Sunday, May 3, 2026
Home Blog Page 187

Kevin McCabe: Taking back town halls and why Republicans must stand firm against disruption

Town halls and public speeches are a cornerstone of American democracy — a direct, unfiltered connection between elected officials and the people they serve. For Republicans, these meetings aren’t just a tradition — they’re essential. They cut through media distortion, allow constituents to be heard, and let leaders speak plainly.

But today, these events are under attack, hijacked by outside agitators and twisted by the media into political theater. Despite the chaos and the risks, Republicans must keep showing up — because leadership demands it, and voters deserve it.

The challenges are undeniable. The recent Eagle River town hall with Reps. Jamie Allard, Dan Saddler, and Sen. Kelly Merrick was supposed to be an open dialogue with local residents. Instead, it was overrun by activists from Anchorage and beyond — people who don’t even live in the district — who shouted down actual constituents to push their own agenda. This wasn’t civic engagement.

It was a staged spectacle designed to grab headlines, and the media played right along.

President Donald Trump called this tactic out on TruthSocial, saying, “Paid ‘troublemakers’ are attending Republican Town Hall Meetings… It’s not going to work for them!” 

House Speaker Mike Johnson backed him up, calling them “professional protesters” and questioning why Republicans should hand them a platform. This isn’t about debate or dialogue — it’s about silencing Republicans and controlling the narrative in the public venue.

Alaskans know this playbook all too well.

In 2020, Senator Dan Sullivan hosted a meet-and-greet in Anchorage. Protesters stormed the stage, and one even threw a bloody caribou heart onto the platform — a grotesque stunt meant to attack his environmental policies. His staff had to step in, worried for his safety. But instead of condemning the behavior, the media zeroed in on the spectacle, framing it as an anti-Sullivan protest and ignoring the intimidation.

Democrat protester shoved a bloody, raw caribou heart at Sen. Dan Sullivan at a campaign event in 2020, seen here as she is stopped from taking over the stage by a campaign aide.

Last week, Sullivan faced the same circus again while addressing the Alaska Legislature. During his question-and-answer session, he was repeatedly harassed by lawmakers pushing their own narrative, turning what should have been a serious policy discussion into a sideshow.

This isn’t just an Alaska problem. Nationally, we saw it when Congressman Al Green interrupted President Trump’s latest speech, hijacking the event for his own political grandstanding before being ejected by Speaker Johnson.

The marxists and progressives are not subtle about encouraging this behavior. One of the most blatant examples came during Trump’s 2020 State of the Union address, when Speaker Nancy Pelosi, on live television, dramatically tore up her copy of the speech for the cameras. It wasn’t a spontaneous act — it was deliberate, a signal to her party that disrespect and defiance weren’t just acceptable but encouraged.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi rips up a copy of President Trump’s State of the Union Address in 2020.

Pelosi wasn’t just tearing up a speech — she was tearing up any remaining sense of decorum, giving activists and lawmakers alike a green light to interrupt, disrupt, and humiliate Republicans at every opportunity. And, of course, the liberal media cheered her on.

But it’s not just about disruption — sometimes, it turns violent. In 2017, US Rep. Steve Scalise was shot and nearly killed by a Democrat activist during a congressional baseball practice. The shooter specifically targeted Republicans, driven by anti-GOP rhetoric and media-fueled rage. It was a chilling reminder that words have consequences — and unchecked political hostility can lead to bloodshed.

In 2023, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene was repeatedly “swatted” — a dangerous hoax where false emergency calls send armed police to someone’s home, putting lives at risk. The media brushed it off as just another “controversy” surrounding her. But the truth is simple: She wasn’t targeted for being controversial. She was targeted for being a Republican. This tactic isn’t limited to politicians — conservative talk show hosts and influencers have recently faced the same dangerous harassment.

So why do we keep holding town halls and public speeches? After all, Democrats avoid them. They prefer staged events surrounded by friendly reporters. They rely on protests and media spin to push their message.

Republicans could take the easy route too — stick to press releases and social media posts from the safety of an office. But that’s not leadership. Leadership means showing up. It means standing tall and answering tough questions, even from those who disagree with us. Hiding behind a screen or in the basement isn’t leadership — it’s cowardice.

Town halls and public speeches should be our chance to cut through the noise — even in Democrat-heavy areas. The media loves to twist our words and distort our message. But when we speak directly to the people — face to face — we remind them exactly who we’re fighting for: Them. Not the elites in DC, not the Juneau insiders, and certainly not the activists screaming from the back of the room or on the capital steps of Juneau.

Republicans are built for resilience. In the era of President Trump’s bold, unapologetic leadership, standing your ground matters more than ever. A disrupted event doesn’t make us weak — it proves we’re tough enough to take the heat and stay in the fight.

But voters have a role to play too. Town halls and public speeches belong to you — not the loudest hecklers in the room. The Eagle River town hall was taken over because activists from outside the district were brought in and packed the room. If constituents want real dialogue — if they want their voices to rise above the noise — they need to show up. They need to take control of these events, push back against the agitators, [USA, USA, USA] and demand that their elected officials have the chance to speak and listen. 

And we do have a perfect example of a better way. Friday night, in Fairbanks, at the Lincoln Day Dinner, 200 protesters rallied outside against Trump. Republicans didn’t retreat or escalate—they put up a sign: “Welcome Peaceful Protesters, We Respect Your First Amendment Rights.” Inside, they raised funds and kept the focus, showing strength through constitutional kindness. That’s how we turn the tables—stand firm, respect rights, keep fighting, and keep serving our people.

Don’t expect the liberal media to help. They thrive on, and sometimes even create chaos. They won’t cover honest conversations because they find those boring and not in line with their liberal progressive ideas — yet they will always cover the shouting and the spectacle. That’s why it’s up to you to reclaim your town halls and public speeches and make sure they serve their true purpose: connecting you with your representatives.

Republicans hold town halls and public speeches because it’s our duty — to serve, to fight, and to lead. We’re not afraid of hostile crowds or media hit jobs. We’re here for our constituents and our values. The only question left is this: Will you stand with us?

In the end, Senator Sullivan’s Q&A session in the Alaska House last week was hijacked by angry liberals in the majority because they knew they wouldn’t be stopped. There was no risk for them. If we want a Republican majority in the future, Republicans must show up. We must take control. Let’s take back our town halls, our public speeches, and our government — together.

Rep. Kevin McCabe is a legislator from Big Lake, Alaska.

Texas attorney general defeats Biden rule forcing gender identity policies on foster parents

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has successfully blocked a Biden Administration rule that mandated the use of gender identity ideologies in foster care placements. The case has national implications.

A federal district court judge in Eastern Texas ruled that the US Department of Health and Human Services, under former Secretary Xavier Becerra, lacked the statutory authority to enforce a policy that conditioned federal funding for foster care programs on compliance with gender identity mandates.

The rule by the Biden Administration required Title IV-E and Title IV-B agencies to ensure that foster-care placements agree with and affirm a child’s self-professed LGBTQI+ identity. Agencies and providers who failed to comply faced penalties for “retaliation” and risked losing essential federal funding.

The “Final Rule first creates a new category of foster children — ‘LGBTQI+ children’ — which it defines as “children with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning, and intersex status or identity,” the judge wrote in his opinion. “The Rule then requires that States affirm and promote these children’s ‘LGBTQI+ status or identity’ in novel ways that potentially conflict with state law—or else lose federal funding for their foster care systems.”

The rule made it clear that by affirming a child’s LGBTQI+ status, the federal government means foster parents must arrange for medical procedures such as puberty blockers, gender-affirming medications, and surgeries.

Attorney General Paxton originally filed the lawsuit against HHS in September 2024, saying the rule violated state and federal law by compelling foster care providers to adopt controversial and non-scientifically sound gender ideologies.

The court’s decision to halt the rule from taking effect is a major victory for state autonomy, parental rights, and the well-being of children in foster care.

“This is a tremendous victory for Texas families, parental rights, and the rule of law,” said Attorney General Paxton. “The Biden Administration had no authority to force radical gender ideology onto vulnerable children and demand compliance from foster care providers under threat of lost funding. I will always fight to protect our values and ensure that Texas children are not used as pawns in the federal government’s social experiments.”

The 27-page ruling by District Court Judge Jeremy Kernodle reinforces Texas’ stance against federally imposed mandates that conflict with state policies and beliefs about gender identity. It also sets a precedent that could impact similar policies nationwide.

Read the court ruling at this link.

Repeal Now announces launch date for collecting signatures to repeal ranked-choice voting

The effort to repeal Ranked Choice Voting in Alaska is set to launch on April 1, as the advocacy group Repeal Now prepares to collect signatures for a ballot initiative.

The petition has been approved by the Division of Elections and the organization has been developing the necessary infrastructure to ensure the campaign’s success and compliance with state regulations.

Repeal Now organizers said the public is eager to get the signature collection process going, but emphasized its commitment to meticulous planning. The group stated that it is aware of the scrutiny by opponents of the repeal, which during the last effort in 2024 tied up the previous repeal group in court and with challenges to the Alaska Public Offices Commission. The Repeal Now group is working to adhere strictly to regulations set by APOC.

The petition initiative has seen some changes in leadership. One of the original petitioners, Ken McCarty, has decided to pursue a different path. However, the Repeal Now group announced the addition of Bethany Marcum as treasurer. In this role, Marcum will oversee all aspects of signature collection across the state. Marcum is leaving her position as state director of Americans for Prosperity in order to devote herself full-time to Repeal Now.

The campaign will commence its efforts through Republican Women’s clubs and a network of district and regional chairs. These chairs will align with the state’s existing regional divisions to facilitate an organized and coordinated approach. Petition booklets are expected to be distributed to volunteers by April 1, and all petition holders will be required to sign an online agreement to comply with the Alaska Division of Elections requirements.

Volunteers interested in obtaining petition books can complete an online check-out form at: https://forms.gle/Uu9ea7iYpuuWcYjq5.

Questions and correspondence can be directed to [email protected].

Repeal Now is also preparing to raise funds to support its initiative. While a website is still under construction, Repeal Now aims to drive donations via credit card once the site is operational. Donations by check will be accepted once a mailing address is established. The group stressed that individuals who wish to assist with fundraising, including handling checks, must be officially designated as deputy treasurers.

The push to repeal ranked-choice voting follows ongoing debates over the election system, which, through Outside dark money, was voted into being in Alaska in 2020. Supporters of repeal argue that ranked-choice voting complicates the voting process and creates confusion, while proponents of the system say it promotes majority rule and discourages extreme partisanship, something that has been proven to be a false promise.

The Democratic Party wants to keep ranked-choice voting because it is the party that most can benefit from the confusion. Republicans generally want to get rid of it. But most voters in Alaska are not aligned with a party, and during the last repeal effort, repeal failed by 743 votes. Many said the ballot language was confusing, because it seemed to say “yes” meant a vote to support ranked-choice voting, or that “yes” could mean the vote was in favor of repealing it. Voters reported they were confused and some said they voted opposite of how they intended to vote.

Linda Boyle: Air Force major being involuntary discharged for refusing flu shot

By LINDA BOYLE

Maj. Brennan Schilperoort is a C-130J transport aircraft pilot stationed at Little Rock Air Force Base, a main training base for C-130 pilots.

He has served honorably for 17 years. 

During the Covid years, he put in for a religious exemption from the Covid jab. The story at that time was that the Pentagon had denied all religious exemptions. Fortunately for Major Schilperoort, a federal judge in Ohio blocked the Air Force from taking administrative action against those who were requesting a religious exemption.  That order was for only a two week period. 

Major Schilperoort was to receive a very serious Letter of Reprimand during that same period. However, that did not happen due to the judge’s order. 

In the interim because of Congressional involvement, the Pentagon had no choice but to repeal its Covid-19 vaccine mandate when that requirement was added to the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act. In doing so, the Pentagon warned such action could put service members at risk of serious illness.

The bad outcomes that the Pentagon predicted did not occur. 

Major Schilperoort was pleased he had avoided the Letter of Reprimand for following his religious convictions. He had also been denied the ability to fly for over a year because the military was processing him for failing to take the Covid jab. With the mandate gone, he was ready to get back to flying again.  

Then the other shoe dropped. Not long after this victory, he was asked what he thought about other immunizations to include the flu shot.  With his renewed religious conviction, Maj. Schilperoort stated he could not take  the flu shot either and put in for a religious exemption.  

I don’t know if the military is actively ensuring all members take the flu shot or just waiting until herd immunity protection for the troops.  I do know from one active duty friend that people in his unit had put in for religious exemptions and they were accepted.  

It just seemed odd that shortly after the Covid jab debacle, Major Schilperoort would be asked about the flu shot.  His command told him that his religious accommodation request  would not be supported.  

Major Schilperoort had previously asked for a medical exemption for the flu shot as he had had a severe reaction to it.  When that was denied, he asked for religious accommodation.  

Of interest, another military member of Space Command had received a medical exemption against the flu vaccine for getting “headaches” from it.  

To make it worse, Maj. Schilperoort learned his command never processed his request for religious accommodation.  He discovered this when he received a Letter of Reprimand for failure to follow a “lawful” order to get the flu shot.

R. Davis Younts is Major Schilperoort’s attorney. He is a retired Air Force Judge Advocate General officer. Younts contended it is hard to get a Letter of Reprimand for not following a “lawful” order when your request for religious accommodation was not processed.  

Maj. Schilperoot has made multiple attempts to get assistance from the Air Force Inspector General, Military Equal Opportunity program, and members of Congress to no avail. “They ignored all of it”, he lamented.

Maj. Schilperoort met a discharge board in October because of the Letter of Reprimand. That board voted to discharge him. He is currently attempting to rebut their claims. 

Major Schilperoot has appealed to the Secretary of the Air Force. He is waiting for a response, knowing that could take months before a decision is made. 

In the interim, his command decided on March 19 ”to place him on a no-pay status until the discharge issue is resolved.”

Maj. Schilperoort shared, “I was given a notice of two and a half business days that my pay would be cut off.”

Maj. Schilperoort’s attorney, who has over 20 years’ experience in defending military members, stated this was an unprecedented decision.   

“Other than individuals that are dangerous criminals or officers that are incarcerated, I cannot recall a case where a client has been put on Involuntary [Excess] Leave,” he said.

I don’t know if Maj. Schilperoort’s activism in notifying members of Congress for what he perceives was an illegal order to force Covid jabs on people had anything to do with the decision to go after him.  

I do know that he and Lt. Col. Carolyn Rocco (a 20 year Air Force officer) have continued to fight against unlawfulness of the mandate. They spent thousands of dollars on shipping a book by Navy Cmdr. Robert A. Green, Jr. to over 120 members of Congress and nearly 200 top military commanders.They also included a copy of the Declaration of Military Accountability authored by Green. 

Green’s book describes “the military COVID-19 vaccine mandate, and the resistance to that mandate by service members who could not, in good conscience, go along.” The Declaration of Military Accountability “pledges to hold military leaders accountable for the illegal conduct and harms caused by the DOD’s now-rescinded COVID-19 shot mandate.

The declaration was subsequently entered into the Congressional Record by Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona. 

Maybe it’s all a coincidence. Maj. Schilperoort couldn’t get a medical exemption from the flu shot for his severe reaction to it whereas another officer could for his reaction (headaches).  

Maj. Schilperoort’s command didn’t even forward his request for a religious accommodation exception when I know of others who had theirs appropriately processed and their requests granted.  

Or maybe the title of the  title of the article in Gateway Pundit summed it  up correctly:  

Motivated by a Desire to Punish,’ Active-Duty Air Force Major is Being Forced to Go Without Pay ‘Indefinitely’ for Taking a Religious and Medical Objection to the Flu Vaccine.  

I pray he is successful in getting his life back, even if it’s just for his family and his integrity. But also for the country.

Linda Boyle, RN, MSN, DM, was formerly the chief nurse for the 3rd Medical Group, JBER, and was the interim director of the Alaska VA. Most recently, she served as Director for Central Alabama VA Healthcare System. She is the director of the Alaska Covid Alliance/Alaskans 4 Personal Freedom.

The Case of the Long Lost Uncle: FBI arrests man in Portland, charged with trafficking minor from Alaska

An Oregon man was arrested by the FBI on March 21 in Portland, Ore. after a federal grand jury in Alaska returned an indictment charging him with transporting a minor with the intent to have the child engage in criminal sexual activity.

According to court documents, in 2019, Steven Fox, 59, moved from Pendleton, Ore., to Anchorage. At some point that year, Fox allegedly presented himself as a long-lost “uncle” to a family with two minor daughters. He began caring for the minors.

Court documents say that in January 2020, Fox took the minors from Alaska to Oregon and started sexually abusing one of the minors, who was 9 years old at the time, almost immediately after leaving Alaska.

Fox is charged with one count of transportation of minors. The defendant was scheduled to make his initial court appearance before an Oregon judge last week. If convicted, he faces between 10 years to life in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any potential sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

U.S. Attorney Michael J. Heyman of the District of Alaska and Special Agent in Charge Rebecca Day of the FBI Anchorage Field Office made the announcement.

The FBI Anchorage Field Office and Anchorage Police Department investigated the case as part of the FBI’s Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force, with assistance from the Pendleton Police Department and FBI Portland Field Office. If anyone has information concerning Fox’s alleged actions, please contact the FBI Anchorage Field Office (907) 276-4441 or anonymously at tips.fbi.gov.

Larry Elder: Death threats against Musk again show how much the Left values science

By LARRY ELDER

In March 2009, the New York Times wrote a lengthy piece about renowned physicist Freeman Dyson, then 85. Four years earlier, Dyson began publicly to express doubts about the global warming or “climate change” alarmism promoted by the likes of former Vice President Al Gore, whom Dyson disparaged as “an opportunist” engaging in “lousy science.”

About Dyson’s intellect and stature, the Times wrote: “Dyson is a scientist whose intelligence is revered by other scientists — William Press, former deputy director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and now a professor of computer science at the University of Texas, calls him ‘infinitely smart.’ Dyson — a mathematics prodigy who came to this country at 23 and right away contributed seminal work to physics by unifying quantum and electrodynamic theory — not only did path-breaking science of his own; he also witnessed the development of modern physics, thinking alongside most of the luminous figures of the age, including Einstein, Richard Feynman, Niels Bohr, Enrico Fermi, Hans Bethe, Edward Teller, J. Robert Oppenheimer and Edward Witten, the ‘high priest of string theory’ …”

Described politically as an “Obama-loving, (George W.) Bush-loathing liberal,” Dyson immersed himself in the science of climate change, read the prominent and influential studies and watched Gore’s Oscar-winning documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth.”

After this deep dive, Dyson said he was coming “out of the closet as far as global warming is concerned” while acknowledging “most consider me wrong about global warming.”

Dyson concluded: “The climate-studies people who work with models always tend to overestimate their models. They come to believe models are real and forget they are only models. … Most of the evolution of life occurred on a planet substantially warmer than it is now and substantially richer in carbon dioxide.”

One would think that Dyson’s observations would cause at lease some of the most ardent climate change alarmists to say, “Dyson is brilliant. What does he see that I don’t? If one of the world’s leading physicists, universally recognized as a genius, thinks climate change alarmism is nonsense and that nonscientist Al Gore is full of it, perhaps I need to rethink this?”

Instead, according to Dyson’s son, his father’s views have “cooled friendships.”

This brings us to Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and a brilliant technologist, whose achievements include co-founding the electronic payment firm PayPal; starting the rocket and spacecraft company SpaceX; becoming one of the first major investors in Tesla; starting an artificial intelligence company; and founding Starlink, a satellite internet service. He bought the company formally known as Twitter, reined in its discrimination against conservative users and fired nearly 80% of its workforce without any harm to continuing operations.

Musk, a longtime member of the political left, renounced the Democratic Party and became not just an admirer of Donald Trump but campaigned on behalf of his second term. Far worse, as far as his former left-wing admirers are concerned, Musk joined the Trump administration as the leader of the Department of Government Efficiency, with a mission to wring out bloat, inefficiency and corrupt spending by the federal government.

Musk recently said: “The government waste and fraud is so high that it’s causing a $2 trillion annual deficit. … The cost of our debt has gotten so high that just the interest payments on the debt exceed the entire military budget. … If a country overspends and doesn’t spend wisely, just like a person, the country will go bankrupt. … (A)nd if we don’t do something, the ship of America is going to sink. We are all on that ship.”

One would think many on the left, especially those who once admired Musk, would at the very least say, “Musk is brilliant. What does the man behind SpaceX and Tesla see about the Democratic Party, the Republican Party and President Donald Trump that I don’t? Maybe I need to rethink this?”

Instead, Tesla owners have seen their cars defaced and set on fire. Musk is regularly denounced by Democratic officeholders as “dumb,” “evil” and “a Nazi.”

Question: As to the now late Dyson and the still-alive Elon Musk, a recipient of death threats, what’s wrong with this picture?

Larry Elder is a bestselling author and nationally syndicated radio talk-show host. To find out more about Larry Elder, or become an “Elderado,” visit www.LarryElder.com. Follow Larry on X @larryelder.

Michael Tavoliero: Taking Back Alaska means reforming Alaska’s election manipulation bureaucracy

Taking Back Alaska Part III

By MICHAEL TAVOLIERO

The greatest threat to Alaska democracy isn’t traditional voter fraud. Instead, it’s state-controlled election manipulation, which ensures establishment candidates and special interests maintain power.

Entrenched elites in America have exploited election laws, selectively enforced campaign finance regulations, and manipulated bureaucratic structures to suppress voter choice and consolidate control.

This extends beyond election procedures. Taxation and legislative mechanisms provide unlimited financing to maintain this dominance while weaponizing public agencies and erecting barriers against grassroots opposition.

Has Alaska’s election system been systematically tilted against voters?

A History of Election Manipulation

  • 19th Century Machine Politics: Corrupt political machines like Tammany Hall in New York City rigged elections by stuffing ballots, intimidating voters, and controlling election officials. These operations were funded through municipal tax structures, enriching political insiders and squeezing out reformers.
  • Jim Crow Disenfranchisement: Post-Reconstruction Southern states imposed poll taxes and literacy tests to suppress black and poor white voters while extracting revenue through taxation to sustain the ruling political class.
  • Progressive Era Bureaucracy: 20th-century reforms like direct primaries and campaign finance laws were meant to reduce corruption but instead created complex regulatory systems favoring well-funded insiders while burdening grassroots movements. The true agenda behind these measures created bureaucracies that favored establishment candidates and agendas securing tax-funded campaign advantages while burdening grassroots movements.
  • The 1960 Presidential Election: Allegations of ballot fraud in Illinois and Texas helped John F. Kennedy defeat Richard Nixon. Cook County, controlled by the Chicago Democratic machine, played a key role, raising questions about the fairness of the system. These local machines were funded through state and city taxation, which funneled public funds into election operations that preserved their grip on power.
  • Watergate and Campaign Oversight Abuse: The Watergate scandal in the 1970s revealed how election oversight agencies could be weaponized to target political opponents, reinforcing the need for truly independent election administration. The Watergate scandal also exposed how federal agencies were used to surveil and undermine political opponents while public funds were diverted for electioneering. The revelation of Nixon’s campaign slush fund underscored how those in power manipulate financial systems to maintain control.
  • The Rise of Dark Money: The 21st century has seen the rapid expansion of untraceable money in politics, with political action committees (PACs), non-profits, and foreign entities influencing American elections while state-level bureaucracies selectively enforce campaign finance laws against outsiders while protecting establishment candidates. The explosion of PACs, non-profits, and foreign entities influencing U.S. elections was mirrored by an increase in taxpayer-funded campaign advantages for incumbents. State-controlled financing mechanisms ensure that political insiders always have the upper hand.
  • The DOGE Awakening: The rise of DOGE has triggered a public awakening, revealing how elections, administrative control, and NGO-driven financial networks serve as conduits for systemic money laundering that cements the DC’s uniparty’s grip on power. While this awareness is growing nationally, states like Alaska remain largely untouched by its impact. 

Originally dismissed as a digital curiosity, DOGE and blockchain technology have instead exposed deep corruption in government finance, campaign funding, and regulatory overreach.

The 2020 and 2022 elections provided proof of how privately funded election administration, masquerading as “non-partisan integrity efforts,” injected untraceable money into the system, overwhelmingly benefiting establishment incumbents. Non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) funneled public dollars (our taxes in many cases) into targeted jurisdictions, laundering campaign operations under the guise of philanthropy.

This system depends on secrecy. Without control over election administration, special-interest NGOs, and taxpayer-funded slush funds disguised as grants, the uniparty’s dominance crumbles. The growing demand for radical transparency, fueled by blockchain technology and financial forensics, is an existential threat to their scheme. As more Americans connect the dots between election corruption, bureaucratic control, and NGO money laundering, the only question left is not if their empire will collapse, but how long they can delay the inevitable?

The 2020 and 2022 Elections: Evidence of Systematic Manipulation

Privately funded election administration, disguised as “non-partisan integrity efforts,” injected untraceable money into targeted jurisdictions, overwhelmingly benefiting incumbents. NGOs funneled taxpayer dollars into election operations under the guise of philanthropy.

This system thrives on secrecy. If bureaucratic control over elections, NGOs, and taxpayer-funded slush funds were eliminated, the uniparty’s dominance would collapse. With growing public demand for transparency, how long can the establishment delay the inevitable?

Alaska’s Election System: A Modern-Day Political Machine?

Just as historical political machines controlled election outcomes, Alaska’s election bureaucracy oversees voting processes, ranked-choice voting (RCV), and campaign finance oversight to secure establishment control while suppressing grassroots opposition.

Restoring Fair Elections: Reforms for Alaska

  • Eliminate Selective Enforcement: Campaign finance laws must apply equally, not be weaponized against challengers.
  • Simplify Election Procedures: RCV confuses voters and undermines trust. Alaska’s elections must be clear, transparent, and accountable.
  • Reaffirm Legislative Oversight: The state legislature’s role in election governance must emphasize clear laws, agency compliance, judicial accountability, and transparency, which establish uniform policies and procedures for all elections in the state. The Alaska State Legislature retains the authority to amend or repeal voter-approved initiatives per Article IX, Section 6, provided such actions comply with constitutional requirements and reflect the legislative process.
  • Ban Government-Affiliated Election Funding – Prohibit government agencies and elected officials from indirectly funding campaigns through grants, state-funded organizations, or administrative resources.

Agencies in Need of Dismantling or Reform

1. Alaska Division of Elections (DOE)

  • Problem: DOE implemented RCV through a voter-initiative which reformed the state’s election process. Does this fundamentally alter election outcomes to benefit establishment candidates? Currently, many see this lack of transparency in vote tabulation eroding public trust, picking winners and losers and not allowing meaningful change in state government.
  • Solution: The Alaska State Legislature retains the constitutional authority to repeal RCV. It can mandate independent election audits.

2. Alaska Public Offices Commission (APOC)

  • Problem: Recent cases have demonstrated the appearance of APOC selectively enforced campaign finance laws, shielding insiders while failing to curb dark money influence in Alaska’s elections and attacking grass roots efforts.
  • Solution: Require full disclosure of all out-of-state campaign donations and close loopholes that allow untraceable money to influence elections. Establish an independent election finance oversight board with investigative authority and powers to audit APOC’s decisions and ensure non-partisan enforcement of campaign finance laws. Limit contributions from PACs and non-governmental organizations, while requiring them to disclose donors and expenditures in real time. Implement automatic audits of all major political campaigns and ballot initiatives, rather than targeting only grassroots efforts or specific candidates.

3. Alaska Division of Legislative Audit

  • Is the DLA conducting audits that disproportionately protect establishment figures while scrutinizing reformers?​ Are reports on election security and campaign finance being delayed or obscured, potentially undermining public trust?
  • Recommendation: Overhaul DLA’s leadership structure to prevent politically motivated audits and mandate independent election integrity reviews.

Building a Responsive and Accountable Election Process

1. Election Law Changes

  • Election rules should be established by voters through initiative but remain subject to legislative review and amendment under Article XI, Section 6 of the Alaska Constitution to ensure consistency, accountability, and adaptability.
  • Require periodic independent reviews or audits of RCV’s performance, focusing on voter participation, ballot exhaustion, election costs, and voter trust.
  • Legislation could condition the continuation of RCV or other voting methods on specific measurable benchmarks.
  • The legislature can enact a statutory sunset clause, unless re-approved by the legislature and voters.

2. Strengthen Campaign Finance Transparency

  • Mandate full public disclosure of out-of-state and PAC contributions.
  • Enact statutory provisions requiring enhanced disclosure and reporting standards for all campaign contributions, including stricter limits on anonymous and third-party funding sources, to reduce the influence of undisclosed financial interests in elections.

3. Strengthen Voter ID and Ballot Security

  • Implement universal voter ID requirements.
  • Enforce strict chain-of-custody protocols for mailed and absentee ballots.
  • Require live-streamed ballot counting and independent audits.

4. Use Recent SCOTUS Precedents to Challenge Election Manipulation

  • Brnovich v. DNC (2021): Defends voter ID and election security laws. The Court ruled 6-3 that Arizona’s voting policies did not violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA) or have discriminatory intent.
  • Moore v. Harper (2023): Reaffirmed that state courts can review state election laws to ensure compliance with state constitutions. This prevents unchecked power within state legislatures.
  • Challenge RCV under Article IV, Section 4: The Constitution guarantees a Republican Form of Government. RCV’s multi-round tabulation process distorts election outcomes and can be challenged on constitutional grounds.

Conclusion: Take Elections Back from Bureaucrats

Elections in Alaska must be controlled by voters—not bureaucrats, special interests, or political insiders. By dismantling or reforming DOE, APOC, and DLA, Alaska can restore election integrity and ensure fair and transparent processes.

This is not about partisanship. Every Alaskan vote must count, free from bureaucratic interference and dark money influence.

Michael Tavoliero writes for Must Read Alaska.

DOGE-Alaska: Check out how public employee unions pay to play in local Anchorage elections

With the upcoming April 1 municipal election, union contributions to Anchorage Assembly and School Board races are worth taking a look at. Organized labor, and more specifically the public employee unions, are historically one of the most influential special interests in local politics.

In this election, there were a reported $35,500 in union donations to candidates, as of March 1. The next financial disclosure report is due March 25.

The Anchorage Assembly, which has the final say in approving union contracts, oversees agreements that commit taxpayers to wage, benefit, and other cost increases for up to five years.

Currently, more than half (55%) of the city’s budget is allocated to salaries and benefits, while 58% of municipal revenue is derived from property taxes.

Union donations play a significant role in the campaigns of Assembly candidates.

  • Kameron Perez-Verdia has received $10,000 from unions this election cycle. Over the course of his Assembly campaigns, unions have contributed a total of $43,600 to his campaigns.
  • Daniel Volland has received $8,000 in union support this election, in addition to $2,000 from a previous campaign. The Alaska AFL-CIO has further contributed $2,500 to his campaign through its special interest group, “Putting Alaskans First.”
  • The AFL-CIO has also funneled $5,000 to “Putting Alaskans First” to oppose Jared Goecker, who is running for the open Eagle River Assembly seat.

Unions have also directed funds toward Anchorage School Board candidates, continuing their pattern of financial support for big-spending Democrat incumbents:

  • Margot Bellamy, seeking re-election, has received $5,000 from unions this year. Over the years, unions have contributed a total of $25,550 to her campaigns.
  • Kelly Lessens has received $5,500 from unions in this election cycle, adding to a total of $26,800 in union support across her political career.

Organized labor remains the largest special interest group contributing to local elections in Alaska. The financial influence of unions on Anchorage Assembly and School Board races raises ongoing questions about the balance of power between elected officials, labor groups, and taxpayers.

Because union contracts representing a significant portion of municipal expenditures, voters will have to consider the role of these contributions and how they influence their elected officials.

Additional financial disclosures due on March 25 will provide further insights into the extent of union influence in the 2025 race.

Browse through the contributions here:

Older than Canada itself, Hudson’s Bay Co. to start liquidation on Monday

The storied Hudson’s Bay Company will start liquidating on Monday. The company that started as a fur-trading outpost will begin getting rid of its inventory in all but six of its 96 stand-alone stores, plus three Saks Fifth Avenue stores and 13 Saks Off 5th shops.

Hudson’s Bay Co. has a history that spans as far back as 1670. The company was active in Alaska during the western expansion of the fur trade. While is very much part of Canada’s European heritage, the company touched Alaska, which was still owned by Russia in 1847, by establishing the trading post of Fort Yukon, as well as fur trading posts as far west as Atlin, British Columbia.

While HBC had trading posts along the Yukon River, it has not had any operating stores in the Yukon since the Whitehorse store closed in 1987.

Earlier this month, the company received creditor protection from the court, a process similar to the Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in the United States. The bankruptcy judge said he saw no other way forward but liquidation.

The six stores being spared, for now at least, include the company’s flagship store in Toronto, two others in Ontario and three in Quebec. All of the other stores will be vacated by June 30 after liquidation sales end June 15.

The nearest remaining HBC location to Alaska, besides Vancouver, is in Kamloops, British Columbia. Those are both on the closure list.

Throughout its history the company was often referred to as a company that grew into a nation. Indeed, HBC is older than Canada itself and survived the ups and downs of retail, World War II, the Great Depression, until the Covid pandemic changed buying habits in Canada and elsewhere. The company never quite recovered from the pandemic policies, and it didn’t take proactive measures to keep up with the online buying habits that developed during the pandemic.