old. A lifelong Republican, he won with 50.3 percent of the vote during his last election in 2016 in a four-way race that included Libertarian Jim McDermott, (1o.3 percent), Democrat Steve Lindbeck (36 percent), and Independent Bernie Souphanavong (3 percent).

Severed head of a president and other indignities of art

6
Before and after: We altered the painting to put the artist’s own head in place of President Trump, because…well, it’s art.

ART CRITIC

If University of Alaska Anchorage artist Thomas Chung wanted to be famous, someone call his mom: He’s finally done it. He’s getting his 15 minutes of fame.

Chung painted a workmanlike depiction of a Captain America holding the severed head of President Donald Trump, while a vampish Hillary Clinton clings to the naked hero’s leg and birds caw around his ears. She’s wearing a pantsuit and she’s let her hair grow a bit. Various other things challenge the viewer of the painting, including the word: “Everything.”

Whatev’, as the kids all say.

Today is maybe the last day you can see on display the painting that has by now gotten the world’s attention, the painting that has caused rather a big ruckus in the world of “people who take offense at almost everything.”

The sheer barbarism that flowed from Chung’s mind onto canvas has earned him worldwide notoriety. He may have a pretty face, but what’s in that Chung head of his? Apparently, it’s not a pretty place.

Chung told KTUU that he wept after the election of Donald Trump in November. And, as artists do, he put brush to canvas and came up with something that is a disturbing mash-up of his own fears, bad dreams, and political projections.

It’s not particularly wonderful or skillful, but it captures a moment in time in the artist’s interpretation of the world. Donald Trump was elected and by roughly half of the people who voted. It happened, and fragile folk like Chung are working through their grief — crying, painting, knitting pink pussy hats, detaching Trump’s head from his body, and having a miserable time.

This artistic interpretation is all about Tom Chung himself, of Brooklyn, NY, the UAA art professor who on his Facebook page posts reams of adorable and/or mysterious photos of himself, in which he’s almost always shirtless, such as this one, where his trim, youthful physique is very much like his depiction of Captain America: Chiseled and lean.

Thomas Chung frolicking in the ocean somewhere in Facebook-land.

The art world is full of crimes against art like, if you will, Robert Maplethorpe. We’ve seen much worse than an American’s president’s severed head painted by an MFA graduate. All over the world of ISIS there are real severed heads, and women much more oppressed and beaten down than Chung’s artistic depiction of Hillary in a soiled, suffragette-white pantsuit.

We’re reminded that President Obama suffered his own indignities, such as the time when this polar bear sculpture made a bloody mess of him:

Chinese artist Vincent J.F. Huang created this sculpture of a polar bear holding President Obama’s severed head. Our inner art critic thinks it is gross.

Consider, if you will, the misogynistic indigities to which Sarah Palin was subjected, this being perhaps one of the least offensive unless, of course, you are Lady Liberty, bloodied on the snow at the hands of Alaska’s most famous governor:

Sarah Palin bags Ms. Liberty, or perhaps she’s saving her from a brutal attack. We’ll never know. Art by Zina Saunders. 2008

And even President Bill Clinton was skewered by artist Boris Vallejo in this hilariously heroic depiction, with a shapely, somewhat sexy Hillary clinging to his testosterone leg, while donkeys peer around — and who knows that that thing is that they’re propped up on — perhaps someone’s dead body?

Compare and contrast: Boris Vallejo painted this of Bill Clinton with a shapely Hillary clinging to his leg. It makes Thomas Chung’s artwork seem quite derivative.

Before we set Thomas Chung out with the recycling, we remember that art is not always comfortable. People could very well read into the Chung painting that American progressives have unfairly beheaded Donald Trump, and that Hillary Clinton has never been more than a simpering wimp, clinging to false idols. Yet we read into this painting what we think the artist thinks, and some of us are none too pleased. We may be reading too much into it. We may be giving Chung too much credit for something that is not much more than a comic book illustration.

Given the time and a shared cup of coffee, we’d tell Chung how the art department at the University of Alaska, including the heat for the buildings, the plows for the parking lots, the paint Chung uses, and the canvas he abuses, are all paid for by public dollars, dedicated to learning by a tolerant, Constitution-loving citizenry, some of whom might prefer that Chung make his living in the private sector, and allow the actual marketplace to guide his creative genius.

Fifteen years later, Sen. Kelly still standing against income tax

Pete Kelly of Fairbanks, Alaska Senate President

IT’S DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN

Fifteen years ago, the Alaska House of Representatives passed HB-303, income tax legislation to make up for a budget shortfall of $963 million.

The tax itself would raise $250 million, it was predicted, and it would be set as a sliding scale, based on income.

If that tax had gone into effect, the state would have taken at least $3.75 billion out of the pockets of working Alaskans by now. And it’s doubtful, very doubtful, that government would have been smaller than it is today.

Other measures would be required to fill the budget gap back in 2002  — an alcohol tax increase would raise $20 million and the Permanent Fund Earnings Account would be used, with $650 million for state services, and $59 million for local governments.

Rep. Ethan Berkowitz, 2002
Rep. Andrew Halcro, 2002

Anchorage Mayor Ethan Berkowitz was one of those House representatives supporting the tax at the time. So was his contemporary Andrew Halcro, R-Anchorage, who was freshman in the House, but who didn’t run for re-election, instead returning to Anchorage to work on the transition team of  newly elected Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich.

“The free ride is over,” Halcro said in 2002, as quoted by the Anchorage Daily News back then. ”What do you want me to cut? Road maintenance? Construction at nearby Dimond High School? Prisons? Courts? We can’t do this anymore!”

Sen. Dave Donley, 2002

But the measure had to pass the Senate. The Senate was solidly Republican.

Sen. Dave Donley  and Sen. Pete Kelly, co-chairs of Senate Finance, said at the time said, “No way.”

“We had a multi-year plan to cut $300 million, and the House and Senate had worked on it for years,” Donley recalled. Sean Parnell was co-chair with John Torgerson before Donley and Kelly, and had to work on the cuts as well.

There was also an advisory vote in 1998, and the public had gone heavily against using the earnings portion of the Permanent Fund. Donley said that while he and his side opposed using the earnings, his side of the argument was outspent in messaging by Halcro and his group, which spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to support use of the earnings.

“We had a 10-point plan of reforms we needed to make before we’d consider new taxes,” Donley said.

The price of oil eventually rose again. Gov. Frank Murkowski recalculated oil taxes to allow the state to scrape more money out of oil companies. And with higher prices and Gov. Sarah Palin, the Alaska’s Clear and Equitable Share was signed into law. ACES brought a pile of oil money into government, and government grew to take full advantage of it.

Donley never did get his government reforms, and he is now serving on the Anchorage School Board, having been elected in April. He has his red pen handy.

Pete Kelly returned to the Senate after a few years away, and now serves as Senate President. He’s still fighting the income tax.

Andrew Halcro got a political appointment from now-Mayor Ethan Berkowitz, and both still favor an income tax even today.

“The only thing standing between Alaskans and an income tax is the Senate,” Senator Kelly said in an interview with radio talk show host Dave Stieren.

OTHER SIMILARITIES WITH 2002

As in 2002, most Alaskans today say that given the choice, a sales tax would be more acceptable than an income tax.

But, as in 2002, Democrats mainly oppose sales taxes because of the burden placed on low-income Alaskans. On April 15 — Tax Day — the House Democrat-led caucus passed HB-115, a personal income tax not unlike the one that passed in 2002, though it’s a bit more aggressive.

Also in 2002, when Gov. Tony Knowles brought House Democrats and Republicans together for a series of closed-door meetings to broker a deal, that action is also repeating itself.

Gov. Bill Walker today invited House Democrat leaders and Senate Republican leaders to the Governor’s Mansion in an effort to broker an agreement.

BATTLE-HARDENED SENATE PRESIDENT

The co-chairs of Senate Finance, Anna MacKinnon and Lyman Hoffman attended, but Senate President Kelly did not head over to the mansion.

What would be the point, after all? The governor already has said which side he favors — he is insisting on an income tax, higher oil taxes, and a restructuring of the Permanent Fund. It’s not exactly an honest brokerage, said Kelly.

“I don’t mind meeting with the governor, he’s not the mediator in this,” Kelly said, as quoted by KTVA. “This is a disagreement between the two bodies, and he’s not the mediator. His background and his experience as a lawsuit lawyer, those are not people that bring people together, they actually get in-between people and take sides and usually take hostages, too. So I don’t think it’s a role he’s really comfortable with and it’s really not appropriate.”

“The income tax is a big deal,” Kelly said on the Dave Stieren Show. “Alaskans should use the handy dandy Senate majority tax calculator. You can put your numbers in and it will tell you what you’re going to pay. It’s pretty shocking to most people.”

Kelly also warned that HB-115 adopts federal code, which comes with possibly tens of thousands of dollars in penalties for making mistakes on your tax returns.

This vague reference is buried in the back of the bill, he said: “An innocent person reading it won’t see it.”

Besides, imposing an income tax on people during a recession is the wrong thing to do, Kelly said, and he’s sure it is not going to pass the Senate: “I don’t know if the State of Alaska has ever had a Senate with this much resolve on an issue. It’s taken difficult votes. There’s not going to be an income tax.”

Kelly has been battling an income tax for nearly 20 years, and shows no signs of stopping.

His side has offered SB-26 as a complete solution: Restructuring the Permanent Fund to use a percent of the market value of the earnings (known as POMV), putting a spending cap and revenue limits in place, and making cuts in spending to close the fiscal gap.

But House Democrats, as articulated by Rep. Gabrielle LeDoux, have said, “If the Senate thinks we are going to get out of here with only a POMV, they have another think coming.”