Former President Donald Trump walked to an easy win in South Carolina’s Republican primary on Saturday. Polls closed at 7 pm, and the Associated Press called the race shortly thereafter.
“I have never seen the Republican Party so unified as it is right now,” Trump said to supporters on Saturday night. “This is really something. This was a little sooner than we anticipated and an even bigger win than we anticipated. And I was just informed that we got double the number of votes that has ever been received in the great state of South Carolina.”
With 7% of the vote counted, Trump was at 59%, to gain 29 more delegates to the Republican Nominating Convention in July. Haley was at 40%.
With 24% of the vote counted, Trump rose to 60% and Haley was at 39%.
With 82% reporting, Trump is at 60.51% and Haley is at 38.85%, at 9:47 p.m. Eastern time.
With 100% reporting, Trump is at 59.79% and Haley is at 39.52%.
Although all registered voters of any party were allowed to vote in the Republican primary, if a voter already cast a ballot in the Feb. 3 South Carolina Democrat primary, he or she would not be eligible to vote in the Republican primary.
Haley has said she will not drop out, even though she has not won a single primary or caucus yet.
Next up in primaries is Michigan on Feb. 27. Then come two caucuses on March 2 in Idaho and Missouri, followed by the District of Columbia primary on March 3, and the North Dakota caucus on March 4.
Michigan has a Democrat primary on Tuesday, and some are sounding the alarm that President Joe Biden may lose the Arab-American vote in that state, as well as the votes from younger registrants.
On March 5, Super Tuesday, 16 states hold Republican primaries or caucuses, including Alaska.
Ravn Alaska has just cut 130 jobs, about one-quarter of its workforce. The Anchorage-based regional airlines that flies between Anchorage and western Alaska towns and cities announced the layoffs to workers Friday.
The airline flies Beechcraft and DeHavilland Dash 8s. Late last year, Ravn stopped serving two of its 12 destinations — Kenai and Aniak.
The airlines had declared bankruptcy in 2020, sold off some of its aircraft, and reorganized. Its parent company is FLOAT Alaska.
Ravn is suffering from a labor shortage, competition, and inflation, it reported. But in 2022, its pilots joined a union — Airline Pilots Association. Two years later, their company is evidently struggling to stay alive.
“In late 2022, the pilots’ Negotiating Committee began preparing for negotiations and surveyed the pilot group with the goal of securing a first collective bargaining agreement. Bargaining began in early 2023 and is ongoing,” reported the pilots union.
Ravn’s CEO is Rob McKinney, also CEO of what launched as Northern Pacific Airways last summer and then changed its named last year to New Pacific Airlines. That company has also struggled. First it planned to fly to Asia through Alaska. Then it inaugurated its service from Ontario, Calif. to Las Vegas, Nevada. It appears to be operating now to Nashville, Tenn. and Reno, Nevada airports from Ontario.
Must Read Alaska sources say Ravn raised pay by about 30% in the fall of 2022 to remain competitive. But the market has been strong for pilots, that a regional airline operating turboprops is not competitive in the labor market, although turboprops used to be a stepping stone for jets. Now, it is an unnecessary diversion for the careers of many pilots.
“Apart from being home every night Ravn has nothing to attract new pilots or retain the ones it had,” a pilot said. “If (when) they cease operations, I seriously doubt that they will be replaced by a similar carrier. The Operational Overhead for a Part 121 carrier in a very seasonal market like ours makes it almost impossible to be profitable.”
Some believe that the future for aviation in Alaska is going to be newer, faster single and twin-engine turboprop aircraft like the Pilates PC-12, Cessna 408, and maybe some legacy Beech 1900’s. Ryan Air, Bering Air, ACE, and Kenai Aviation could see some tremendous market growth if they choose, sources said.
A ballot initiative to increase Alaska’s minimum wage has enough signatures to be included on the November ballot.
As seen at the Division of Elections, the group needed 26,705, and submitted 31,719 qualified signatures. The signatures were spread out between a majority of House districts, as required. The exceptions were House Districts 37-40 and House District 7, which underperformed.
The group behind the ballot initiative is Better Jobs for Alaska, a project of the Outside dark-money group the Sixteen-Thirty Fund, which has been written about extensively on this website. The group’s chair is Ed Flanagan, of alaskans for a Fair Minimum Wage. Other financial supporters are the Fairness Project in Washington, D.C., and SEI’u 776 Alaska PAC of Anchorage. The AFL-CIO is also involved in the effort to raise the minimum wage.
Supporters of theballot initiativefiled their signed petitions on Jan. 10 with the Division of Elections. For the past six weeks, the division has been verifying signatures.
Alaska’s minimum wage on Jan. 1 went from $10.85 to $11.73 an hour, as part of a ballot initiative passed by voters in 2014.
The proposed bill language for the new minimum wage is:
“An Act increasing the Alaska minimum wage to $13.00 per hour effective July 1, 2025, to $14.00 per hour effective July 1, 2026, to $15.00 per hour July 1, 2027 and to thereafter be adjusted annually for inflation; providing employees the ability to accrue up to 56 hours of paid sick leave per year if their employers have 15 employees or more; providing employees the ability to accrue up to 40 hours of paid sick leave if their employers have under 15 employees; and to prohibit employers from compelling employees to attend meetings regarding religious or political matters that are unrelated to their work.”
Supporters say that the cost of living in Alaska is high and necessitates higher wages.
The Division of Elections and Better Jobs for Alaskans have not yet made an announcement about the signature threshold having been met.
Meanwhile, the ballot initiative to get rid of ranked-choice voting in Alaska has not been updated at the Division of Elections since Thursday, but Phil Izon, who is with Alaskans for Honest Elections, has notified supporters around the state that the signature threshold has been met. An announcement is expected next week.
There are those who posture and talk about societal ills, and then there are those who do something about them.
When it comes to rural physical and sexual assault and human trafficking, Rep. Sarah Vance of District 6 Homer is among those trying to affect real change.
Vance recently apologized for making the following statement in the State House Tribal Affairs Committee following testimony from Alaska Native justice advocates:
“What I hear in this committee is that Alaska Native women feel that it’s exclusive to your experience. Because it sounds exactly like what I have heard of white women in my community, it’s the same thing.” She went on to add, “But what I continue to hear in this committee over and over again as if you’re the only one. And I know that’s not your heart.”
It’s clear Rep. Vance cares passionately about this issue and is an ally in the fight against every form of physical and sexual abuse and human trafficking. What is equally revealing is the relentless effort by the extreme left, inspired by their prophet Rahm Emanuel, to “never let a serious crisis go to waste.”
Their criticism of Rep. Vance’s comments speaks to the larger issue of Alaska’s dismal progress on this issue and the need to come together with focus on solutions.
Rep. Vance has been a stalwart defender against human trafficking and against violence, particularly in rural Alaska. She spearheaded getting stickers made that are placed in public restrooms across the state to give trafficked women a phone number to call for help. She has also sponsored several bills on this subject.
Looking for Solutions
I suggest Vance should leverage her Judiciary Committee chair position and appoint a subcommittee on missing and murdered indigenous women, as well as human trafficking, to focus on the root causes of how Native women in Alaska fall victim at such high rates.
There are a few elephants in this “rural sexual assault” room, the largest of which is accountability for progress.
A few days after Rep. Vance made her comment, Department of Public Safety Commissioner James Cockerell stated it is shameful rural Alaska had received disproportionately less law enforcement resources since statehood
“We’ve closed our eyes and allowed rural Alaska to be seriously victimized,” Cockerell said.
This is a curious confession from the head of Public Safety, who has been in a position to implement policy decisions on the topic of rural law enforcement, serving as the head of the Alaska State Troopers and the Alaska Department of Public Safety under more than one governor. I respect the commissioner, but who is the “we” he refers to? Who does he believe is accountable for this current state of crisis?
Alaska has a long history of violence against women and children. In 2020, Alaska was ranked the 21st worst state in terms of homicides. That rose 67% by 2022, from 6.7 per 100,000 to 10.3 per 100,000, placing Alaska in 5th place.
Compare that to the national average of 6.5 per 100,000. These are statewide statistics that do not take into account the higher percentage of “missing” women who were likely murdered.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports that recidivism among Alaska Natives and American Indians is four times higher for men compared to the national average and six times higher for women. Think of what this means about the rates of crime in rural Alaska and the cycle of despair.
An FBI report in 2016 paints an even bleaker image of sexual violence across the United States and highlights a very concerning data point: If a child suffers sexual abuse, he or she is 23% more likely to commit sexual violence against another person. If a child suffers physical abuse, he or she is 24% more likely to commit sexual violence against another person.
When we discuss the rates of sexual violence in our communities, we need to understand that physical violence is a root cause. Imagine what this does to a child who is the victim of both sexual and physical abuse.
Violence is violence, regardless of who the victims or perpetrators are. However, violence among the Alaska Native and American Indian populations is occurring at far higher rates per capita than among other populations. Our politicians need to focus less on discrediting their opponents and take more time to inform and collaborate. We need to have a sense of urgency to handle this problem now, but we can’t lose our patience, dignity, and respect.
Most Native Alaskans understand Rep. Vance is not the problem in this fight, but rather a staunch ally. The need to break the chain of violence is undeniable, but partisan attacks against Vance are not helpful.
Vance’s debacle calls to mind the phrase, “No good deed goes unpunished.” What is in our heart matters, but it’s what we actually do that changes the world. Vance’s work is helping our brothers and sisters in rural Alaska to find their voice by speaking out about sexual predation and physical abuse, both of which contribute to the highest rates of suicide in the nation.
Choose Respect
Gov. Sean Parnell started a “Choose Respect” campaign with great promise and intentions. It produced regular marches and rallies across Alaska. The Choose Respect movement was mainly a public awareness effort with few systemic changes or actions. In fact, during this time, thousands of sexual assault kits from across Alaska went unprocessed for years.
In 2013, activists showed up at one such Choose Respect rally to bring attention to the high number of indigenous women who were victims. The rallygoers interrupted Lt. Gov. Mead Treadwell’s speech and received significant media attention. The interruptions took on the appearance of partisanship, but their main point — that little progress was being made — resonated. Alaskans need to refrain from political grandstanding and find ways to solve this problem together.
Choose Respect rallies are a thing of the past, and there has been little statistical progress made on the issues of missing murdered indigenous women or sexual assaults in rural Alaska. However, it brought people together on the issue from across the political aisle for a short time. Ten years later, Alaska is still among the worst states in national statistics measuring crimes where violence against women and children are present, and more alarming is that statistics that isolate Alaska’s indigenous population are much higher.
The Need for Results
In 2018, Sen. Mike Shower’s office proposed to dramatically reform Alaska’s rural policing model from top to bottom by creating a full-time, rural police force comprised of officers policing the villages where they live. We worked with a broad-based group of rural legislators, regional Alaska Native organizations, Village Public Safety Officers, and law enforcement experts to design a comprehensive model to change the face of how we protect the people of rural Alaska. Sen. Shower held a Native Alaska tribal summit to listen to the concerns of rural residents. The plan was later considered by a legislative working group led by then-Senate President Cathy Giessel and then-Speaker of the House Representative Bryce Edgmon.
The idea was summarily dismissed by the Department of Public Safety. Why? One aspect of Shower’s plan challenged the status quo, the current “hub and spoke” model of rural State Trooper law enforcement, claiming that it is ineffective. This current model pays to house mostly non-native Troopers in a hub community and deploy them into communities only when an incident occurs.
Imagine if the Anchorage Police Department worked like this: When a Hillside resident calls 911, it rings a dispatcher in Seattle who takes your information and informs you that they will send an officer as quickly as possible once they can secure a flight to Anchorage, depending on the weather. This is an unacceptable policing model and needs to be re-examined in light of our current statistics.
One highlight of Shower’s plan proposed to utilize the high number of fully funded but perennially vacant Trooper positions statewide as a permanent, culturally relevant and localized rural police force who already live in Alaska’s villages. Sen. Shower believes his plan is fiscally more sound.
In contrast, the Department of Public Safety bristles at the suggestion that it uses the funding otherwise assigned to the many unfilled Trooper positions as a rural duty “overtime” slush fund. Is our Legislature smart enough to run these numbers and expose the fiscal truth of the matter? The health and welfare of rural Alaska demands that we do just this.
Let’s take a close look at the net savings of funding a model that activates a competent, culturally integrated, full-time, entirely local, rural police department into our villages to disrupt the status quo.
Recommendation: The Legislative Budget and Audit Committee should conduct an audit of DPS funding available for rural law enforcement. It should conduct a fiscal impact analysis comparing the status quo to Sen. Shower’s proposed re-structure. At the same time, the committee should inquire of the DPS commissioner: “Who is the ‘we’ you refer to and exactly who is accountable for the current situation?”
In conclusion, it is time to move beyond the status quo, beyond the politics of good intentions and do something about this tragedy. When we focus on the victims and those suffering, we cease vilifying champions of change, like Rep. Vance, and work toward solutions. Every opportunity lost for bipartisan reconciliation is a life lost.
Scott Ogan served as a legislator in the Alaska House and Senate and writes for Must Read Alaska.
Taxes being redistributed contrary to taxpayer intent is a concern within the context of environmental funding.
While taxpayers may expect their tax dollars to be used to directly address environmental issues, the actual distribution and use of these funds often diverge from their intended purpose into political and ideological intentions.
Government funding earmarked for environmental protection is subject to allocation decisions made by policymakers, bureaucrats, and special interest groups. As a result, taxpayer dollars end up supporting initiatives and organizations that are not aligned with priorities or values of those paying the taxes.
While China (1.412 billion people) and India (1.408 billion people), countries with populations significantly larger than the United States population (331.9 million people), produce greenhouse gas emissions that greatly surpass the United States, there is little evidence of environmental groups gaining traction in those countries, due to lack of funds as well as lack of political influence.
In the United States, however, the labyrinth of the federal and state government bureaucracies and the lack of transparency in the allocation process make it difficult for taxpayers to track how their tax dollars are being spent, as well as comment their agreement or dissent. The lack of accountability leads to inefficiencies, waste, and even corruption within the environmental funding system.
Lobbyists and special interest groups distort the allocation of funds, as they advocate for initiatives that serve their own interests rather than the broader goals of environmental protection.
Alaska entities like Chugach Electric Association and Matanuska Electric Association are examples.
The boards of both Alaska energy entities are influenced by special-interest groups whose prime intent is to affect the policy direction of intermittent renewable energy resources like wind and solar, over firm renewable energy resources like hydro, thereby impacting the economy of Southcentral Alaska.
The phenomenon of “mission drift” is also a concern. Organizations originally established to address specific environmental issues gradually expand their scope or shift their focus to attract more funding as well as drive more policy influence. This results in resources being diverted away from critical environmental priorities towards less urgent or tangential activities.
Taxpayers have a right to know how their money is being spent and to have a voice in shaping environmental policies and priorities. Without safeguards, there is a risk that environmental funding will continue to be influenced by factors other than genuine environmental stewardship, undermining the effectiveness and legitimacy of environmental protection efforts.
While we elect our representatives to champion our welfare and the success of our progeny, there is a genuine lack of direct oversight. Taxpayer dollars allocated for environmental protection flow through governmental agencies, non-profit organizations, research institutions, and regulatory bodies.
One issue is the overabundance of influence of special interest groups. The environmental sector attracts stakeholders, including environmental advocacy groups, industry associations, and lobbyists. These entities exert influence on the allocation of environmental funding to advance their own agendas or priorities.
As a result, taxpayer dollars are directed toward initiatives that serve the interests of powerful stakeholders, rather than addressing pressing environmental issues and taxpayer concerns. Environmental targets of these influences are directed at vaporous concepts which cannot be influenced by human beings.
Governmental bureaucracies responsible for managing environmental funding are prone to inefficiencies, red tape, bias and administrative bottlenecks. The complex processes involved in allocating, disbursing, and monitoring funds hinders the timely and effective implementation of environmental programs, resulting in suboptimal environmental outcomes.
Private environmental organizations and initiatives funded by taxpayer dollars experience mission drift over time. Originally established to address specific environmental challenges, these entities may gradually expand their scope or shift their focus to attract additional funding sources. While this bolsters their financial sustainability, it can dilute their effectiveness and divert resources away from core environmental priorities.
As an example of both being a governmental bureaucracy and an environmental entity, the National Park Service plays a crucial role in protecting and preserving America’s natural and cultural heritage, the organization has become susceptible to mission drift over time due to various internal and external pressures, including reliance on taxpayer dollars, changes in political priorities, and competing stakeholder interests.
Meaningful public engagement and participation are essential for ensuring that environmental funding reflects the priorities and values of taxpayers. However, the limited opportunities for public input in the decision-making process has marginalized voices of taxpayers and communities most affected by environmental issues. Empowering taxpayers to actively participate in shaping environmental policies and priorities may help ensure that environmental funding aligns with their interests and aspirations.
The challenges associated with the redistribution of taxes contrary to taxpayer intent in environmental funding must start with a concerted effort to enhance transparency, accountability, public engagement, and efficiency within the environmental governance system.
In today’s vernacular, the unfortunate consequence of any pushback to self-serving agendas by taxpayers often become opportunities for bullying and intimidation. By fostering greater transparency and public participation, policymakers can help ensure that taxpayer dollars are effectively and responsibly utilized to address pressing environmental challenges and safeguard the planet for future generations.
Michael Tavoliero is a senior writer at Must Read Alaska.
The Alaska House Majority passed House Bill 143, legislation aimed at the need for dealing with plastic waste across Alaska.
Roughly 90% of plastics currently recycled or sorted at landfills are not suitable for mechanical recycling. That leaves 10% of plastics that are actually recycled.
Advanced recycling, with chemical processes like pyrolysis and gasification, transforms plastics that cannot be recycled through traditional means into new, high-value plastics, chemicals, and other products, revolutionizing our approach to plastic waste management. That is not available in Alaska — yet. But HB 143 anticipates that eventuality and starts the regulatory framework that would allow it, relaxing some environmental rules pertaining to air quality.
“This is a strategic framework not only for our environment but also for the economic prosperity of our state, as an advanced recycling facility would create jobs, generate revenue, and stimulate economic activity. HB 143 strikes a balance, offering innovative solutions that work without heavy government subsidies,” said bill sponsor Rep. Tom McKay. It’s a way to keep plastics out of landfills that are filling up in communities, he said.
With the designation of the Department of Environmental Conservation to develop manufacturing regulations related to advanced recycling, the hope is that the private sector will look for opportunities in Alaska.
The American Chemistry Council supports the bill. “Changing the way plastics are made and remade is a top priority for America’s plastic makers. We’ve set an ambitious goal for all US plastic packaging to be reused, recycled, recovered by 2040, and we are working towards this goal by supporting systems and technologies that remake new plastics from used plastics.”
The vote to pass the bill was 23-13, and it will now be considered by the Alaska Senate.
With the election season under way, how is former President Donald Trump and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley faring in Alaska?
Haley has appointed a team of chairpersonsto get out the vote during the Alaska Republican Party’s March 5 Presidential Preference Poll, which helps the party calculate delegates to the national convention. Only one of the team members actually donated to Haley’s campaign in 2023.
Looking at the Federal Election Commission reports for last year, Trump is still stronger than Biden in Alaska; Trump won in 2020 with 53% of the vote in the Alaska general election. Trump supporters are showing up stronger, compared to Republican Nikki Haley this year.
Here’s a snapshot of the campaign contributions for 2023:
In 2023, Trump’s campaign received 7,603 financial contributions from Alaskans.
Results by various cities include:
Anchorage: 2,548 contributions
Wasilla: 756 contributions
Fairbanks: 618 contributions
Juneau: 278 contributions
Kenai: 179 contributions
Palmer: 178 contributions
Ketchikan: 101 contributions
Haley’s campaign received 911 contributions from Alaskans in 2023. By city:
Anchorage: 364 contributions
Fairbanks: 84 contributions
Juneau: 51 contributions
Ketchikan: 31 contributions
Palmer: 12 contributions
Kenai: Zero contributions
Joe Biden received 461 contributions from Alaskans in 2023. By city:
Anchorage: 240
Juneau: 75
Fairbanks: 25
Wasilla: 17
Ketchikan: 9
Palmer: 7
Kenai: 4
Note that these contributions do not represent individual donors, as many donors give multiple times to campaigns.
Must Read Alaska calculated 225 individual donors for Haley, and 684 individual donors for Trump from Alaska in 2023. There were 135 individual donors from Alaska to Biden.
Sen. Dan Sullivan said today that, in comparing the presidential terms of President Joe Biden and President Donald Trump, there’s no question who was better for Alaska: It’s Trump.
Sullivan has always said he would support the Republican nominee, which he has predicted would be Trump.
In Ketchikan for the day meeting with Alaskans, Sullivan reiterated what he said to the Legislature on Wednesday: Biden has enacted 56 executive orders shutting down Alaska’s economy in one form or another.
In a statement to Must Read Alaska, Sullivan answered the question on everyone’s mind: Who does he support for president?
“As I stated in my recent press conference, the two leading Presidential candidates both have detailed records on Alaska: Biden gets a “D-“ and Trump gets a “strong A.” In fact, working with me and our Republican Senate majority, the Trump Administration’s record to advance the interests of Alaskans is unmatched: ANWR, access to NPR-A, the King Cove Road, the Ambler Road, allotments for our heroic Alaska Native Vietnam Veterans, the Tongass Roadless rule exemption, reestablishing our state’s right to manage fish and game, Operation Lady Justice to address the missing and murdered indigenous women crisis, historic investments in public safety for rural Alaska villages, defending our Second Amendment rights, appointing conservative judges to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and putting prominent Alaskans in Senate confirmed assistant secretary positions at the Department of the Interior.
“From Day 1, President Biden has focused on reversing this historic record of achievement to the significant detriment of Alaskans. If re-elected, President Biden will continue his aggressive, illegal push to turn Alaska into a giant national park. For all these reasons, I am again supporting former President Trump for President and working with my colleagues to regain a Republican majority in the U.S. Senate,” he said.
Also endorsing Trump is Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy and Republican congressional candidates Nick Begich and Nancy Dahlstrom. Sen. Lisa Murkowski opposes Trump and Biden; Democrat Rep. Mary Peltola, who replaced Trump-supporting Congressman Don Young, has endorsed Biden.
Alaska Republicans will caucus-by-ballot during the GOP Presidential Preference Poll on March 5 at locations across the state. Watch Must Read Alaska for details on where to cast your PPP ballot.
Just before the 2022 primary election, the Alaska Division of Elections cut in half the number of polling places available to military families on Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. Instead of two places to vote, there was only one, and they were seven miles apart.
It is akin to an Anchorage voter having to drive from Dimond Blvd. in south Anchorage all the way to City Hall in downtown in order to vote.
Now, activists in Anchorage are trying to get the second polling place put back in place to prevent voter suppression of military members by the Division of Elections.
Although the closing of one of the polling locations was protested by one retired military member, the Division said it could not reverse its decision, Must Read Alaska sources said.
On Tuesday, Anchorage political activist and former Alaska Republican Party Chairman Randy Ruedrich met with a representative from the Division of Elections to discuss returning a polling location to the Orion Elementary School, which is on the Elmendorf side of the joint base. As of this writing, there is no polling location planned for that former site.
Election watchdogs argue that one polling place on base is inadequate.
“Thirty-seven precinct polling locations in District 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 22, as well as the other three District 18 precinct polling locations are geographically closer to the JBER Elmendorf side voters than their current Precinct 18-555 polling location at Ursa Minor Elementary School. No other Anchorage voters north of Tudor Road are required to travel two miles to cast their ballot. The 14.5 mile JBER’s Elmendorf side to Ursa Minor Elementary round-trip drive time for on-duty military personnel exceeds 30 minutes,” said Ruedrich.
Activists noted that military Election Day turnout has historically been low, but military and non-military organizations have been working diligently to increase voter turnout on Alaska’s bases.
“The Division of Elections decision pulls the rug out from under those patriotic efforts and sends the wrong message to Anchorage’s military community. Why should they believe that their vote matters when the State of Alaska cuts their opportunity to vote in half?” Ruedrich commented.
“The Division of Elections needs to recreate a regular precinct with its own unique voter roll for zip code 99506 for the Elmendorf side residents to vote at Orion Elementary and maintain the second precinct with its own unique voter roll for zip code 99505 for the Fort Richardson side residents to vote at Ursa Minor Elementary School,” he said.
Rep. Jamie Allard of Eagle River agrees.
“Disenfranchising Alaska military the opportunity to vote in a polling placed located on JBER is a complete lack of understanding of what our military do, their way of life, and the limited personal time they actually have,” said Rep. Allard, who has many military members living in her district. “With the demanding working hours, our military members and families deserve to have the flexibility and a logical location near where they live. We must do better and help with a better quality of life for our military members and their families.”
Ruedrich is asking Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom to restore the JBER Elmendorf precinct for the 2024 Primary and General Elections, but sources close to the Division of Elections told Must Read Alaska that no such plans are under way.
JBER has over 32,000 service members, civilians, and family members, according to the U.S. Military.
By combining voters into one precinct, some believe that career bureaucrats are trying to suppress the military vote.
The turnout results from two gubernatorial election years show the possible problem (skipping over the 2020 presidential election, as military members vote in greater numbers in those years):
