Americans for Prosperity Action announced Monday its endorsement of Nick Begich for Alaska’s one congressional seat.
Alaskans deserve a leader who embodies the independent spirit of the Last Frontier, the group said. The endorsement brings an enormous amount of funded messaging and door-to-door campaigning by Alaskans.
“Since her election, Mary Peltola has sided with the Biden-Harris administration each step of the way. Nick Begich is the leader who will stand up for Alaskans in Congress, fight to bring down the cost of living, and champion Alaska’s energy industry,” the group said.
The group is now hiring for grassroots door knockers to help spread the word across Alaska.
AFP Action is confident there is a path to victory in this race and our team of grassroots staff and volunteers are laser-focused on ensuring Begich is elected come November. This endorsement is part of AFP Action’s “Firewall Strategy” to prevent one-party progressive rule in Washington, DC, the group said.
AFP Action also endorsed Nick Begich in the last election, where he came in third after Mary Peltola and Sarah Palin.
AFP Action Senior Advisor Bethany Marcum released the following statement: “AFP Action is proud and excited to endorse Nick Begich in his bid to unseat Mary Peltola in Congress. Begich has vast policy experience and a vision for fiscal restraint and responsibility. We are confident that in this two-way race, Begich is the best candidate to serve Alaskans across our great state.”
Nick Begich is the grandson of Congressman Nick Begich, who died in a plane crash over Prince William Sound on Oct. 16, 1972. The grandfather was a moderate Democrat, but Nick Begich of today’s generation is a conservative Republican, raised in the church by faith-filled grandparents who were Republicans. He became a Republican before graduating from high school, and attended Baylor University, a nationally ranked Christian university.
Begich is taking on Democrat Mary Peltola in the general election and has the endorsement of 40% of the Alaska Republican district committees, as well as six of the seven Republican women’s clubs and all Young Republican clubs in Alaska. He is unapologetic about his conservative beliefs, which are vastly different from those of his uncles Mark and Tom Begich, both who have served in elected office in Alaska.
To date this cycle, AFP Action and AFP are separately engaged in over 500 federal and state races throughout the country, including hundreds of state legislative races critical to shifting the policy landscape in a number of key states. AFP Action continues to expand our grassroots capabilities by engaging Americans in every state across the country, with over 5.6 million citizen contacts and more being added each day.
AFP Action says its highly targeted layered approach of doors, phones, mail, and ads is proven to be the most effective way to engage and persuade key voters.
“Our grassroots teams will be out in full force as we head into the final stretch of the campaign,” the group said.
The Alaska Republican Party became an opposing party to the case that the Alaska Democratic Party has brought against the Division of Elections over the general election ballot.
The Democrats say that including Democrat Eric Hafner’s name on the general election ballot for the congressional race violates the law. Oral arguments were heard Monday morning in Anchorage Superior Court and Judge Ian Wheeles said he would have a decision by Tuesday.
At issue is whether Eric Hafner’s name can be moved up into the fourth slot on the ranked-choice ballot. Two previous candidates dropped out who would have been on the ballot — Nancy Dahlstrom and Matthew Salisbury. That meant John Wayne Howe and Eric Hafner moved to the third and fourth slot.
The ballot now has Mary Peltola, Nick Begich, John Wayne Howe, and Eric Hafner for voters to choose from or rank in November. The Democrats say that ranked-choice voting law only mentions that the fifth-place finisher can move up, and says nothing about the sixth-place finisher.
Usually in laws, however, if it is not prohibited, then it is legal.
One of the arguments made by the State of Alaska, as it defended the Division of Elections was, what if there were only six candidates and four candidates dropped out? Does the mean the fifth candidate would win by default and the sixth-place candidate is not even put on the general election ballot?
But the Democrats are suing over Hafner because he is a Democrat — and because he is serving in federal prison in New York State for serious threats against public officials. The Democrats’ brief says that Alaska voters might vote for Hafner first and then not rank incumbent Rep. Mary Peltola second. At least three times in the Democrats’ brief they say that voters might be confused by ranked-choice voting. These Democrats are the same ones who argue that ranked-choice voting does not confuse voters but gives them more choices.
The Democrats also say Hafner can’t possibly serve if he wins because he is serving a 20-year sentence, which they imagine cannot be commuted or reduced.
The State pointed out that the Democrats did not challenge Hafner’s credentials when he was running in the primary against 11 other candidates even though he was in prison and they would have easily been able to know that.
The Republican Party’s motion to intervene says the party has standing because it has one of the four candidates on the congressional section of the November ballot, and that “through the litigation, and now subsequent to the Primary Election, Plaintiffs [Alaska Democrats] seek an order from this court to essentially change the law and regulation relating to rank choice voting, and seek to disregard the will of the voters.”
The Democrats, according to the Republican Party, are trying to change the outcome in November through this litigation.
“While Plaintiff, like the ARP, may be frustrated by the consequences of rank choice voting, it is the current law in the State of Alaska unless repealed in the upcoming General Election. By their Complaint, Plaintiffs admit that they are trying to manipulate the ultimate outcome of the General Election. Accordingly, the ARP has a very acute interest in the outcome of this litigation because of the plain admission that Plaintiffs seek to affect the outcome of the election,” the Republicans say in their motion to intervene.
The Republican Party is not represented by any lawyer that is actual party to the case, but “Plaintiffs [Democrats] request that the court ignore well-settled constitutional law, and manipulate the rank choice voting law in order to craft who will appear on the ballot outside the democratic process. And second, the State, while it will defend its law, its loyalties lie with the voting public, not the parties or candidates.”
Superior Court Judge Wheeles granted the Republican Party “intervenor status” in the lawsuit the conspiracy-driven Democrats brought, in which they say that Republicans cooked up a plan to get Hafner on the ballot.
Democrats are concerned because they now see polling that shows Republican Nick Begich has pulled even with Mary Peltola since the primary ended.
Carmela Warfield, Alaska Republican Party chairwoman, said “We believe the inclusion of the second Democrat on the general ballot is well within the parameters of applicable laws, and a direct result of the ranked choice voting scheme that is currently the law in Alaska. If our traditional, historical voting process was in place, this issue would be moot — the second, incarcerated Democrat would never have made it through his party’s primary. The fact is, we are currently burdened with ranked choice voting and its results, whether we like it or not.”
Warfield concluded, “It does not have to be this way. This November, Alaskans will have a choice to do what is best for Alaska and reject outside influence to ensure this nonsense never happens again in our great state.”
David Guttenberg, running for Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly, joined a small handful of protesters on Fridayat the corner of Peger Road and Airport Way in Fairbanks to express dismay at Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of House Bill 17, Rep. Ashley Carrick’s crowning achievement.
The bill would have forced private insurance companies to provide one free year of birth control pills. Dunleavy said that was government overreach and that “contraceptives are widely available, and compelling insurance companies to provide mandatory coverage for a year is bad policy.”
Most birth control is already free with most health insurance plans, according to Planned Parenthood, and for those who are on government programs, such as Medicaid. Birth control pills are prescribed and mailed to people in Alaska and most other states using the Planned Parenthood Direct app.
Carrick serves House District 35, which includes the Ester Lump. Her primary focus during the 33rd legislature was HB 17. While her constituents reached out to her for help with legislation on squatters taking over their properties, she chose to use her resources on a bill that was not even needed, rather than her broader constituency.
Her opponent is Ruben McNeil, a well-known property rights activist.
Guttenberg, a Democrat, who waved a sign during the protest, previously served as a state House representative for a part of the district now represented by Carrick.
During his time on the Assembly, Guttenberg’s votes have been to raise property taxes. He has aligned with Presiding Officer Savannah Fletcher’s radical agenda to refashion the Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly into an Anchorage style government, controlled by tax-increasing leftists.
Guttenberg is currently running for re-election for Assembly against against retired U.S. Army veteran Miguel Ramirez. Ramirez is currently a civilian working for the Department of Defense to help military families find housing.
Fairbanks North Star Borough Assemblywoman Kristen Kelly, running for re-election, stated in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner that the Interior Taxpayers’ Association forum “does not seem like a legitimate forum.”
Thus, that’s the reason she did not attend the annual candidate forum held by the group last Tuesday.
Kelly is the chair of the Assembly’s Finance Committee and makes her living from the Fairbanks North Star School District, where she is a school counselor.
The Interior Taxpayers’ Association has held a candidate forum on the first Tuesday after Labor Day for decades. It is one of the first candidate forums held in which candidates for Borough, Fairbanks City Council, and mayor are all invited to provide statements and answer questions from attendees on fiscal issues.
This year’s forum was a packed house at University Park Baptist Church; all the Fairbanks City Council members candidates attended.
“I chose not to participate in the forum because some of their more prominent members have spoken at Assembly meetings in the past,” Kelly told the newspaper. “There was no guarantee we would be treated civilly. It does not seem like it is a legitimate forum.”
She does, however, plan to take part in forums hosted by the League of Women Voters or Greater Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce, she said.
Interior Taxpayers’ Association President Debbie Rathburn can’t recall anyone from ITA that would treat anyone uncivilly. She has also been an active member of the Fairbanks Tennis Association, Northern Area Swimming, Fairbanks Youth Soccer, and other sports programs across the borough, and other members of Interior Taxpayers’ Association are also involved with a variety of borough programs where they regularly interact with people from all political persuasions.
There is no record of anyone being mistreated at an ITA forum in the 30 plus years the forum has been held.
Assembly candidates Miguel Ramirez, Tammie Wilson, and Jimi Cash attended the forum and pledged to support the tax cap and to work to secure property rights.
Incumbent David Guttenberg gave a brief written statement to the News-Miner, in which he said there were “too many rumors, not enough facts” concerning the question on policies.
Candidate Garrett Armstrong said he needed further clarification to the questions. Rather than attending the forum to provide facts and dispel rumors, or get additional information, he and Guttenberg took a pass.
Mayoral candidate Grier Hopkins also failed to attend. But candidates for mayor John Coghill and Robert Shields both showed up and engaged in a lively civil discourse on a variety of fiscal topics.
Mayoral candidate Grier Hopkins marched for higher property taxes back in May with Prop. A group. He would not attend the Interior Taxpayers’ Association candidate forum last week.
Earlier this year, there was a move by the Borough Assembly to bust through the Fairbanks North Star Borough tax revenue cap in a special election held on May 7. That effort was resoundingly defeated, with help from Interior Taxpayers’ Association.
Assembly members Kristen Kelly and David Guttenberg voted for the special election and from their own wallets gave financial aid to the group that supported breaking the tax cap.
Mayoral candidate Grier Hopkins also actively supported busting the tax cap, led by Assembly Presiding Officer Savannah Fletcher and School Board candidate Morgan Dulian.
Rather than attending the forum to answer questions on their pro-tax stance, the candidates who supported expanded taxation chose to skip the forum and dodge questions on fiscal policy.
The Fairbanks municipal and borough election is being held on Tuesday, Oct. 1.
After the forum, the ITA endorsed the following candidates:
Jerry Cleworth for Fairbanks City Council
Aaron Crook for Fairbanks City Council
Miquel Ramirez for Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly
Tammie Wilson for Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly
Jimi Cash for Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly
For more than 80 years, the rulings in NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp (1937) and Wickard v. Filburn (1942) have cast a dark shadow over this nation, twisting the meaning of our Constitution and betraying the very foundation of our history and traditions. These decisions tore apart the democratic process, corroding our legal system and eroding the rights of both individuals and states. They paved the way for the unchecked expansion of the federal government, feeding the monstrous bureaucracy we now call “The Swamp.”
The tyranny that followed suffocated any chance for true compromise between the people and their government.
These rulings have chained the Court to a political battle it was never designed to fight, a conflict it will never resolve.
Eight decades later, the Court stands isolated. These decisions claim a right so destructive, so vast, that they have altered the very fabric of human life in ways for which the Court was never designed.
NLRB upheld the constitutionality of the National Labor Relations Act of 1935, also known as the Wagner Act, which was a center piece for the FDR New Deal centralization of the control and power by the federal government. NLRB marked a major shift in the federal government’s regulatory power over labor relations and interstate commerce.
The case arose when the National Labor Relations Board accused Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, one of the nation’s largest steel producers, of discriminating against workers involved in union activities. The company argued that the Act, which protected workers’ rights to unionize and bargain collectively, exceeded Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause, since labor relations were a local matter and not subject to federal regulation.
Less than 20 years earlier, the US Supreme Court ruled in Hammer v Dagenhart (1918) that local labor conditions did not fall under federal authority, even if they influenced commerce. The Court also relied on the 10th Amendment and states’ rights to regulate local matters like labor. Thus, this decision reflected the Court’s earlier philosophy of limiting federal intervention in local affairs.
Our nation’s jurisprudence up to National Labor Relations Board has been clear as well as supported by both Madison in Federalist No. 42 and Hamilton in Federalist No. 11. The federal government had the authority to regulate interstate commerce, and the states had authority to regulate intrastate commerce.
At the time of NLRB, the Court adopted a view of federal power which perverted the Commerce Clause, aligning with the New Deal era’s goals of regulating the economy and labor relations on a national scale.
NLRB opened the door to tyranny in the United States. The New Deal Era Supreme Court case fundamentally reshaped American jurisprudence, increased Congress’ power and control over the states and US citizens exponentially and vastly expanded the federal government’s budget simply by the Court’s expansion of its definition of the Commerce Clause.
This decision was a key moment in expanding the federal government’s ability to regulate economic activity, particularly in areas related to labor and business practices, and played a crucial role in shaping modern labor law in the U.S.
Compared to amending the US Constitution which usually takes a period of several years to accomplish if at all as there are hundreds of amendments introduced regularly, NLRB was argued Feb. 9 through Feb. 11, 1937, and decided April 12, 1937.
In other words, the U.S. Supreme Court permanently amended Article 1, Section 8, of the United States Constitution in 62 days.
The FDR Administration, unlike the more traditional efforts of the Wilson Administration, found a way to reshape the U.S. Constitution with astonishing speed and with the influence of just five individuals—the Supreme Court justices. In a matter of years, they achieved what should have required the will of the people and a rigorous amendment process, instead bypassing it with judicial rulings that altered the very foundation of our nation.
What was meant to be a careful and deliberate process, with checks, balances, and broad public consensus, was reduced to the decisions of a handful of people. This quiet yet monumental shift didn’t just undermine the Constitution; it subverted the democratic process itself, stripping away the people’s right to shape their own government. This swift and subtle change has left us grappling with a government that wields powers never intended by the Framers, powers we must now decide whether to accept or reject.
The question before us is clear: will we reclaim the Constitution, or let it continue to be rewritten by a few?
Then in 1942, the Wickard v Filburn decision drove the nails of tyranny into the heart and the four corners of constitution and buried liberty in a hell some believe not even Charon can access.
Wickard v. Filburn (1942) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that further expanded the federal government’s power under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution.
The case involved an Ohio farmer, Roscoe Filburn, who grew more wheat than was allowed under the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, a law designed to stabilize wheat prices by limiting production. Filburn argued that the wheat he grew in excess was for personal use on his farm and not for sale, so it should not be subject to federal regulation.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled against Filburn, holding that even wheat grown for personal consumption could be regulated by the federal government if it had a “substantial effect” on interstate commerce. The reasoning was that if many farmers grew excess wheat for personal use, it could affect the overall supply and demand in the national market, indirectly influencing interstate commerce.
This ruling broadened the scope of federal power under the Commerce Clause, allowing Congress to regulate even local, non-commercial activities when it is imagined by federal authorities to have a cumulative impact on interstate commerce.
These two decisions underscore a troubling reality: government spending and expansion have far outstripped the growth of individual earnings and the prosperity of states, as Washington, D.C. seizes more power and control. This shift marks a dangerous trend of centralizing authority, where the government’s reach takes precedence over the dignity and freedom of American citizens. Instead of respecting the diversity and autonomy of states to shape their own futures, we are witnessing a forced transformation of national norms, with the heavy hand of federal control suffocating the self-determination that once defined our country.
From $4.4 billion in 1937 to an astounding $6.3 trillion in 2024, the U.S. budget has skyrocketed by an unimaginable 142,731%. In stark contrast, the median annual income has risen by just 6,114%, reaching roughly $59,228 in 2024. At first glance, we might chalk this disparity up to inflation, but that explanation falls short. Inflation from 1937 to 2024 has only caused a cumulative price increase of 2,084.31%—nowhere near enough to account for the vast chasm between government growth and individual income.
So, what is truly driving this economic distortion? The answer is clear: it’s our federal government. By inflating its own power and expanding its spending to unsustainable levels, Washington, D.C. has eroded the value of our hard-earned dollars. This unchecked federal bloat is not merely a symptom—it is the cause, choking off prosperity and placing the burden of its reckless growth squarely on the backs of the American people.
The expansion of the Commerce Clause through NLRB and Wickard gave Congress sweeping control over every facet of human life, from conception to the grave. This redefinition didn’t just mark an unprecedented rise in federal power—it unleashed a tyranny that contemporary Americans had never known. It allowed Congress to hand off its legislative authority to sprawling bureaucracies, run by unelected administrators with little accountability to the people.
This shift in power has done more than just reshape government. It has transformed our very way of life, dictating behaviors and norms from a distant capital. And now, as Americans and Alaskans, we stand at a crossroads, facing critical election decisions amidst the distracting noise of those who seek to preserve this system. The time has come to reclaim our voice, our autonomy, and our future.
Michael Tavoliero is a senior writer at Must Read Alaska.
Rep. Mary Peltola has been campaigning in Alaska for a month, and now that Congress is back in session, she put out a notice on Monday saying she will be in Bethel this week to celebrate the life of her late husband, who died a year ago this coming Thursday. She explains this week off is part of Yup’ik culture.
The U.S. House of Representatives meets Monday through Thursday this week and Monday through Friday next week. Among items to be considered are measures to pass stop-gap funding to prevent a government shutdown.
Gene “Buzzy” Peltola was piloting a small plane when it crashed last Sept. 12 upon takeoff from a hunting site near St. Mary’s. He was the only person on board, ferrying more than 500 pounds of moose meat and a set of antlers.
About 60 residents of the Goldhill area of Fairbanks, sometimes called the Ester Lump, gathered Saturday for a bonfire and a meet-and-greet with Republican candidates for the Legislature, mayor, assembly, and school board.
The event, organized by Assembly member Barbara Haney at the home of Karla Secor, included state Senate candidate Mike Cronk, House of Representative candidate Ruben McNeil, mayoral candidate John Coghill, Assembly candidates Miguel Ramirez, Tammie Wilson, and Jimi Cash, and school board candidates Loa Hubbard and April Smith.
Ester has a growing number of Republicans and conservative-leaning voters in the district, but a Republican event in Ester is still a rare thing. This one came shortly after two heavily attended fundraisers hosted by Gov. Mike Dunleavy in Fairbanks for Rep. Frank Tomaszewski and mayoral candidate John Coghill.
For Rep. Mike Cronk, now running for the Senate seat being vacated by Sen. Click Bishop, this event was like a homecoming of sorts. Cronk has several family members who are long-time residents of the neighborhood, where the Cronk kids were well known and popular. Even though Mike Cronk moved from Ester to Northway while he was young, he’s maintained ties to the area through his aunt and uncle and extended family.
Residents had one-on-one conversations with the candidates about issues that mattered to them, while a bonfire was the center of activity for hotdogs and marshmallows.
The Goldhill area is one that has been hard hit by homeless people squatting on private property, sometimes even inside people’s houses, sheds, or garages, while owners are away. Ester also has a mining community, and some members expressed concern with the “anti-mining” mindset of the current borough Assembly under the leadership of Savannah Fletcher.
Other area residents discussed the challenges in meeting the documentation requirements by the borough assessor for the agriculture exemption, and other assessment issues. Overly aggressive assessments, excessive document requirements, and unreasonable timelines under the new appeal process have been an on-going area of concern by residents throughout the FNSB borough, and Ester residents were no exception.
Under the new appeal process passed under Fletcher’s leadership, it is practically impossible to file an appeal under the 10-day timeline. As one attendee noted, “By the time a person receives the letter to allow the appeal, the 10-day deadline to appeal is passed. It doesn’t seem fair.”
Saturday was an opportunity for candidates to listen to the concerns of Ester residents. Rather than coming in with a platform of ideas, the candidates came to listen to what mattered most to residents.
A new documentary by Jeff Landfield and Scott Jensen of the Alaska Landmineshows the underbelly of Anchorage in all its wasted glory. Landfield takes viewers through the encampments around Alaska’s largest city on foot and by drone, going into places where many citizens would not feel safe treading.
It’s the third documentary on the topic he had done in five years. In those years, the problem has only gotten worse.
The hobo encampments have spread from the greenbelts and parks to encampments on streets and sidewalks. Since his latest documentary, released in late August, Landfield says he has been contacted by Anchorage business owners who say they’re dealing with vagrants’ vandalism at their businesses, with everything from broken windows to abandoned items.
But the big message from the permanent campers featured in the video is that they want to live that way. They don’t want to be in shelters. These are people who can’t easily be housed because they are dealing with serious mental illness, drug or alcohol addiction, or a strong need to be outside of society in general.
Over 22,000 people have now viewed the video on YouTube, and more on Facebook and Twitter, Landfield said.
Watch the video at here:
As fall closes in on Alaska, the temperatures will drop and Anchorage will again open mass shelters and use taxpayer money to pay for hotel rooms for those who can’t camp all winter in the outdoors.
Although the filmmaker offers no solutions for the problem that plagues Anchorage and other major cities, recent rulings at the U.S. Supreme Court now give local communities more authority to deal with the growing problem of vagrancy — if they have the political will to do so.
“WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again,” Trump wrote late Saturday at Truth Social and on X/Twitter.
The media pounced: Trump was “sowing doubt once more about the integrity of the election, even though cheating is incredibly rare,” said the AP.
The AP has decided that election fraud just is not a thing.
“Please beware,” Trump continued in his post, “that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.”
In other words, election fraud will be prosecuted by the Department of Justice.
The headline on the AP story, carried around the world is this: “Trump threatens to jail adversaries in escalating rhetoric ahead of pivotal debate.”
Even in the Anchorage Daily News on Sunday, the AP headline ran verbatim as news, not commentary:
“Trump’s message represents his latest threat to use the office of the presidency to exact retribution if he wins a second term. There is no evidence of the kind of fraud he continues to insist marred the 2020 election; in fact, dozens of courts, Republican state officials and his own administration have said he lost fairly,” the AP story continued.
The AP was once considered to be a neutral news source. In recent years, however, it has drifted toward a point-of-view style of journalism.
Over on PBS, the news team is already pre-spinning how Trump might deny a 2024 loss:
“Beware when PBS brings on a ‘nonpartisan’ expert on election integrity, and no one mentions Kamala Harris at all. On the September 3 PBS News Hour, deeply biased White House reporter Laura Barron-Lopez brought on David Becker for a segment titled “How Trump has made election lies a key feature of his campaign.” But this wasn’t just about Trump denying he lost the election in 2020. Most of it was about ‘pre-denial,’ or how Trump would spin a loss in the 2024 election,” explained writer Tim Graham at Media Research Centers’Newsbuster website, which holds mainstream media accountable.
Becker co-authored an anti-Trump book with CBS reporter Major Garrett, titled “The Big Truth: Upholding Democracy in the Age of ‘The Big Lie,'”touted as an “overwhelming counterattack” on Trump’s election denial. The “Big Truth” authors imagined theoutbreak of civil war in 2023, according to Graham.
At Amazon, the new book by conservative Jack Posobiec, titled “Bulletproof: How a Shot Meant for Donald Trump Took Out Joe Biden,” was given a thumbnail book cover that advertised a completely different book: “Kinfolk.” After over 24 hours of the wrong image being attributed to the conservative writer’s new book, Amazon had still not fixed the error. It was showing a photo of a publication that is a guide to Seoul, Korea.
Posobiec wrote, “They are sabotaging the FIRST book ever written about the Trump assassination.”
The mainstream media and companies like Amazon appear determined to take sides during the election cycle, repeating habits they perfected and locked in during the 2016 and 2020 general elections when Trump was also on the ballot.
Must Read Alaska will continue to hold them accountable, even from our outpost here in the Great Land, where we work to preserve free speech and free people.
