Thursday, July 30, 2026
Home Blog Page 297

Supreme Court weighs Tennessee’s state ban on chemo, surgical gender jerry-rigging of kids’ bodies

By KIM JARRETT | THE CENTER SQUARE

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday began weighing its role in determining whether a Tennessee law banning medication to treat gender dysphoria for minors violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

The court heard oral arguments on the law passed by the Tennessee General Assembly in 2023 and signed by Gov. Bill Lee. The state is one of at least 26 with similar restrictions or bans and the first to have litigation against it reach the nation’s highest court.

The high court is split 6-3 with conservatives in the majority.

The U.S. Department of Justice, the American Civil Liberties Union and others argue the law violates the 14th Amendment. Tennessee law allows puberty blockers and hormone treatments for purposes other than treatment on minors.

The question before the court is what is its role, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said.

“If the constitution doesn’t take sides, if there’s strong, forceful, scientific policy arguments on both sides in a situation like this, why isn’t best to leave it to the democratic process?” Kavanaugh said.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, representing the Biden Administration, said she understood the state’s need to regulate and take into concerns about adolescent health.

“But when you look at how this law actually operates, what it is doing is denying individual plaintiffs the ability to access medications on the basis of their sex,” Prelogar said. “And that doesn’t mean that the states are disabled from taking into account the actual biological differences between males and females, but that has to be channeled to the highest scrutiny stage. And I think that there would be a real danger in this court saying, looking ahead essentially saying there might be benign justifications or we think states should have some ability in this regard to overlook the … sex classification in this statute.”

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti said it should be up to the General Assembly.

“Tennessee’s General Assembly reviewed the medical evidence, as well as the evidence-based decisions of European countries that restricted these procedures, and ultimately passed this bipartisan law prohibiting irreversible medical interventions,” Skrmetti said in a statement after oral arguments ended. “The plaintiffs in this case are asking the court to take the power to regulate the practice of medicine away from the people’s elected representatives and vest it in unaccountable judges.”

Justice Sonia Sotomayor struck back against claims by Tennessee Solicitor General Michael Rice that the law is not tied to sex and that the treatments could cause harm to minors.

“There is always going to be a percentage of the population under any medical treatment that is going to suffer harm,” Sotomayor said. “So the question in my mind is not do policymakers decide whether one person’s life is more valuable than the millions of others who get relief from this treatment, the question is can you stop one sex from the other.”

Justice Samuel Alito referred to the United Kingdom and Sweden, which have instituted bans on puberty blockers in some situations.

“I, of course acknowledge, Justice Alito, that there is a lot of debate happening here and abroad about the proper model of deliver of this care and exactly when adolescents should receive it and how to identify the adolescents for whom it would be helpful,” Prelogar said. “But I stand by that there is a consensus that these treatments can be medically necessary for some adolescents and that shouldn’t matter what source you look at.”

Prelogar said the court could issue a narrow ruling, pointing the court to a West Virginia law that bans gender-affirming care for minors unless there is a suicide risk.

The decision from the court is not expected before summer.

Florida sheriff withdraws name from DEA post after backlash over his Covid enforcement

Florida Sheriff Chad Chronister, who was the nominee for the director of the Drug Enforcement Agency, has withdrawn his name after receiving intense criticism on social media, due to his aggressive enforcement of lockdowns during the Covid era.

“To have been nominated by President-Elect @realDonaldTrump to serve as Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration is the honor of a lifetime. Over the past several days, as the gravity of this very important responsibility set in, I’ve concluded that I must respectfully withdraw from consideration,” Chronister wrote on X. “There is more work to be done for the citizens of Hillsborough County and a lot of initiatives I am committed to fulfilling. I sincerely appreciate the nomination, outpouring of support by the American people, and look forward to continuing my service as Sheriff of Hillsborough County.”

Chronister’s nomination came under fire from conservatives who pointed out that he had approved the arrest of a Tampa Bay pastor on charges of unlawful assembly and violating a public health order, when the pastor had continued to provide church services during a Covid lockdown.

In March of 2020, the Hillsborough Sheriff’s Office wrote that the pastor was arrested because “His reckless disregard for human life put hundreds of people in his congregation at risk and thousands of residents who may interact with them this week in danger. The River at Tampa Bay has an advantage over most places of worship, because they have access to technology that allows them to live stream their services over the internet and broadcast television for the more than 4,000 members to watch from the safety of their homes.”

Trump confirmed on Wednesday that he asked Chronister to withdraw because of the treatment of the faith community during Covid lockdowns.

Trump adds more nominees, as Pete Hegseth says he will fight against attempts to oust him from Defense

In a Wall Street Journal opinion column on Wednesday, Defense Secretary nominee Pete Hegseth put to rest the media-spread rumors that he would withdraw from the position he was named to — leading the U.S. Department of Defense. He said he would stay and fight for it and that Donald Trump encouraged him to fight on through the allegations being brought against him.

“I’ve been through a lot: combat tours, job changes, divorces and family challenges. (Yes, I love my mom very much, and she loves me.) I have always led with honesty, integrity and passion. Tragically, many veterans never find the purpose for their next chapter and succumb to the bottle, depression or, worst of all, suicide. I understand what they are facing—because I’ve lived it. But by the grace of God, I took another path. My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ has renewed and restored my life. I am saved by his grace,” Hegseth wrote in the newspaper.

“The press is peddling anonymous story after anonymous story, all meant to smear me and tear me down. It’s a textbook manufactured media takedown. They provide no evidence, no names, and they ignore the legions of people who speak on my behalf. They need to create a bogeyman, because they believe I threaten their institutional insanity. That is the only thing they are right about,” Hegseth wrote.

“Talk to those who served with me in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, Afghanistan or the National Guard. They support me, and I’m honored by that. I have never backed down from a fight and won’t back down from this one. I am grateful President-elect Trump chose me to lead the Defense Department, and I look forward to an honest confirmation hearing with our distinguished senators—not a show trial in the press,” he concluded in this op-ed that has been made available outside the Wall Street Journal’s paywall.

Trump on Wednesday named former Missouri Congressman Billy Long to serve as the next commissioner of what is arguably the most despised agency of the Deep State: The Internal Revenue Service. It’s one of several names he has announced in the past 24 hours to key posts, most of which will require the Senate’s confirmation.

“Billy brings 32 years of experience running his own businesses in Real Estate and, as one of the premier Auctioneers in the Country. He then served 12 years in Congress, because he felt it was important for his constituents to have a Representative who has signed the front of a check!”
 
Since leaving Congress, Long has worked as a business and tax advisor. While in office, he cosponsored Bill H.Res.1005: Honoring the life and legacy of the late Congressman Don Young of Alaska.

Trump also announced that David A. Warrington will be the assistant to the president and counsel to the president, leading the Office of White House Counsel and serving as the top attorney for the White House. Warrington is Trump’s personal attorney and is a partner at the Dhillon Law Group. A veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps, he is a former president of the Republican National Lawyers Association and a graduate of Georgetown University School of Law.

Trump named Monica Crowley to serve as ambassador, assistant secretary of State, and chief of protocol. Crowley, like Hegseth did in 2016, has visited Alaska as a guest speaker of the Alaska Republican Party in years past.

“Monica will be the Administration Representative for major U.S. hosted events, including America’s 250th Birthday in 2026, the FIFA World Cup in 2026, and the Olympic Games in Los Angeles in 2028,” Trump said. During his first term, Crowley was assistant secretary of the Treasury for public affairs.

Gail Slater was nominated to be assistant attorney general for the Antitrust Division at the Department of Justice.

“Big Tech has run wild for years, stifling competition in our most innovative sector and, as we all know, using its market power to crack down on the rights of so many Americans, as well as those of Little Tech! I was proud to fight these abuses in my First Term, and our Department of Justice’s antitrust team will continue that work under Gail’s leadership,” Trump said. Slater served in the first Trump Administration on his National Economic Counsel. Recently, she worked in the Senate office of Vice President-elect JD Vance.

Trump has picked Paul Atkins to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission. Atkins, a crypto-currency expert, was a former commissioner at the SEC. SEC Chair Gary Gensler announced last month that he will step down when Trump becomes president on Jan. 20.  

Former U.S. Senator Kelly Loeffler of Georgia is Trump’s pick to run the Small Business Administration.

Former White House adviser Peter Navarro, who just finished serving a prison sentence over his role in the Jan. 6, 2021 disruption at the U.S. Capitol, will come back as a senior counselor for trade and manufacturing, which “leverages Peter’s broad range of White House experience, while harnessing his extensive Policy analytic and Media skills,” Trump wrote.

Data shows Biden-Harris Administration opened floodgates for taxpayer-funded sex changes on kids

By MEGAN BLOCK | DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION

The Biden-Harris administration opened the door for a massive increase of taxpayer-funded transgender interventions, including child sex-change surgeries, and the Daily Caller News Foundation has obtained enough data to give a partial estimate of the cost.

From January 2018 to September 2023, 16 states spent more than $165 million funding “gender transition services” — including puberty blockers, hormones, and sex-change surgeries — with more than $45 million spent on interventions for children 17 and younger, according to data obtained by the DCNF through a series of public record requests.

The DCNF asked states to provide reimbursement data for gender transition services covered through state insurance and medical assistance programs, such as Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which is funded through Medicaid. The states were able to identify gender transition services through medical billing codes such as International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Published by the World Health Organization, ICD codes provide comprehensive diagnostic information for diseases and injuries and create a valuable dataset used in medical research.

The DCNF requested the total amount of reimbursements paid for all gender transition services — which could include speech therapy and mental health services as well as life-altering surgeries — that were covered through state insurance and medical assistance programs.

The states that provided data to the DCNF include: Michigan, Idaho, Illinois, Virginia, Nevada, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Louisiana, Maryland, New Hampshire, Wyoming, Kentucky, North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, and Washington.

Editor’s note: Alaska apparently did not provide data to the DCNF.

The three states with the highest amount of reimbursements for gender transition services for adults and kids were Illinois, Oregon, and Washington state. Illinois spent $40,843,721, which included $14,296,558 in services for children 17 and under. Oregon spent $30,045,262 and Washington State spent $27,145,383. Other statewide totals for gender transition services includes Maryland, which spent $11,849,062, Nevada, which spent $10,096,655, Michigan, which spent $6,821,169, and New Hampshire, which spent $2,360,534, according to data sent to the DCNF.

Virginia provided the DCNF with data from 2020 to 2022, spending a total of $13,933,635 on gender transition services in three years, with $3,480,492 spent on sex-change interventions for children 17 and under.

The state of Oregon specified that their data included reimbursement costs for a range of sex-change procedures including surgeries, anesthesia costs, hair removal, speech therapy, hormone therapy, and puberty suppression.

The data showed a 60% increase in sex-change interventions for adults and kids under the Biden-Harris administration across the 15 states that provided yearly data totals for 2020 to 2022, jumping from $27,753,478 spent on gender transition services in 2020 to $44,553,052 in 2022. Utah did not break down its data into yearly totals and was excluded from this calculation. While data for 2023 was incomplete, 12 states provided some totals showing $22,017,362 had been spent on sex-change interventions over the first nine months of last year.

The DCNF attempted to obtain similar data from 48 states. However, many states outright denied the requests or sought exorbitant fees to obtain public data

For example, Rhode Island wanted a prepayment of more than $3,000 to fulfill the request that other states considered exempt from public information processing fees.

Explosion In Sex Changes For Minors 

Democrat-led policies that required insurers to pay for sex changes for minors led to an increase in the procedures nationwide, according to a leading transgender activist and physician.

In a June 2022 email exclusively obtained by the DCNF, Jason Rafferty, the lead author of the American Academy of Pediatrics sex-change policy, attributed the growth of pediatric sex-change surgery to services being more “accessible” due to increased Medicaid funding.

“I would say that there has likely been an increase in ‘top surgery’ among 16 and 17 year olds simply due to the fact that this surgery has become more accessible. 10 years ago when I started in this field, if a patient wanted surgery there was really only 1 surgeon in the region doing it for patients under 18 and aside from that they would need to travel across the country and pay out of pocket,” wrote Rafferty.

“Clearly if you were on Medicaid or did not have the resources, it was off the table. Today, we have 3 surgeons in [Rhode Island] doing these surgeries and probably half a dozen in [Massachusetts] plus a pediatric plastic surgeon at Boston Childrens specializing in gender surgeries. Most if not all now take Medicaid – very few patients are paying the fully cost of surgery out of pocket. So, the point is that my experience is not that surgery is ‘more popular’ but just more (or simply just) accessible,” he wrote.

Rafferty did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the DCNF.

The rapid growth of tax dollars funding the sex-change industry can be attributed to policies from Democrat presidential administrations.

In 2014, the Obama-Biden administration overturned a rule preventing Medicare from funding sex-change surgeries, opening the doors for taxpayers to pay for sex-change operations. They further expanded coverage for sex-change interventions in 2016 through their interpretation of Section 1557, a non-discrimination provision of the Affordable Care Act.

In May 2016, the Obama-Biden administration issued a rule that quietly redefined the discrimination policy to include sexual orientation and “gender identity,” a move which strong-armed the entire medical community into embracing gender ideology and sex-change interventions, especially for children. “Gender identity” is a term used by transgender activists to describe how a person feels about or perceives their sex. Activists believe these feelings override a person’s biology and should have equal weight in law and society.

The Obama-Biden administration’s regulatory change prevented insurance companies from categorically denying coverage for sex-change interventions, considering such bans a form of discrimination, which forced insurance plans to offer coverage for sex-change services.

“What the rule was about under Obama, and now under Biden-Harris, was to force medical providers to do the surgeries, even against their medical judgments, and for insurance companies to pay for it, which means we all pay for it,” Roger Severino, vice president of domestic policy at the Heritage Foundation and former director of the Office for Civil Rights at Health and Human Services, told the DCNF.

“That includes the whole gamut from hysterectomies to breast augmentations to tracheal shapes, voice training — just an extraordinary number of very expensive procedures to treat a psychological condition using physical interventions, surgeries, etc. and no real religious exemption,” Severino said.

2023 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) showed the impact of Obama’s 2016 Rule, finding the number of sex change surgical procedures performed in the U.S. nearly tripled between 2016 to 2019. Roughly 8% of patients were between the ages of 12 to 18, the study found, and showed a sharp rise in breast and chest surgery from 2016 to 2019 within the pediatric population.

Biden-Harris Restores Gender Surgery Funding After Trump Admin

In June 2020, the Trump administration overturned Obama’s Rule on Section 1557, reinstating the government’s previous interpretation of discrimination must be based on biological sex rather than “gender identity.” At that time, Severino was the director of the Office for Civil Rights at Health and Human Services.

On May 10, 2021, however, the Biden-Harris administration reversed the Trump rule and redefined discrimination under Section 1557 to include “gender identity,” again forcing the medical community, including insurance companies, to provide sex-change services to children or face accusations of discrimination.

“I issued the Trump regulations, undoing the Obama Section 1557 changes that added gender identity as a protected class and requiring cross sex, surgeries, hormones, puberty blockers, included on children in federally funded programs and in insurance,” Severino said.

“They were as comprehensive as they could to try to push unscientific gender ideology into the medical system, and they succeeded, over the last three plus years, in trying to coerce hospitals, doctors, and insurance companies to push experimental treatments and surgeries, including and especially on children,” Severino added.

Do No Harm, a medical watchdog group, recently published a databasethat found from 2019 to 2023, 13,994 children in the United States have received sex change-related treatments and 5,747 sex change surgeries had been performed on children.

“Medical professionals must provide evidence-based care, not pursue a political agenda,”Dr. Stanley Goldfarb, chairman of Do No Harm, told the DCNF. “We are committed to ending this predatory practice, which is harmful to the thousands of minors whose lives and bodies will never be the same.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service

Terrence Shanigan: Ranked-choice voting is a deceptive scheme

By TERRENCE SHANIGAN

Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) is one of the most deceptive systems ever imposed on Alaskans. This system is unconstitutional on multiple grounds and undermines democratic principles. It was sold by out-of-state sponsors to the public with misleading claims and implemented by a partisan Division of Elections director, raising serious concerns about neutrality and fairness.

RCV, rooted in century-old European systems, is used primarily for local and legislative elections in democratic socialist countries—not for electing heads of state. These nations prefer simpler two-round runoff systems, like Alaska’s former method, to avoid RCV’s complexity, manipulation risks, and tendency to elevate less-qualified candidates. Using RCV for presidential elections is unconstitutional. It conflicts with the Electoral College, which the progressive left opposes, and violates equal voting rights protections. 

The Constitution mandates the Electoral College, not a redistributed popular vote, to elect the president. RCV alters how states achieve majority outcomes, directly conflicting with the Constitution’s allocation of powers to states and Congress. Alaska’s leaders must step up and challenge the certification of this election to protect constitutional integrity and electoral fairness.

RCV exacerbates disparities in how votes are counted through unequal voting power across states. Alaska’s implementation of RCV caused inconsistencies, while other states retained their traditional head-to-head systems, which interfered with vote processing and conflicts with redistribution for the Electoral College.

Ballot exhaustion—a common issue in RCV—occurs when voters do not rank enough candidates, and their ballot is excluded in later rounds, disenfranchising thousands of Alaskan voters in a national election and violating the principle of equal representation. The Division of Elections does not track the tens of thousands of exhausted or rejected votes, but the numbers are staggering.

RCV’s ballot exclusion and rejection rates are 10 times higher than head-to-head elections, according to the Social Science Research Network. The high ballot rejection rates violate the Equal Protection Clause and impose a burden on voters with its unjust system that undermines the democratic process.

The ability to rank multiple candidates in RCV, touted as granting more choice, actually gives unequal weight to votes in successive rounds when redistributed, violating the “one person, one vote” principle from the 1964 case Reynolds v. Sims. This unfair system undermines equal representation. In the United States, voting has always meant casting a single vote. Under RCV, voters, for losing candidates, effectively gain a second, third, or fourth vote, creating an unequal system that contradicts the democratic ideal of fairness and equality in the electoral process.

RCV ballots fail to provide write-in spots equal to the number of ranking slots, coercing voters into selecting only pre-listed candidates and restricting their ability to choose non-listed options freely. This limitation violates democratic principles, as Reynolds v. Sims stated: “The right to vote freely for the candidate of one’s choice is of the essence of a democratic society.” By offering insufficient write-in slots, RCV prioritizes pre-selected candidates, creating inconsistency, undermining fairness, and limiting voter representation. This coercive restriction unconstitutionally promotes undue influence and unequal treatment in the electoral process.

RCV’s sponsors knowingly misled Alaskans with deceptive messaging, targeting groups like Alaska Natives, rural residents, deployed military members, and mail-in voters who supported it most. Many Alaska Natives still lack the facts about RCV’s negative impacts on their tendency to vote by mail. It dilutes policy platforms and sidelines well-qualified leaders in favor of broadly “acceptable” but less capable candidates. If more voters understood how RCV undermines electoral quality and effective governance, they might reconsider supporting this flawed system that sacrifices strong leadership for superficial inclusivity.

The claim that open primaries are liberating and allow voters to choose freely is misleading. Open primaries encourage cross-party interference, where voters from one party strategically vote for weaker candidates in another party to manipulate outcomes. This undermines the integrity of the process. Closed or semi-closed primaries prevent such interference by limiting participation to registered party members, ensuring the selection process is aligned with party values.

I support competition and more parties, but open primaries undermine ideological coherence. Parties are not mere “clubs” but represent policy and core beliefs platforms, giving voters clarity about candidates’ ideologies. Open primaries blur these distinctions, reducing party labels to empty symbols. It would be like allowing Russia to choose the U.S. Olympic team—outsiders influencing decisions that should reflect our values. In the same way, RCV weakens the party system, dilutes voter understanding, and undermines the integrity of elections, making it harder for voters to align with candidates who truly represent their beliefs.

RCV sponsors claim to improve democracy, but their push to eliminate closed primaries erases the foundational philosophies that guide party candidates. It allows parties without broad appeal to exploit the system, diluting meaningful policy debates. The process of parties conducting their primaries and presenting candidates under their banners gives voters clarity and a basis for informed decisions.

Open primaries strip voters of this clarity, making party affiliations like “R” or “D” irrelevant. Voters should beware of systems that aim to destroy ideological accountability and the policy foundations that define representative democracy. RCV weakens democratic accountability because candidates are not directly accountable to their party’s voters, who are most invested in their success.

The claim that Alaskans are protected from outside money is a lie exposed by the reporting of liberal progressives from the Lower 48 spending nearly $13 million to manipulate Alaska’s electoral system, aiming to influence national elections. Alaska urgently needs election fiscal reform to protect our unique way of life from progressive D.C. special interests intent on colonizing us politically.

RCV has introduced countless ways to exclude ballots while relying on Dominion Voting Systems, raising serious concerns about data security, tabulation trustworthiness, and manipulation. Why did the Division of Elections insist on Dominion machines, and why did the lieutenant governor approve this purchase without public comment? This system fosters exclusion, blocks hand-counting, and erodes transparency.

RCV’s complexity leads to higher rejection rates, particularly for mail-in voters, amplifying disenfranchisement risks. The destructive impact of RCV has left Alaska with a system that prioritizes mediocrity and injects confusion over fairness and clarity. Returning to a strong, traditional head-to-head system is critical to restore trust, transparency, and integrity. Alaskans deserve better leadership to drive this change.

Terrence Shanigan is a lifelong Alaskan of Sugpiaq descent from Bristol Bay. He is also the co-founder of Mission Critical, is a combat veteran, an honored husband and a dedicated father.

Red stripe expands: Anchorage Assembly passes law requiring servers to check for ‘no booze’ licenses

The Anchorage Assembly passed another restrictive law on Tuesday night, this one requiring all bars and restaurants to check the identifications of people ordering alcohol. Already by state law liquor store clerks in Alaska are required to check for the telltale “red stripe” on drivers’ licenses that indicate there’s a court order that prohibits the buyer from purchasing alcohol. Usually that person is on parole or has “conditions of release” that require them to not buy or consume alcohol.

The Assembly voted unanimously to expand that law beyond liquor stores to other establishments. It takes effect March 1.

According to AS 04.16.160, a person who is restricted from purchasing alcohol may not knowingly enter or remain in a licensed premises to obtain or consume alcohol, per AS 04.16.047. The Anchorage law now puts the burden on the server to check the drivers’ licenses of those ordering booze to screen out the 2,100 out of 730,000 (.28%) Alaskans who are not allowed to purchase a drink.

Sudden move: China bans rare minerals from export to USA, but Alaska has minerals to spare

In what is seen as a retaliatory move against the United States, the Chinese government has announced that it will no longer allow certain rare earths, such as gallium, germanium and antimony, to be exported to the U.S.

The ban announcement came one day after the Biden Administration restricted the export of specific computer chips to China out of concern these chips are being used to develop advanced weapons that could be used against the United States and her allies.

The minerals that come from China are used in the semiconductor manufacturing process, sophisticated weapons, and every-day items Americans use, such as computers and mobile phones.

This embargo will increase domestic demand for these minerals, which Alaska can provide and has produced historically.

Gallium, for instance, which is used in fiber optic cables, cell phones, solar panels, and infrared technology, is found in the Red Dog mining area, as well as in parts of Southcentral Alaska and near the Ray River north of Fairbanks, where germanium, tungsten, and uranium have been located, just off the Dalton Highway. 

Alaska is rich in antimony, and has produced it historically throughout Alaska history, from Southeast Alaska to the Brooks Range, starting in 1905, when Alaska was still a district. The Stampede Mine in the Kantishna Mine District produced 75% of the U.S. domestic production of antimony during much of World War II, and Livengood contributed production during the Korean War. It’s used in everything from batteries to nuclear weapons.

But domestic mining has fallen out of favor in America under the Biden Administration, which has bent to the will of environmentalists, halting permitting and setting areas off limits through federal regulatory actions, such as as blocking access to mining areas like the Ambler Mining District. That could change under the incoming Trump Administration and Donald Trump’s Make America Great Again mandate.

“I’ve been saying for years that our reliance on China for critical minerals undermines our national security and defense. This ban is a wake-up call. We have many of these rare earth minerals in the United States—particularly in Alaska,” said Sen. Dan Sullivan. “The Biden-Harris administration—led by extreme environmentalists—has been hell bent on keeping these minerals locked in the ground which, in my view, is national security suicide. I am confident President Trump and his administration understand the imperative of developing our own resources so that we aren’t dependent on an adversary, like China, to keep us safe.”

Nick Begich, Alaska’s incoming congressional representative, has long been interesting in mining and has supported and invested in Alaska mineral projects for years.

“For years alaska representatives have made a point that our energy and mineral security have been placed in the hands of our global adversaries. Self-reliance and self-determination require America to regain control these critical supply chains. That effort begins in Alaska, where critical minerals, rare earths, base metals, oil and gas, and more are available in abundance,” he said.

Kristen Walker of the American Consumer Institute, writes that an unwillingness to mine and process critical minerals, used for countless technologies and energy projects, on our soil needs reexamination. 

China currently dominates the supply chains, keeping every other nation at their mercy. Tapping into our own vast supplies would not only enhance national security but would benefit the environment due to superior standards here. We should open our lands to more exploration,” she says.

Alex Gimarc: The definition of insanity and ranked-choice voting repeal II

By ALEX GIMARC

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.” – Often misattributed to Albert Einstein. It was more accurately attributed to Rita Mae Brown in Sudden Death, 1983, and a Knoxville, TN newspaper article in 1981. Earlier versions can be traced back a century.  It is an increasingly popular phrase.  

Why should we care about this today? Well, Phil Izon and the 907/Honest guys are back at another bite of the apple, cranking up yet another repeal of Ranked Choice Voting. He made the announcement in an e-mail sent Nov 29.  It is a call for sponsors for signature gathering to float another ballot initiative. Last time around, they had 182 sponsors.  He thinks they can get 300 – 500 next time around. Signature gathering will be timed to make the 2026 ballot.  

Why is this an exercise in insanity? Because signature gathering for this issue is easy. Actually winning the campaign to pass the initiative is hard, especially an issue that is about as close to a 50 – 50% voter split statewide as you can get. 

RCV was originally passed in 2020, winning a 3,781-vote victory (50.55% of the total vote, 174,032).  Votes against were 49.45%, 170,251.  Final results this time were much closer, with repeal failing by 737 votes.

The money spent in passing and defending RCV is the real problem. When it was passed in 2020, its backers raised and spent over $6.8 million. Opponents responded with nearly $0.6 million. They were outspent over 10:1. This time around, defenders of RCV raised and spent a whopping $14.6 million.  Supporters of repeal were far behind at $0.5 million, being outspent 28:1.  The vast majority of money spent passing and defending RCV was and continues to be Outside money.

The pro-RCV side crushed the anti-RCV side with spending in two elections. Does Mr. Izon believe the results in 2026 would be any different? If so, why?  

The good news is that the anti-RCV has demonstrated that they can raise half a million dollars for a statewide campaign.  That money is wasted in fighting multi-million-dollar flood of pro-RCV outside money in any statewide campaign.  How could it be spent better?

One way would be to elect a Legislature and governor supportive of RCV repeal. For example, if that money were used to remove Republican legislators from office who simply can’t wait to cross the aisle and form “bipartisan” caucuses, we can actually form Republican led caucuses. 

In the House, this would be voting out ringleaders like Louise Stutes and Chuck Kopp. In the Senate, this would be Cathy Giessel, Gary Stevens, Bert Stedman and Kelly Merrick. 2026 is also a gubernatorial year, so we need a supportive Republican governor for RCV repeal.  

We’ve tried fighting RCV twice with the same results:  Close losses at the ballot box after getting outspent 10 – 30:1 in Outside money. What makes repeal crowd think a third time will be the charm? Nothing that I can see from here.  Perhaps I am missing something.  

If what you are doing isn’t working, it’s time to do something else.  

Alex Gimarc lives in Anchorage since retiring from the military in 1997. His interests include science and technology, environment, energy, economics, military affairs, fishing and disabilities policies. His weekly column “Interesting Items” is a summary of news stories with substantive Alaska-themed topics. He was a small business owner and Information Technology professional.

Recall petition in Palmer seeks to boot mayor

The City Clerk of Palmer has approved a petition request to recall Mayor Steve Carrington, who has suffered withering criticism for using a Ketchikan attorney to craft a separation agreement with the most recent city manager, who was driven out after he fired the police chief.

The petition by Palmer resident Cindy Hudgins, long a watchdog of city government, states Carrington broke the law because his hiring outside counsel to help with the removal of the former city manager required the approval of the city council. Carrington used outside counsel because the city attorney had been involved in outlining complaints against the city manager, who lasted two months before upsetting much of the community and staff of the city.

“This abuse of executive power by Mayor Steve Carrington constitutes unlawful behavior by a public officer in relation to the duties of his office, willful in character,” Hudgins wrote.

Alaska law outlines the grounds for recall: “misconduct in office, incompetence, or failure to perform prescribed duties.”

The application approval means a petition may be approved by Dec. 17, and will require at least 71 signatures, or 25% of those who voted in the last regular election, no later than Feb. 16 before a recall election would be held.