Wednesday, July 29, 2026
Home Blog Page 260

Pedro Gonzalez: Anchorage Homeless Industrial Complex grows despite massive taxpayer dollars

By PEDRO GONZALEZ

Between 2020 and 2024, Anchorage appropriated nearly $190 million toward fighting homelessness, according to a document published by the municipality.

Those funds, derived from federal pandemic relief dollars and a new alcohol tax, have been allocated for major investments in housing.  

What do the results look like? Mixed, mostly, with the biggest winners being those who profit from what seems to be a perennial problem. 

Last year, Linda Burke, the owner of Wild Starr Creations and Coffee House, complained about the growing homeless population in Anchorage to KTUU. She said it was hurting her bottom line. “When you have people outside passed out, smoking weed and drinking alcohol, there is no business,” Burke told reporters. “If it keeps happening, people will never come back, and with the police presence not visible, it makes it even harder.”  

Survey data shows that, even as the city threw money at the problem, homelessness rose 54 percent between January 2019 and 2024, mirroring statewide trends. There was a short period of decline, but it was followed by the number of homeless shooting up again at the tail end of last year. As of this January, there are more people experiencing homelessness compared to November 2023, according to data from the Anchorage Coalition to End Homelessness. 

In 2022, the Anchorage Assembly greenlit nearly $12 million in federal relief funds to the Rasmuson Foundation for a low-income and supportive housing project. That was the biggest slice of an over $51 million federal relief pie. It happened around the time that there were 65 other similar projects, often hotels and inns being converted toward the same use by other nonprofits, like the Anchorage Affordable Housing and Land Trust.

The land trust is illustrative of how these nonprofits work. According to its website, its mission is “acquiring, creating, operating, and preserving permanently affordable housing for low and extremely low-income residents.”  

It’s a public-private model that is further sustained by an influx of homeless individuals from the villages and rising costs of rent and living that sometimes contribute to people being pushed into homelessness for the first time.  

A kind of complex emerges: nonprofits and other entities make a business out of developing housing projects, as they are almost guaranteed a steady stream of funding, and the demand is maintained by a seemingly endless stream of the newly unhoused and those who are perpetually so—both of which have a good chance of becoming dependent on this system for support. The model is also reinforced by the addition of migrants. In 2023, the head of the National Alliance to End Homelessness told Alaska Public Media that there had been a “surge” of these people seeking resources. 

Right now, whether the issue actually ever gets solved might be beside the point. Establishing permanent ghettos doesn’t seem like a good solution to anyone but the people collecting tax dollars to develop the projects.

Linda Boyle: Republicans will again attempt to get 8,400 Covid-unvaxed military members reinstated

By LINDA BOYLE

In 2023, both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate attempted to pass a law to reinstate the 8,400 military members who were discharged from service because they refused to take the Covid jab. That attempt failed in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

But this year a different House and Senate — controlled by Republicans — are trying to pass legislation again. 

Congressman Pat Harrigan of North Carolina and Senator Ted Cruz of Texas are working parallel bills referred to as the Americans Act of 2025. 

What would these bills mean to those who were discharged during the Covid years? 

Sen. Cruz’s Americans Act of 2025 would require the Department of Defense to

  • Offer reinstatement to any service member separated solely for Covid-19 vaccine status, crediting such service member with the time of involuntary separation for retirement pay calculations;
  • Restore the rank of any service member demoted solely for Covid-19 vaccine status and compensate them for any pay and benefits lost as a result of that demotion;
  • Adjust to “honorable” any “general” discharge given to a service member due solely to Covid-19 vaccine status;
  • Make service members whole for any bonuses they were forced to repay or did not receive based solely on their Covid-19 vaccine status;
  • Expunge from a service member’s record any adverse action based solely on Covid-19 vaccine status, regardless of whether or not such service member previously sought an accommodation.
  • Make every effort to retain service members not vaccinated against Covid-19, providing them with professional development, promotion, and leadership opportunities equal to that of their peers; and
  • Provide a Covid-19 vaccine exemption process for service members with natural immunity, a relevant underlying health condition, or a sincerely held religious belief inconsistent with being vaccinated.

If this legislation were passed, it certainly would vindicate those hurt by the government’s heavy  handed approach to the Covid jab.  Very few religious exemptions were allowed.  

Military members were coerced into taking the jabs. If they chose to leave the military, they were made an example of  by some commanders.   

One commander told the story to all his troops at his commander’s call that he had discharged a service member with a promotion number to the next rank because she could not in good conscience take a shot she  religiously opposed. She had nearly 17 years of military service.

It fascinates me how zealous the services were in forcing these people out of service.  

It reminded me of the Anthrax shot that was required for deployable troops back in the late 1990s, early 2000s.

I was a medical group commander at that time. One of my doctors had been deployed for Desert Shield/Desert Storm and returned home with an unusual blood disorder. Now as a deployable doctor, he was mandated to take the Anthrax shot. I could have forced him to do so, but felt his health concerns were valid. I had him evaluated by my infectious disease doctor. He stated that this doctor should not get the Anthrax vaccine due to his previous health concerns returning from Iraq.

I removed him from deployment and retained him in my family practice clinic.  

Fast forward to four years ago. I doubt I would have had the same  flexibility when it came to the Covid jab. 

In a recent article I wrote about according to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s then definition, the military had herd immunity with the need to mandate it for all service members. 

Herd immunity used to be the standard.  During flu season, the flu vaccine was mandated for all military personnel. Yet my public health department told me that once we went over 75%, we would have herd immunity. They weren’t concerned about those who did not take the vaccine.

But the Covid years were run by zealots. The jab was the only acceptable answer with very few exceptions.  At what cost did the military push this agenda? 

We lost some well trained and excellent military members who were concerned about their faith and their health. 

Congress is attempting to remedy that. I am not sure how successful it will be, nor do I know what effect that would have on those members should they choose to return.

You can help these wronged military members get justice by contacting your congressperson and senators.  

Read more about The House version of The Americans Act of 2025.

If you are interested in weighing in, here are the web pages with contact links for Congressman Nick Begich and Senators Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan: 

https://www.sullivan.senate.gov

https://www.murkowski.senate.gov

https://begich.house.gov/about

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.  

Video: Singer Jewel apologizes for any hurt she caused fans by performing at RFK Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again inaugural gala

Alaska-raised singer-songwriter Jewel explained in an Instagram post on Friday about why she performed at Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s “Make America Healthy Again” inaugural celebration, and said she was sorry if it caused her fans pain.

She said she performed because, “I am a mental health advocate.”

The singer, who was born as Jewel Kilcher but who goes by her first name only, said she had reached out to the Biden Administration about her concerns, saying that one in four children in America are “considering un-aliving themselves.” It’s not much better for adults, she said.

Jewel said, “I believe there are things we can do to save lives. I believe I can help, and if I believe I can help, I have to try.”

She said the mental health crisis cannot wait another four years. “If I can help shape policy, make sure mental health is in the conversation when it comes to American health, if I can help put resources or mental health tools into the hands of the most vulnerable who need it, I’m going to try, and I’m going to fight.”

She also apologized, saying she is “so sorry that I caused pain, especially in my LGBTQIA+ community, because you guys are treasures.” 

The full statement can be viewed here:

From a family of Alaska pioneers, Jewel’s grandfather was Yule Kilcher, who settled in Homer, Alaska after emigrating from Switzerland. He ultimately had a hand in drafting Alaska’s State Constitution and served in the Alaska State Senate.

Her life story is one of overcoming hardship. Her parents divorced and she was raised by her father, who suffered from the scars of having been physically abused as a child, and having post-traumatic stress disorder after serving in the Vietnam war. He abused alcohol and his own children.

“Through the neglect and human frailty of both my parents, I began to doubt my worth, my instincts, and value,” Jewel said in a biography published at the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans. “So lasting are the scars of the child who never feels worthy of love. The negative lessons I learned from my mom and dad, which I’m sure they inherited from theirs, would take me many years to unlearn.”

Jewel hit the road in her teens, living out of her car and singing throughout small venues in Southern California, where her talent was discovered by those who helped her launch her storied singing and acting career. Read her life story at this link.

Critics, such as one writer at Vanity Fair, treated her harshly for performing at a gala celebrating the election of Donald Trump and were not forgiving of her apology.

Eve Batey snarked that Jewel claiming to be “a mental health advocate” is “an assertion that likely made the millions of people who have felt their mental wellness crumble in the past week gnash their teeth in frustration, especially when the singer continued, ‘I believe I can help, and if I believe I can help, I have to try.’ That meant serenading RFK Jr. and his wife, actor Cheryl Hines, with a rendition of ‘Somewhere Over The Rainbow,’ though it’s unclear how the performance of the famous song made an impact on the fight for our nation’s sanity.”

Injured by Covid shot? Journalist is looking for Alaskans to interview

By LINDA BOYLE

The Alaskans 4 Personal Freedom (AK4PF.org) was contacted by a journalist writing a story about vaccine injured Alaskans. She is specifically interested in those who had any of the Covid shots and now have neurological or vascular problems that may be related to the jab.

She is also interested in parents who may have had a child or children injured from Covid shots or any childhood vaccines. For those interested, the journalist is ready to start doing interviews this weekend. Go to this website and contact the Alaskans 4 Personal Freedom to get information about contacting the reporter.

Blowback: Republican women’s club denounces Sen. Lisa Murkowski and calls for her censure

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:


McCabe: An important update on education funding and what HB 69 would cost over three years

By REP. KEVIN MCCABE

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.

Snowless Anchorage is sign of ‘a better managed winter city.’ Which assemblyman said that?

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 dispute between Enstar and Hilcorp results in complaint over ‘call option’ additional gas

8

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.

Here’s the complaint in full:

Trump blocks funding from going to overseas abortion advocates and coordinators

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.”