Thursday, June 4, 2026
Home Blog Page 33

Let’s Flip the Assembly and Reclaim Anchorage

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
11
Let’s Flip the Assembly and Reclaim Anchorage

By Theresa Bird

Candidate filing period for Assembly, School Board and Service Area Board of Supervisors closed on January 30th.  Anchorage, if you want lower taxes and conservative social policies, we have a phenomenal opportunity to flip our Assembly on April 7th from a supermajority of radical Leftists to a conservative majority, and we shouldn’t let it go to waste.

The tax-and-spend policies enacted by “the Marxist Nine” – and good policies blocked by these same members – have driven the problems of crime, homelessness, and affordability into hyperdrive the last five years.  Residents are now afraid to hike and bike on our trails and use our public parks and library due to unchecked crime and vagrancy. Millions of dollars’ worth of materials purchased for Mayor Bronson’s navigation center are sitting at the Port housing sand.  But if you have the right connections, millions more tax dollars are being poured into the highly lucrative homeless industrial complex, with no lasting, positive impact on the chronically homeless.

How about a thriving, accessible Downtown?  Nope. Business owners and churches Downtown are forced to shell out tens of thousands paying for private security to keep their buildings intact and safe while crime goes unchecked (with the Berkowitz-era police station in the midst of it all).  That doesn’t include the police reports and insurance deductibles pastors and congregations shell out for the break-ins.  Yet property taxes continue to rise, new taxes are floated and voted without any debate (our Mayor is just full of surprises!), and mortgage and interest rates remain untenably high.

I once called Anchorage a dying city.  I hope not.  But if it is, the liberal Assembly is hastening its demise a la Jack Kevorkian.  Then again, Mayor LaFrance’s Big, Beautiful Assessment (except for Rich Folks Like Her) is probably the real intention of the Leftists: destroy the Middle Class and drive them out of Anchorage.  Those statistics are verified by the census numbers in the burgeoning Mat-Su Valley, and you can ask any builder whether they get better business, here or in the Valley.  Hint: it’s not Muldoon or Downtown.

While things look bleak at the moment, that could all change in a little over two months.  Assembly Members Jared Goecker, Scott Myers, and Keith McCormick are currently the only 3 reliable conservative members on a 12-member body.  Myers is not running for re-election, but his Eagle River seat is reliably conservative.  On the other hand, five seats held by Leftists are up for grabs in two months. If Anchorage voters fill these six seats with the strongest conservatives running, then the Assembly is suddenly a conservative majority of 8-4, and the city stands a decent shot at stemming the tide of regress.

Is Anchorage worth fighting for?  You bet.  And if you wish to remain in Anchorage raising your family, running your business, or living in relative peace and security, you’d better help get out the vote and flip the Assembly on April 7th .  Here are my recommendations, and please share them with every registered voter you know and encourage them to vote:

If you live in District 1, North Anchorage: Vote conservative Justin Milette to replace term-limited Chris Constant. Website: miletteforalaska.com. (Nick Danger, Sydney Scout, and Max Powers are also running.)

If you live in District 2, Chugiak, Eagle River, JBER: Vote conservative Donald Handeland to replace conservative Scott Myers, who is not running again. Website: votehandeland.com. Handeland is endorsed by Goecker, Myers, and Jamie Allard, among others. (Kyle Walker is also running.)

If you live in District 3, West Anchorage: Vote conservative Brian Flynn to replace incumbent Anna Brawley. Website: flynnforanchorage.com. Flynn is endorsed by Goecker, Myers, Sami Graham, Mia Costello, among others.

If you live in District 4, Midtown: Vote conservative Dave Donley to replace term-limited Felix Rivera. Website: donleyforalaska.com. Donley is endorsed by Fred Dyson, Leigh Sloan, among others. (Janice Park and Kim Winston are also running.)

If you live in District 5, East Anchorage: Vote conservative Cody Anderson to replace incumbent George Martinez. Website: andersonforanchorage.com.

If you live in District 6, South Anchorage, Girdwood, Turnagain Arm: Vote conservative Bruce Vergason to replace incumbent Zac Johnson. Website: bruceforanchorage.com. (John Stiegele and Janelle Anausuk Sharp are also running.)

Anchorage desperately needs a sea change in order to flourish again. We have two months to make these candidates household names so nobody texts you asking, “who should I vote for?” when our ballots arrive in March. Please print this list, take a screen shot, and share it widely with your friends and neighbors. Know your district and your candidates.

Let’s seize the moment: get out the vote, flip the Assembly, and start to reclaim Anchorage.

Theresa Bird is a wife and homeschooling mother of nine. She earned her BA in Philosophy at Thomas More College of Liberal Arts in Merrimack, NH. She lives in Anchorage.

Opinion: You Can’t Tax Your Way Out of Broken Trust 

SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
-
27
Opinion: You Can’t Tax Your Way Out of Broken Trust 

By Edward Martin, Jr.

Alaska is once again being told that the solution to our fiscal problems is a new tax. 

This time it comes wrapped in careful language: “stability,” “shared responsibility,” “rules-based budgeting,” and a promise that this plan will finally fix what years of uncertainty have broken. A seasonal statewide sales tax. A constitutional amendment. A 50/50 split. Sunset clauses. Spending caps. 

On paper, it sounds responsible. 

But paper plans do not govern Alaska— law does. And before we debate new revenue, we must confront the uncomfortable fact that Alaska’s current fiscal instability was not caused by a lack of taxation. It was caused by a failure to obey existing law. 

For seven years, the statutory Permanent Fund Dividend formula was ignored. Earnings were diverted by discretion rather than rule. The Alaska Permanent Fund was treated not as a trust with defined beneficiaries, but as a flexible revenue source for government operations. The Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation, governed by appointed trustees, operated without full transparency and without the safeguards Alaskans were promised when the Fund was created. 

That history matters because sequence matters in a constitutional republic. 

Before Alaska imposes a single new tax, the State must confront a simple truth it has spent years avoiding: you cannot tax your way out of broken trust. The Permanent Fund was not mismanaged by accident; it was redefined by executive convenience, administered by appointed trustees insulated from accountability, and stripped of statutory safeguards without public consent. To now ask Alaskans — families, seniors, workers, and rural communities — to shoulder a statewide sales tax before restoring lawful governance of the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation is not fiscal responsibility; it is upside-down government. In any private trust, a fiduciary who ignores governing law does not get more authority or new revenue. They get audited, bonded, corrected, or removed. Yet here, the State proposes the opposite: pay us first, trust us later. That is not shared responsibility. That is asking citizens to finance a system that refused to obey the rules that bound it in the first place. 

Supporters of a sales tax argue that “everyone will pay,” including tourists and non-residents. That may be true, but it misses the point. Visitors did not forgo mineral rights at statehood. Visitors did not accept the Permanent Fund as a substitute asset held in trust for the people. Alaskans did. And when that trust is compromised, the remedy is not new taxation; it is restoration of lawful governance. 

A constitutional amendment to lock in a new dividend structure does not restore the rule of law. It replaces it. Worse, it risks ratifying past misconduct by retroactively blessing years of statutory noncompliance. Amendments should correct constitutional defects, not sanitize political convenience. 

Sales taxes are also regressive by nature. They fall hardest on working families, seniors on fixed incomes, and rural communities with higher costs of living. Asking those Alaskans to pay more before the State proves it can obey the laws it already has flips accountability on its head. 

In a system of self-government, the State earns the right to tax by obeying the law first. Citizens do not owe financial obedience to a government that refuses legal obedience in return. 

That is why this moment demands clarity, not slogans. 

Every candidate for governor, regardless of party, should be asked this single, unavoidable question, publicly and on the record: 

Will you commit to enforcing Alaska’s existing Permanent Fund statutes and restoring full fiduciary compliance at the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation — including bonding, bylaw enforcement, and trustee accountability — before proposing any new taxes or constitutional amendments that alter the dividend or earnings structure? Yes or no. 

No hedging. 
No task forces. 
No future promises. 

Because if a candidate cannot say yes to enforcing the law first, then every tax proposal, every “fiscal plan,” and every constitutional amendment that follows is not reform. It is ratification of past misconduct. 

Alaska does not suffer from a lack of ideas. It suffers from a lack of enforcement. The path forward is not complicated: restore the law, repair the trust, enforce fiduciary duty— then talk about revenue. Anything else asks Alaskans to pay for a government that has not yet proven it deserves their consent. 

Ed Martin, Jr. is a retired 50+ year IUOE, General Contractor and long-time Alaskan with a strong belief in the National and State Constitutions and the inherent rights of citizens. He devotes his retirement to investigating Constitutional violation(s) in hopes of protecting the eternal rights of liberty. “Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” — 2 Corinthians 3:17. 

Survey Series: Which Gubernatorial Candidates Prioritize Alaska LNG Project?

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
6
Survey Series: Which Gubernatorial Candidates Prioritize Alaska LNG Project?

By Nathaniel Herz

Editor’s Note: This piece was originally published in Northern Journal, a newsletter and news website. Nathaniel Herz is an independent journalist and the founder and editor of Northern Journal. Nathaniel has given Must Read Alaska express permission to republish his gubernatorial candidate survey series.

We’re back with the next edition of our recurring survey of the more than a dozen candidates running to be Alaska’s next governor.

This week’s questions revolve around a huge — and hugely expensive — LNG export project pushed by Alaska’s current governor, Mike Dunleavy. We also asked for some book recommendations. Full questions and answers are below.

Questions: Alaska LNG/ Literature in Alaska

The Alaska LNG export project has been discussed and debated for decades, but in spite of huge sums of state money spent on it, construction has not begun.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy says the project is as close to a final investment decision as it’s ever been; skeptics point out that no customers have signed binding contracts to purchase gas and that the project’s cost would exceed $40 billion.

To support the state’s continued participation in the export project, which is now majority owned by a private developer, Glenfarne, Dunleavy has proposed budgeting $2.3 million in general funds for the state-owned Alaska Gasline Development Corp., known as AGDC, in the next fiscal year.

Question 1: Do you support this expenditure, and would you make development of the LNG export project a priority for your administration? Why, or why not?

Question 2: What’s your favorite book that’s set in Alaska, and why?

Answers from the Candidates

Former Anchorage Mayor Dave Bronson, Republican

Q1: I support the $2.3 million appropriation and making Alaska LNG a priority. Alaska has some of the largest proven gas reserves in North America, yet families and businesses pay among the highest energy costs. Alaska LNG is not just an export project; it is the backbone of a statewide gas system that would lower heating, power, housing, and grocery costs while strengthening the private sector. This is a 50- to 100-year infrastructure investment built for the next generation, not short-term prices. The state is not funding a $40 billion project, but keeping it viable as private capital finalizes contracts. Walking away now would cost little in savings but kill long-term opportunity.

Q2: Alaska Bear Tales by Larry Kaniut is a classic and very Alaska. It’s a collection of real-life bear encounters told through hunters, bush pilots, fishermen, troopers, and longtime Alaskans. Great read.

Republican James William Parkin IV

Q1: Not as is; however, LNG could work for Alaska, if negotiated properly. We are not getting good deals on any of our resources development projects. I am 100% in support of corporations and companies in Alaska. I don’t fault them for negotiating the best deals they can for themselves. Alaska needs to do the same. For Alaska to be able to negotiate on equal footing with corps, we need a citizen owned cooperative state corporation that can develop our resources if necessary. With this kind of leverage, we could negotiate much more attractive deals for Alaska.

Q2: Alaska Bear Tails for its gruesome, true stories of bear attacks in Alaska.

Anchorage Democratic State Senator Matt Claman

Q1: I support a reasonable budget for AGDC, and $2.3 million appears reasonable. I support developing the Alaska LNG pipeline if it is economically viable, and developing alternative North Slope gas delivery and sales if the Alaska LNG pipeline is not economically viable. I continue to have questions about the $44 billion estimate, but the most important information is confidential.

Q2: John McPhee, Coming into the Country. It’s a detailed account about an important period in Alaska history.

Anchorage Doctor Matt Heilala, Republican

Q1: If Glenfarne is putting millions on the line this early, the state should match that momentum with the governor’s proposed $2.3M by ensuring AGDC has the capacity to be a strong partner and deliver this long-awaited asset. Alaskans need affordable, reliable, abundant energy, and we need it now. Affordable and abundant energy is the fertile soil that allows everything else to grow: lower heating and power bills for families, stronger local businesses, new jobs, and an economy that can thrive in every region of our state. Alaska’s gas pipeline must be a top priority of any administration, and it will be at the forefront of mine.

Q2: My favorite Alaska book is Fifty Years Below Zero by Charles Brower. It is a classic memoir every Alaskan should read. Brower’s firsthand stories from late 19th century Alaska show the harsh toll industrial whaling took on Iñupiaq communities, yet he writes with deep respect for their resilience and rich culture. These are lessons and history modern Alaskans need to know. Packed with gripping survival tales and the shift from sailing to airplanes, it captures the changes that shaped Alaska.

Matanuska-Susitna Borough Mayor Edna DeVries, Republican

Q1: Yes and yes. We have resources that need to get to market plus making gas available to many of our residents who don’t currently have it available.

Q2: The latest read is Homeless by Ric Davidge. No favorite because more coming every week.

Former Anchorage State Senator Tom Begich, Democrat

Q1: I’m unsure — so my answer is, “I don’t know.” The proposal is subject to legislative approval — after they hold hearings to determine if this cost is justified. As Dermot Cole pointed out, recent announcements by the developers and governor have not filled in the blanks on this project. That said, the proposed project, as described, is the most promising yet. I will watch those hearings and see if the project meets my criteria: that the project 1) prioritizes a spur to Fairbanks to ensure Alaskans get the benefit of the gas; 2) that, along with taxes, the project pay us in units of gas provided to us to ensure a steady supply of gas that meets projected Alaska demand; finally, 3) that the developer foot the bulk of the bill — not the state.

Q2: My first thought was the “Bush Blues” detective series set in Western AK by Sitka’s Sheldon Schmidt — but that may be because I’m a named character in the books. But my favorite is either Charles Wohlforth’s “The Fate of Nature” or “The Whale and the Super Computer”. The latter captures the dichotomy — and synchronicity — between western and Indigenous “science” on the North Slope and the impact of climate change on culture. The first does the same in Prince William Sound. Both are beautiful.

Republican Former State Senator Shelley Hughes

Q1: Because many details are confidential, to weigh the expense, we can consider the work and long list of interested companies who’ve signed preliminary agreements. We can look to Dunleavy’s and Sullivan’s recent positive remarks. Although judging fully and prudently isn’t possible when information is limited, considering the pressing need for gas and rising utility costs, if the expenditure is necessary to bring gas into production, then I am all for it. Anything that diversifies revenue and makes energy and heat less expensive is a win. My administration will be focused on achieving cheap energy — on the gasline if it goes forward, on big and small hydro, our clean coal, small modular reactors, and any other economically feasible options.

Q2: The Snow Child. Author Eowyn Ivey is a lifelong Alaskan who went to Palmer High and is from the area — and that local aspect was an automatic draw. A novel is always a nice escape, so that also was a draw. But what I really liked was the quietness I felt when I read it. Loved too the connection with the remote setting — reminded me of when I lived in villages away from rushing traffic, sirens, the hustle and bustle. Doesn’t hurt that book is incredibly well-written and highly acclaimed either!

Republican Former State Senator Click Bishop

Q1: My priority is ensuring affordable, reliable gas for Alaskans and creating the conditions for a financeable project. The Alaska North Slope gas pipeline project represents a generational opportunity. As a state senator I worked within SB138 to advance Alaska LNG with guardrails, workforce training, and off-ramps if economics didn’t work — ensuring Alaskans benefit first. I support limited, disciplined state participation that protects taxpayers, and leverages private capital. LNG exports can be an opportunity, but only if they are market-driven with purchase commitments, fiscally responsible, and deliver tangible benefits to Alaskans.

Q2: Etok: A Story of Eskimo Power has always stuck with me because it’s a reminder of what real strength looks like in Alaska. Etok isn’t loud or flashy—he’s steady, responsible, and puts his people first. That kind of leadership feels familiar to anyone who’s lived up here.

Former State Health and Revenue Commissioner Adam Crum, Republican

Q1: Alaska LNG has long been discussed because Alaska’s energy future matters. But the state must be clear-eyed and disciplined. I support a limited, well-defined state role focused on permitting, alignment, and protecting Alaska’s interests — not putting taxpayers on the hook for construction risk. A modest AGDC appropriation can be appropriate to preserve momentum and optionality, provided it is tied to clear milestones, private capital commitments, and enforceable off-ramps. As governor, I would support Alaska LNG if it provides jobs for Alaskans, delivers affordable in-state energy, and strengthens Alaska’s long-term economy.

Q2: The Call of the Wild by Jack London. I loved it as a kid because it’s a great story about dogs. As an adult, it hits differently — you come to appreciate the incredible settings and the powerful sense of adventure and longing to explore Alaska that runs through every page.

Republican Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom

Q1: I support continued state participation in the Alaska LNG export project and agree it’s closer to a final investment decision than at any point in the past. This project has the potential to create thousands of good-paying jobs, strengthen Alaska’s economy, and provide long-term energy security. Alaska must be powered first, and this project should help deliver reliable, affordable in-state energy for generations of Alaskans. At the same time, the state must act responsibly and protect taxpayers from undue financial risk. Continued funding should be focused on advancing firm commercial commitments and ensuring private capital, not Alaskans, bears the primary financial responsibility.

Q2: Number two is easy. My favorite book that takes place in Alaska is Johnny’s Girl, by Kim Rich. I’ve read it several times and hope I’ll have an opportunity to meet Kim one day.

Republican Bruce Walden

Q1: No. Liquefication requires cold temps. Liquefy on the Slope, extend the rail there, extend the rails to Point Mack, and ship from there. This would cost around an even $1 Billion. I speak Korean as a second language and can talk to the people in Pohang and Pusan eye to eye and get the money to extend the tracks without sending the bill to Alaskans.

Q2: The Sacred Relics. Weaves Alaskan, and Biblical history into a Christian Adventure such as Indiana Jones would envy. Plus, I wrote it.

More in Series

Survey Series: Which Candidates for Governor Support Increasing Taxes on Oil and Gas, Which Don’t, and Why?

Survey Series: Candidates for Governor Share Their Favorite Fish Recipes!

House Democrats and Republicans Debate Best Way to Ensure State Pays Its Bills on Time

Natalie Spaulding
-
7
House Democrats and Republicans Debate Best Way to Ensure State Pays Its Bills on Time

Yesterday, Jan 29, at 3:15pm, the House State Affairs Committee met to consider three bills. First on the agenda was HB 133: “An Act establishing a 30-day deadline for the payment of contracts under the State Procurement Code; establishing deadlines for the payment of grants, contracts, and reimbursement agreements to nonprofit organizations, municipalities, and Alaska Native organizations; relating to payment of grants to named recipients that are not municipalities; and providing for an effective date.” The bill is sponsored by Representative Rebecca Himshoot (I-Sitka) and cosponsored by Representatives Fields (D-Anchorage), Kopp (R-Anchorage), Mears (D-Anchorage), Mina (D-Anchorage), and Holland (I-Anchorage).

The Committee discussed two proposed amendments to the bill, one from Rep. Carrick (D-Fairbanks) and one from Rep. McCabe (R-Big Lake).

Carrick’s amendment requested that Rural Health Transformation funding be used as a funding source for software upgrades necessary for realizing the bill. Rep. Vance (R-Homer) asked if technology upgrades are a permissible use of Rural Health Transformation funding. Rep. Carrick answered that the funds cannot be used for capital projects or hardware, but it can be used for software.

Amendment 1 was adopted by the Committee.

McCabe’s amendment addresses unintended consequences that the bill causes, mainly at the expense of the State. This amendment removes non-profits from triggering the automatic penalty if the State’s payment to a non-profit is delayed. McCabe argues that prompt payment clauses in other states usually apply to local governments and private contractors, not to non-profits. Regulations already imposed by the Legislature regarding non-profits make it difficult for the State to make payments to non-profits without delays. McCabe says that it does not make sense to punish agencies for delays that the Legislature itself has caused.

Rep. Holland spoke in opposition to the amendment, stating, “Non-profits operate as a business… they have to figure out how to juggle the money just like a private business… Our non-profits need to be treated as well or even better than municipalities and private contractors.”

Rep. Himshoot also spoke in opposition to the amendment. Rep. St. Clair (R-Wasilla) spoke in support.

McCabe responded to Holland and Himshoot, saying that they were presenting non-profits as simple mom-and-pops, but McCabe points out that the state has contracts with large non-profits like Providence. “We are talking about non-profits like Providence… This is not a bunch of volunteers we are talking about here.” He emphasized that the amendment keeps “the status quo” for non-profits and does not add any additional burdens.

After a vote 3 yes – 4 no, amendment 2 was not adopted by the Committee. Republicans Vance, McCabe, and St. Clair voted yes for the amendment. Independents Himshoot and Holland and Democrats Story and Carrick voted no.

In her final remarks regarding the bill as a whole, Rep. Vance acknowledged that there is truth in everyone’s points, and the discussion shows that “the bill touches on a broader issue” within state departments. “Something obviously needs to change,” she stated, but expressed doubt that this particular bill as written is the way to do it.

Rep. Carrick pointed out the common ground: “Everyone agrees the state should pay its bills on time.” Then, she acknowledged there are different ways to go about that. Referencing conversations that she has had with organizations who express frustration with the current system, she believes the bill is the correct course of action.

The bill moved from House State Affairs. Next, it will be considered by the Finance Committee.

Opinion: Parents Must Stay Vigilant and Demanding of Government Schooling Systems

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
8
Opinion: Parents Must Stay Vigilant and Demanding of Government Schooling Systems

By Lars Bauer

The opinions expressed here are of the author only.

In August 2025, Senior Contributor John Quick made meaningful observations about the posture of homeschooling in small town Nikiski, asking in his column’s title “Can someone like homeschooling and public school?”

My family and I appreciated and agreed with his sentiment of two worlds coexisting but noted Mr. Quick did not have a laser-focus on whom that question needs to be asked of. As an Alaskan military family currently homeschooling outside the state, we can confidently clarify the answer. We can also herald the arrival of what is to happen should our communities fail to constantly pay attention to the ever-growing conflict over educational and parental freedom being waged outside our towns and our state.

I am going to use the term “government school” instead of “public school” because it is more precise. “Public school” is not quite “public.” Unless one lives in a one-school town, families are zoned to a specific district, meaning the public is often denied entry except to the school they are told to go to. Moreover, unless they are enrolled in that school, the public is denied all opportunity for programs at that or any government school except via policy.

Our own children have attended all types of government, private, and home-schooling environments, both state-side and abroad. They have lived in far off and wonderous places and have experienced interactions with people and concepts that most people on earth never will. Just as unique are the challenges and setbacks they face. Most military families report frequent moves and quasi-nomadic lifestyles. The loss of continuity in steadfast relationships and community are the larger trade-offs for gaining these world experiences.

Today that community for us is not Nikiski, nor any other small town, U.S.A in red state America where the home/government-school environments could ever be mutually feasible. It is a place where the state mandates frequent reports and work samples from homeschooling parents or else face criminal charges and Child Protective Services notifications. A place where school districts deny and gate-keep all opportunity for children in sports, ROTC, and academic programs merely because families will not enroll in their system. In certain states and countries where we have lived, lucky homeschooling families are left alone to educate how they wish; while in others they are arrested and their children taken.

That is why we know the answer to the question of who. Who needs to answer, “Can we like both?” The same group who would stand in the way of people’s freedom to both. Not only are government school system heads and their union/political arms the ones who need to answer this question, but they also need to affirm their support of both. They alone owe the answer. Alaskan parents take note: unless you demand this daily from lawmakers, irrespective of your current educational setting, places like Nikiski are not immune from what is happening outside. Mr. Quick is able to frame his question without adversaries identified. We should all be so fortunate.

Lars Bauer is an Active Duty Field Grade officer. He and his wife are lifelong Alaskans currently homeschooling their children through years of deployments and operational tours around the world. His expressed views are personal and do not represent his respective service branch or the Department of War.

Cuts to Biden-era Leasing Regulations Benefit Oil and Gas Industry

Natalie Spaulding
-
4
Cuts to Biden-era Leasing Regulations Benefit Oil and Gas Industry

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service has announced revisions to leasing regulations for federal oil and gas resources on National Forest System lands. The revisions establish a clearly defined leasing decision point, reduce duplicative analysis, improve response times to industry requests, reduce backlogs, accelerate lease issuance, and support timely processing of permit applications.

The revisions were issued in response to President Trump’s Declaration of a National Energy Emergency. The declaration identifies “affordable and reliable domestic supply of energy” as “a fundamental requirement for the national and economic security of any nation.” Claiming the urgent need to address America’s “precariously inadequate and intermittent energy supply, and an increasingly unreliable grid,” the declaration authorizes federal agencies to “identify and exercise any lawful emergency authorities available to them, as well as all other lawful authorities they may possess, to facilitate the identification, leasing, siting, production, transportation, refining, and generation of domestic energy resources, including, but not limited to, on Federal lands.”

Furthermore, Trump’s Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy” provides a detailed list of directives aimed at restoring American prosperity by cutting red tape preventing or delaying energy development.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins stated: “This rule gives energy producers the certainty they need to expand supply to make energy more affordable, create jobs, and ensure America remains the dominant force in global energy markets – all while safeguarding forests and communities. Energy security is national security. These revisions create clarity and alignment across federal agencies, allowing our teams to move swiftly on leasing and permitting so American families and businesses can rely on affordable, dependable energy, while continuing to be good stewards of our public lands.”

The federal government’s cutting of red tape for the oil and gas industry contrasts sharply with Alaska State Representative Ashley Carrick’s “AIDEA Accountability Act,” introduced Jan 22, 2026. The Democrat-sponsored bill seeks to add legislative oversight to the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority that could delay or prevent key resource development projects in Alaska.

USDA Forest Service issues revised oil and gas leasing ruleDownload

Opinion: AIDEA Accountability Act Would Paralyze Alaska’s Economic Development

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
24
Opinion: AIDEA Accountability Act Would Paralyze Alaska’s Economic Development

By Marcus Moore

HB 124 is what happens when lawmakers want to kill projects but do not have the nerve to say “no” out loud. So instead, they wrap obstruction in the language of accountability, smile politely, and let uncertainty do the dirty work.

This is being sold as the AIDEA Accountability Act. That name alone should raise alarms. Because when politicians lead with “accountability,” what usually follows is paralysis, delay, and a quiet retreat of anyone with capital, patience, or options elsewhere.

The Soft Sell, the Hard Stop

On the surface, parts of HB 124 look harmless enough. Tweaks to the AIDEA board. Adjustments to appointments. A bit more legislative visibility. Fine. Boring, even.

But buried inside this bill is the real payload: a fundamental rewrite of how Alaska treats large-scale economic development.

HB 124 drags major infrastructure projects out of established, professional due-diligence processes and dumps them into the political thunderdome of the legislature. Not for guidance. Not for review. For permission.

That is not oversight. That is a veto with extra steps.

Section 9: The Project Graveyard

Section 9 is where this bill stops pretending.

It creates a new statute that applies to any AIDEA project over $10 million. And what does it require? It requires:

  • A full economic impact analysis
  • A social impact analysis
  • An environmental impact analysis
  • Submission of all documentation to the legislature
  • Explicit legislative approval, passed into law

All after years of planning, permitting, financing work, and regulatory review.

If you were trying to design a system that scares off investment before it ever shows up, this is exactly how you would do it.

The $10 Million Tripwire

Let’s be clear about what $10 million means in Alaska.

This bill is not aimed at hypothetical mega-projects or boogeymen. In Alaska, $10 million is:

  • Energy infrastructure
  • Roads and access projects
  • Ports and industrial facilities
  • Health care construction
  • Resource development

In other words: normal projects.

That means real, existing investments suddenly fall into legislative limbo, including:

  • Interior Energy Project — $139M (Fairbanks)
  • Ambler Access Project — $50M+
  • Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation — $162M (Bethel)
  • Cook Inlet Gas Development — $82M

Under HB 124, all of these would be forced to survive a political gauntlet that has nothing to do with engineering, finance, or feasibility, and everything to do with election cycles and committee chairs.

Uncertainty Is the Point

Supporters will say this is about transparency. That the legislature deserves a say. That the public needs confidence.

Here is the reality: Alaska already has one of the most rigorous permitting and review processes in the country. This includes environmental review, public comment, financial due diligence, regulatory oversight, and federal and state approvals layered on top of each other.

HB 124 does not add clarity. It adds uncertainty at the worst possible moment.

After millions are spent.
After years of planning.
After investors have committed.

The final step becomes “wait and hope the legislature likes you this year.”

That is not how serious economies operate.

How You Kill a Project Without Saying No

Legislators rarely like being blamed for lost jobs or stalled development. HB 124 offers a workaround.

No need to reject a project outright. Just require one more approval. One more vote. One more session. One more delay.

Eventually, the investors leave. The timelines collapse. The financing evaporates.

And lawmakers get to shrug and say, “Well, it just didn’t pencil out.”

Mission accomplished.

The Message This Sends

HB 124 would tell the world exactly one thing: Alaska is no longer predictable.

And in capital markets, predictability matters more than enthusiasm, incentives, or press releases. No serious developer is going to sink years of work into a project that can be kneecapped by political mood swings at the finish line.

This bill does not protect Alaskans. It protects indecision.

It does not create accountability. It guarantees delay.

And it does not strengthen Alaska’s economy. It quietly tells investors to take their money somewhere else.

Down But Not Out: ConocoPhillips Pivot Development Strategy

Todd M Lindley
-
4
Down But Not Out: ConocoPhillips Pivot Development Strategy

The toppling of Doyon Drilling Rig 26 on January 23, 2026, during transport on a North Slope gravel road has temporarily disrupted ConocoPhillips’ operations, but highlights the company’s commitment to innovative, responsible resource development amid ongoing legal challenges. The massive rig, known as “The Beast,” ignited a contained fire after collapsing in unseasonably warm 30-degree temperatures. All personnel escaped serious injury, with eight individuals treated and released, and no damage to pipelines or communities reported. The incident, just miles from Nuiqsut, landed 50 feet from gas lines, prompting an environmental assessment under Unified Command led by Doyon Drilling.

Engineered for Arctic extremes, Doyon 26 features a 165-foot cantilever mast, 1.3 million-pound hook load, and 3,000 hp drawworks, with a modular design of five support modules and a two-piece subbase for ice-road mobility. This enables extended-reach drilling (ERD) to tap 154 square miles from a 14-acre pad, as seen in the 2022 Fiord West Kuparuk record well of 35,526 feet.

The outage—limited to the derrick subbase, allowing potential modular rebuild—could delay projects like Willow, but Conoco has pivoted to Doyon 142 for exploration. By comparison to another massive ERD land rig, Russia’s Sakhalin-1 Yastreb rig, a 230-foot seismic-resistant giant with 1.5 million-pound capacity and world-record ERD of over 37,000 feet horizontal, Doyon 26 showcases transportability over scale. The modular design between the Doyon 26 and Doyon 142 provides a distinct advantage to enable a quicker turnaround to resume development drilling.

Amid this, a U.S. District Court ruling allowed Conoco’s winter exploration to proceed despite a lawsuit by groups including Earthjustice, which argues rushed approvals harm wildlife and subsistence in areas like Teshekpuk Lake. Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm with a stated goal to end the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, contrasts Conoco’s prosperity-focused development by challenging permits to ensure legal compliance and environmental safeguards.

“This project opens a new era we call ‘growth without gravel’ where we can use extended reach technology to access 60 percent more acreage from a single pad, dramatically reducing our footprint,” said Erec Isaacson, president of ConocoPhillips Alaska.

This remains a developing story.

Opinion: Alaska’s 2026 Election and America’s Stability

SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
-
19
Opinion: Alaska’s 2026 Election and America’s Stability

By Paul A Bauer Jr.

My op-ed for Alaskans is framed to inform, not inflame, and to connect national instability to practical decision-making in the 2026 gubernatorial election. My spirit is civic, sober, and grounded in Alaska’s governing realities.

Alaskans are practical people. We live far from Washington, D.C., yet we feel the consequences of national decisions are faster and harder than most states. Energy policy, federal land control, law enforcement, elections, and courts are not abstractions here, they shape whether our community’s function or fracture.

As the country enters one of the most polarized periods in modern history, it is reasonable to ask a difficult question: Is the United States at war with itself?

The honest answer is “no,” not in the sense of tanks, militias, or rival governments. But the country is experiencing an internal conflict marked by deep mistrust, ideological extremism, and competing views of whether the Constitution is something to be followed or something to be “corrected.”

That matters for Alaska, and it should matter when we vote in 2026.

Large numbers of Americans now believe institutions apply the law unevenly, elections are administered in ways that favor one side, speech is punished while disorder is excused, and Constitutional limits are obstacles rather than guardrails.

At the same time, radical ideological factions, particularly on the far left, have been tolerated, enabled, or defended by elements within one major political party. What matters is that millions of citizens believe the system no longer treats them equally.

History is clear: countries do not unravel because everyone is wrong, they unravel because trust collapses.

Why Alaska Is Not Immune

Some argue Alaska can ignore national turmoil. That is a mistake.

Alaska depends on Constitutional clarity between state and federal authority, Neutral enforcement of law and order, public trust in elections and courts, and leaders willing to confront, not accommodate ideological extremism. I expect that we will experience some outside activism occurring this spring 2026 in Alaska.

When other states normalize sanctuary policies, selective prosecution, or ideological governance, the effects spread. They weaken federalism, undermine public confidence, and invite disorder.

Alaska cannot afford that, not with our geography, our infrastructure challenges, our energy economy, or our reliance on public safety and resource development.

The 2026 Gubernatorial Election Is About More Than Personality

My belief is that this election should not be about charisma, slogans, or social media performance, but it should be about governance under pressure.

Alaskans should ask every gubernatorial candidate:

  • Do you believe the Constitution limits government power, or merely guides it?
  • Will you enforce the law evenly, even when it is unpopular?
  • Do you view radical political movements as legitimate partners or as destabilizing forces?
  • Will you defend Alaska’s sovereignty against federal overreach?
  • Can you lead decisively when institutions are under stress?

This is not about left versus right. It is about constitutional stability versus ideological drift.

Alaska’s Historical Advantage and Responsibility

We, Alaska, are young by state standards. We were built by people who understood self-reliance, fairness, and rule-based cooperation. Our success has never come from ideological experiments. It has come from competence, restraint, and respect for law.

In times of national uncertainty, states either anchor stability, or import chaos. To my observable knowledge, there are forces from outside influencing our state, not just in the current blitz of political ads but with an influx of voters escaping sanctuary states that they destroyed. As they escape their sanctuary states, they inherently bring their politics.

Then there are the vulnerable low information and low-income voters that need to communicate about the truth of what is occurring and the best candidate to address it. Are you going to be part of the problem, or part of the solution?

The governor and lt. governor elected in 2026 will play a decisive role in which path Alaska takes.

A Final Thought

Civil conflict does not begin with violence. It begins when people stop believing the system protects them. Alaskans still have a choice.

In 2026, voting less on rhetoric, and more on character, constitutional loyalty, and governing ability. Alaska does not need a gubernatorial team of candidates with showmanship, incompetence through inexperience, or displaying personality niceties. It needs leadership that understands the stakes and is willing to act accordingly, even aggressively if necessary.

Our future depends on it.

Paul A. Bauer Jr. is an Anchorage-based civic leader, military veteran, former elected official, and public integrity consultant. His work focuses on constitutional governance, election integrity, public safety, energy and resource development, and institutional accountability. Bauer emphasizes competence over showmanship, character over celebrity, and results over rhetoric in Alaska’s public leadership.

1...323334...1,789Page 33 of 1,789

About us

Must Read Alaska is news of people, politics, policy, culture, and happenings in Alaska.

Contact
4021 West Hill Road,
Homer, AK 99603

Op-Ed/Article:
[email protected]

Subscription: [email protected]

The latest

Anchorage Assembly to Consider New Ordinance Aimed at Developing “Missing Middle Housing”

The 907 1
On June 1, 2026, Assembly Members Erin Baldwin Day...

The Christian Imperative of Forgiveness: Mercy Amid Violence

Faith Watch 0
In Christian circles, the words “I forgive you” are...

Sullivan Chairs Hearing on Advancing Alaska’s Maritime and Coastal Economies

Politics 0
On Tuesday, June 2, U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska)...

© Must Read Alaska