Valley Republican Women of Alaska on Saturday passed a resolution condemning Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski for several offenses, including her public opposition to President Donald Trump and his plan to Make America Great Again, and her failure to support the Alaska Republican Party platform.
The resolution calls out Murkowski for not voting to confirm Pete Hegseth for secretary of the Department of Defense, and her active support for ranked-choice voting, as well as her disregard for the expressed values, priorities, and will of the Alaska Republican Party.
In the resolution, the women’s club calls for the immediate sanctioning of Murkowski by the party as a whole. The party will have to take up the request at its Feb. 22 State Central Committee meeting in Juneau.
In addition, the women’s club demands that Murkowski consider changing her party affiliation so the public will be able to distinguish her from the rest of the Republicans.
Murkowski has been sanctioned by the party as a whole in the past, specifically for bucking the party she says she is a member of.
She was sanctioned by the party in 2021, after she voted to impeach Donald Trump even after he was no longer in office. On March 16, 2021, the Alaska Republican Party voted to censure Murkowski and announced that it would recruit a Republican challenger in the 2022 election cycle. But that cycle contained the special feature that Murkowski’s dark-money network had rigged — ranked-choice voting. The method of gaming the election system helped her win the jungle primary with the help of the Democrats.
In 2010, she was sanctioned for running a write-in campaign against the Republican nominee, Joe Miller.
While those sanctions expired, Murkowski is not a welcomed guest at Republican events and has not been invited to speak at conventions that the party has held. She’s not only anti-Trump, she is misaligned with the party itself.
Earlier this week, the chairwoman of the Alaska Republican Party issued a pointed letter asking the Alaska senators to vote to confirm Hegseth. It was aimed at Murkowski, since Sen. Dan Sullivan had already stated he would be a yes vote.
Read the entire resolution from the Valley Republican Women of Alaska here:
There is a new education funding bill on the table from the House Democrats — HB 69. This bill proposes a permanent increase to the Base Student Allocation (BSA) over the next three years. Here’s the financial breakdown:
Cost Increase for HB 69:
• FY26: $326.3 million
• FY27: $501.3 million
• FY28: $645.7 million
This is a total cost over three years: $1.47 billion on top of the current BSA.
If passed, this would push the Department of Education & Early Development’s (DEED) FY26 budget to $1.58 billion — a massive jump from the Governor’s proposed $1.25 billion.
Let’s be clear: Republicans absolutely support funding education. We all believe Alaska’s students deserve every tool possible to succeed, and that strong, viable schools are essential for the future of our state. However, given Alaska’s current fiscal situation, we must ask some tough questions about how to reach that goal. We MUST ensure that school district administrators spend every dollar they receive responsibly.
Here’s the deal: any increase in education funding won’t come out of thin air. It will be directly tied to the funds designated for your Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD). Are Alaskans ready to sacrifice their PFDs (possibly permanently) for this ongoing spending increase? Are we prepared for income or sales taxes? Can we sustain this funding increase responsibly without jeopardizing other critical areas of the budget, such as roads, Medicaid, seniors, the Alaska Marine Highway, and other essential programs?
We must ask: Who pays? Which program will fund the significant increase in another program? What’s the investment from district administrators, and what’s the return on that investment? Are we talking about new trucks, snowplows, or additional non-teacher staff, or is the funding going directly into classrooms? An honest conversation is essential. We need to move beyond emotional manipulation and flashy red slogans and have open, candid discussions backed by accurate, up-to-date data.
Most Alaskans agree—we want to fund education, but we also demand accountability. It’s not enough to simply increase funding without ensuring that money actually reaches the classroom and improves outcomes for our kids. The focus must be on students, not bureaucracy. Every dollar spent should be directed toward enhancing the learning experience in the classroom.
Last session, House Republicans supported the largest one-time education funding boost in state history — $322 million — on top of the fully funded the BSA, plus a one time increase. That was a big step forward, but let’s not forget: this isn’t just about throwing more money at the problem. It’s about making sure every dollar we spend delivers results for our children – the results parents want for their children.
Alaska’s kids deserve the best education we can provide, but we owe it to them, their parents, and all Alaskans to fund education in a way that is both effective and fiscally responsible. We must demand full transparency from school districts—not only to the legislature but to parents as well. Let’s focus on reforms that truly make a difference for our students and be honest about the trade-offs we’re facing. We must have an honest conversation, with correct and factual data and we must ask “who pays” and what is the return on investment. An investment in our kids always provides the greatest return. But if we cut DOT funding to invest in school districts and the kids can’t get to school, that would be an issue.
The conversation is far from over. I’m committed to ensuring that Alaska’s future remains bright—for our students and for all Alaskans.
Rep. Kevin McCabe is a legislator from Big Lake, Alaska.
From Southcentral Alaska to Southeast Alaska, winter has been remarkably snow free. There has been twice the snow in New Orleans, Louisiana than has fallen in Anchorage this winter. Only 3.8″ of snow has fallen in Anchorage. When Mayor Dave Bronson was in office, 133.3 inches of snow fell in the winter of 2023-24 and LaFrance and Constant said that the snow removal problems were due to his incompetence.
But Anchorage Assembly Chairman Chris Constant, who heads up an Assembly that governs 40% of Alaska’s population, thinks the streets are clear because of the fine leadership of Mayor Suzanne LaFrance.
In a Facebook post, Constant wrote that the clear streets are “Telltale signs of a better managed winter city.”
If Mayor LaFrance is credited for the lack of snow, critics say she also gets credit for the growing homeless encampments, including open fires, such as this one along A Street outside of Barnes & Noble’s store in midtown:
Homeless encampment in Anchorage in January, complete with open fire. Signs of a better managed winter city?
In addition to these homeless encampments that are popping up everywhere, the growing number of homeless that have been brought into the Spenard neighborhood has led to a visible increases of homeless using the airport for shelter. Homeless people are now sleeping on the floor in baggage claim and in the checkout.
When Mayor Bronson was in charge, Constant and the other Democrats made it impossible for him to solve the homelessness issue by blocking his every move.
Contract disputes happen all the time between companies.
Since November, a contract between Enstar, a public utility that provides natural gas to Southcentral homes and businesses, and Hilcorp, which is the main gas producer in Cook Inlet, has been the center of a dispute over the steps and protocols for delivering “extra” gas — that which is not immediately needed.
Rather than go to arbitration, Enstar escalated the dispute to the court system with a complaint this week. It’s a disagreement about how Hilcorp delivers the “call option” natural gas for additional gas that Enstar wants but does not necessarily need. There are stages to the delivery process — Enstar has the basic gas, then is supposed to use gas it has in storage, and then can have a “call option” for more gas, as needed.
“Despite various efforts to resolve an ongoing contractual dispute related to the delivery of natural gas and an agreement related to natural gas supply protocols, Enstar has chosen to initiate legal action,” said Hilcorp in a statement. “We strongly disagree with their interpretation of the contracts and look forward to resolving these issues in a timely manner. We hope Enstar will come back to the table and work with us to develop a reasonable resolution that takes into account the needs of all Alaskans that depend on Cook Inlet natural gas.”
The issue, technical and contractual in nature, is not a matter of life and death for Alaskans who depend on these companies to keep their homes and businesses warm, because the contract gas is being delivered. It’s a disagreement that could have been arbitrated and ultimately may be resolved before the case is heard in Anchorage Superior Court.
President Donald Trump signed an order ending funding for overseas nongovernmental organizations that provide abortions or that promote and advocate for the killing of unborn humans.
He did so on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, put into law by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1973 and overturned in 2022, also by the Supreme Court, which stated that the laws on abortion are the responsibilities of individual states, not the federal government. There is no federal right to an abortion.
Federal law — the Hyde Amendment — does not permit use of taxpayer dollars to support abortion services in other countries, but abortion groups have worked around that by using federal dollars to advocate for abortions and advise women how to get them. Running on U.S. taxpayer dollars, they can then free up other money to pay for the abortions.
The policy is one that changes depending on whether Democrats or Republicans are in power. President Ronald Reagan enacted such a ban on the use of taxpayer dollars overseas, but Democrat presidents, including Joe Biden, have reversed that ban. Trump once again put it in place on his fourth day in office.
Opponents refer to it as the Mexico City Policy. The rule applies not only to organizations that receive U.S. taxpayer dollars but to the groups they work with that provide the abortions. The people of America, for the next four years, won’t be paying for the advocacy of abortion in other countries.
The United States is by far the largest funder of global health services and so-called family planning services. Of the over $15 billion U.S. taxpayers spend on overseas health programs, nearly $700 million is spent on “family planning.”
On Thursday, Trump pardoned several anti-abortion activists, including a Catholic priest, who protested and prayed at the entrances of abortion clinics.
Trump said it was “a great honor to sign this. They should not have been prosecuted.”
Kristi Noem was confirmed Saturday as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.
The Senate voted 59-34 to confirm the former South Dakota governor, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Sen. Dan Sullivan both voting yes.
She succeeds Alejandro Mayorkas, who was in charge of President Joe Biden’s open-border policy that has brought millions of illegal immigrants, many of them violent criminals and suspected terrorists, into the country over the past four years.
Noem will be in charge of securing the borders, particularly the southern border, where the majority of illegal immigration occurs. But she’ll also need to focus on the border with Canada, which is increasingly becoming an entry point for bad actors.
Noem’s confirmation makes three out of three for President Donald Trump. On Friday, the vote for Pete Hegseth for Department of Defense came down to a tie, which was broken by a vote by Vice President JD Vance to complete Hegseth’s confirmation. Marco Rubio was the first confirmation; he is now secretary of State.
A tie vote in the confirmation of Pete Hegseth as Defense secretary had to be broken by Vice President JD Vance on Friday night. The 50-50 split in the U.S. Senate was due to Sens. Lisa Murkowski, Susan Collins, and Mitch McConnell — all three Republicans — voting against Hegseth, along with the Democrats, while all other Republicans voted for President Donald Trump’s nominee.
The Senate waited for the vice president to arrive and cast the tie-breaking vote. It was Vance’s first tie-breaking vote in the Senate, which has a narrow Republican majority.
As Murkowski and Collins huddled together in the chamber, JD Vance arrived and voted to affirm Hegseth.
Murkowski was the first of the three Republicans to state her objection to Hegseth, saying he was not qualified. But Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan, a U.S. Marine veteran, found him qualified enough and voted to affirm Hegseth.
Late Friday evening after the vote, Sullivan talked about Hegseth’s goals as Defense secretary:
“After a number of substantive discussions with Pete Hegseth, including during his confirmation hearing, I am confident Mr. Hegseth will work to refocus our military on lethality, warfighting and peace through strength, as well as getting rid of the damaging woke policies of the Biden administration, some of which I witnessed firsthand as a Marine Corps Reserve Officer,” Sullivan said. “These have been my top priorities as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and they will be Mr. Hegseth’s. Mr. Hegseth also assured me that he understands the important role that women play in our military, including in combat, as well as the strategic importance of Alaska. Along with President Trump, he is also committed to continuing the military buildup in our great state. I want to congratulate the incoming Secretary of Defense on his confirmation and look forward to welcoming him up to Alaska soon to see firsthand the critical strategic asset our state is to our national security.”
The U.S. Department of Energy made it clear on Friday that the punishing policies of the Biden Administration against Alaska are no more. It’s the Trump era.
“Gone are the days of the Biden administration undermining American energy projects. Thanks to President Trump’s directive, the Department of Energy is committed to supporting Alaska and the rest of the U.S. in responsibly developing and exporting their LNG,” the Department of Energy posted on X/Twitter.
Sen. Dan Sullivan responded: “Alaska is America’s energy powerhouse. I look forward to working with @ChrisAWright_ and @ENERGY to get clean-burning Alaska gas to Alaskans, all Americans, and our allies overseas.”
Congressman Nick Begich said: “The centerpiece of Donald Trump’s energy dominance strategy is clearly Alaska. From our heretofore stranded gas resources to enormous estimated quantities of liquid gold, Alaska has what the nation needs.”
The fact that Alaska LNG was prominently mentioned in the message was not lost on those who have watched the state being locked down.
For the past four years, President Joe Biden cancelled resource project after resource project, allowing only the ConocoPhillips Willow Project on the North Slope to proceed — and that one was only allowed to proceed because Biden’s lawyers told him he would lose in court, according to Biden’s own account.
After President Trump was sworn in as president on Monday, he immediately prioritized Alaska LNG and other resource projects in the 49th state with his executive order titled “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential.”
But such an exclusive mention by the Department of Energy signals that the turn has been made.
“The one [order] that hit me that will have the quickest effect on it, is getting rid of the LNG pause that Biden had put into place,” said former Energy Secretary Rick Perry.
The message from the Energy Department, even before Chris Wright’s nomination for Energy Secretary has been voted on, is clear: Alaska is a Trump priority.
Many parents have voiced their emotional attachment to Anchorage neighborhood schools during the proposed school closures. But changing schools and transitioning children to different schools in different states is pretty much the normal for military parents.
Here is the normal routine for the military and their children:
“We got orders, and we’re moving this summer.”
As a veteran, I can tell you these can be some of the most challenging words military members can utter to their family. Reactions can range from, “Not again. We just got here,” to, “Great news! I hate this place.” Relocating to an unfamiliar place is daunting. Choosing a place to live with schools in mind is even more so. We face a lot. The movers come and pack things—some of which we might never see again.
Likewise, our kids pack up their lives to probably never see their friends and classmates again. Our children feel like their friendships and social lives may never be the same. On top of that, our kids also must adapt and survive in new classrooms.
In many cases, some spouses remain in their current location, so their children can complete a school year after receiving relocation orders. Some spouses even stay put until their kids finish high school, which can take years. Uncertainty of the quality of education in the next place is enough for some families to feel they have no better option than to brave the hardships that such a distance can bring.
Military families sacrifice every day, especially when it comes to finding the best educational options for their children. This can be the greatest challenge of all. The challenge often begins with new neighborhood schools that may have a different curriculum, different sports programs, no advanced placement classes or fewer course options than families’ previous schools. Military kids lose the continuity of a curriculum.
Our children could use much more stability, and many schooling alternatives, including distance learning, charter networks, virtual learning and even home schools could provide that as kids move from place to place. Military families are at a distinct disadvantage getting their children into Anchorage’s better charter schools. That’s because there is a wait list for most of the desirable charter schools and once a child is enrolled, they seldom leave the charter school. So, if a newly arrived military family wants to enroll their child in a charter school’s third grade, there is usually no opening. The child is left to enroll in the neighborhood school. There is no equity for this child in education options.
Other education options are not available everywhere—a problem for families that move frequently from state to state. It’s a problem that could be solved, however, with education savings accounts (ESAs)—a flexible type of school choice—provided at the federal level. And why not? These parents are actually federal employees. In this way, military families would have more opportunities to ensure continuity in their children’s education. After all, our kids need that stability in what, to most, would be a disruptive life.
Education savings accounts allow parents to access the public funds already set aside for their children’s education. Those funds—often distributed to families via a restricted-use debit card—can cover private school tuition and fees, online learning programs, educational therapies, private tutoring, community college costs, higher education expenses and other approved customized learning services and materials.
ESAs could even allow families to use their funds to pay for a combination of public school courses and private services, depending on their children’s needs. A 2017 Surveying the Military report by EdChoice found young military/veteran parents and especially active-duty military parents are more likely than their counterparts to have already sought schooling options beyond a neighborhood public school for their kids.
Not only that, but most military-connected families said they support programs like ESAs and for good reasons. Mostly, they want access to better academic environments, more flexibility as parents and more individual attention for their kids.
As veterans, my wife and I feel the same way.
While serving, we relocated our kids to five different state school districts in a 10-year period. I can say that finding that “good neighborhood with good schools” in which to rent or buy a home is a formidable task. I remember arriving in a new location. I asked a friend who was already stationed there, “Is X school a good school?” She said it was.
Later on, my son told me, “Dad, I was sure glad to see you pick me up every day after school.” I came to find out that his school was a dismal failure, and my son actually feared for his safety every day! What an eye opener that was. But, hey, he got straight As!
How does a military family get current, valid, reliable data on a local school system? Which neighborhood has the better schools and teachers? How safe are the schools? What special needs do the schools provide? Does the school have career-technical education? How does one enroll in a charter school? The military base/post does not provide any information on the performance of local schools. The real estate industry provides some, although it’s dated and inaccurate. Most military families get their information from friends and by word of mouth. In my experience, that was not a very good source to determine my child’s future. This information vacuum needs to be filled to help military families find the best fit for their children’s educational needs.
Even though a military child’s new school may be substandard or ill-suited to their needs, they become comfortable or begin making friends, and parents find it difficult to put them through more trauma by moving again so they can attend a better public school. That’s the real challenge: finding a “better school” or other educational options. Every military parent wants to hear their children say these words: “I love my school.” “My teacher is the best.” “I met the nicest kids at school.”
You see, veterans and active-duty military members always look out for their kids. For most, a quality school is the primary criterion. In fact, more than one-third said dissatisfaction with their children’s education was a significant factor in their decision to remain or leave the military service. The ones who stay sacrifice to locate to a neighborhood where that ZIP Code- assigned school ranks high. They sacrifice to access alternatives. Data show they are more likely than non-military parents to go so far as getting a second job or taking out a loan just to ensure their kids get a chance at a quality education.
After a life full of sacrifices, couldn’t our education system do more? I think we all owe military families a debt not just on Veterans Day, but all days.
Let’s help them meet the educational challenges unique to their families. Let’s say “thank you for your service” by giving them access to the educational choice options that they want and that will help their children reach for the stars.
David Boyle is the education writer at Must Read Alaska.
