Monday, November 17, 2025
Home Blog Page 489

Gold prices reached an all-time high on Friday

Gold prices reached all-time high on Friday, as Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell hinted that the Central Bank may start cutting rates beginning in March.

Spot gold climbed 1.6% to $2,069.10 per ounce, up 1.6% over the previous close and 3.4% higher on the week. But it had gone as high as $2,075.09 per ounce on Friday, which topped the record of $2,072.49 in 2020.

U.S. gold futures were a record $2,089.7. However, inflation has eaten away at what that dollar value actually is. Since 2015, the U.S. dollar has been affected by nearly 30% cumulative inflation. High inflation typically has a major impact on gold prices, as investors seek safe-haven investments and a means of preserving wealth.

In Alaska, the Manh Choh gold mine under development near Fairbanks has become embroiled in controversy as the Native Village of Tetlin is divided on whether the mine should start production. A dispute about whether tribal leaders broke tribal law by approving it is the current barrier to progress. Kinross is the majority owner of the project and has plans to haul the ore by truck to Fort Knox, which has a mill.

Other gold mines in Alaska include those in production and those in development:

  • Hecla Greens Creek Mine: An underground mine producing polymetallic (silver, zinc, gold, and lead) ore to a surface mill and concentrator, which in turn produces three separate concentrates and is located on Admiralty Island, Greens Creek is the largest private-sector employer in Southeast Alaska.
  • Coeur Alaska-Kensington Gold Mine: An underground gold mine located on the east side of Lynn Canal some 45 miles north of Juneau. The ore is processed in a flotation mill that produces a gold-bearing concentrate which is sold to smelters.
  • Fort Knox Mine: An open-pit gold mine about 26 miles northeast of Fairbanks, operated by Kinross and employing over 400 people.
  • Pogo Gold Mine: An underground gold mine 38 miles northeast of Delta Junction.
  • Donlin Gold: Donlin Gold, owned by NovaGold Resources and Barrick Gold Corporation, it is working to build a gold mining project near Crooked Creek Village in the Yukon Kuskokwim area of Western Alaska. With some of the largest known gold deposits in the world, it has an estimated 33.8 million ounces of gold. The Donlin Gold project would create 3,000 jobs during construction, and up to 1,400 jobs for the estimated 27 years of production. Environmentalists have targeted it with legal challenges this year.
  • Pebble Project: In Southwest Alaska on state land set aside for mineral development, Pebble has one of the most important concentrations of copper, gold, molybdenum and silver in the world, but has been blocked by environmentalists for decades.
  • Niblack: A copper-zinc-gold-silver prospect on Prince of Wales Island, about 30 miles from Ketchikan, Niblack is in the exploration phase.
  • Livengood: Livengood Gold Project is 70 miles north of Fairbanks, and is one of the largest gold deposits discovered globally in 20 years.
  • More on Alaska mines at the University of Alaska Southeast’s Center for Mine Training link.

Kelly Tshibaka: Bold insights from Larry Elder

By KELLY TSHIBAKA

Larry Elder, a prominent conservative commentator and political figure, has been vocal about his views on various issues affecting the black community in the United States. While opinions on Elder’s proposed solutions may differ, it is essential to examine his perspectives, particularly in light of his formative life experiences. 

In Elder’s recent interview on the podcast show STAND with Kelly & Niki Tshibaka, he shared how his policy views were significantly shaped by witnessing how his parents overcame significant discrimination and poverty. Elder took the audience along his father’s inspiring journey from the Jim Crow South to the Marines and eventually to Los Angeles. Larry’s father, a symbol of perseverance, faced racial discrimination yet remained steadfast in providing for his family.

One of Larry Elder’s key pillars is the concept of personal responsibility. He argues that individuals, regardless of their race, must take responsibility for their actions and choices. Elder contended that systemic racism does not hold people back. Rather, he said the formula for success is to: a) wait to have kids until after 20 years old, b) get a job, c) don’t leave the job until you have another job, and d) avoid the criminal justice system. 

Elder then placed personal responsibility for the conditions faced by black Americans on the black community itself. He dropped these points in rapid fire:

  • – 70% of black kids enter the world without a father in the home married to the mother.
  • – The top cause of preventable death for a black person age 19 and under is homicide, almost always at the hands of another person age 19 and under
  • – There is a 50% urban dropout rate in many urban schools, like Milwaukee where 13 public high schools have 0% of the students who can do math at grade level

Elder also strongly advocated for school choice, believing that empowering parents to choose the best educational environment for their children is crucial. He argued that providing alternatives to underperforming public schools, such as charter schools, private schools, or homeschooling, can help break the cycle of poor education outcomes often observed in disadvantaged communities.

He criticized the Democrat Party for not supporting school choice and other solutions that would genuinely help the Black Community. Instead he said the Democrats intentionally mislead voters “because they want Black people to go in there and pull that lever for the Democratic party.” He called out the Democrat party for being the party of slavery, the party of the Confederacy, the party of Jim Crow, the party of Dred Scott, the party of the KKK, and the party that destroyed the family.

Larry Elder’s proposed solutions for the Black community revolve around principles of personal responsibility, education reform, economic empowerment, and the promotion of stable family structures. While his ideas may spark important discussions, it is crucial to consider a diverse range of perspectives and approaches to address the complex challenges faced by the Black community. Ultimately, a comprehensive and collaborative effort is needed to create meaningful and lasting change.

Kelly Tshibaka is the host of the podcast, TV, and radio show STAND, and the 2022 Alaska Republican candidate for U.S. Senate. She co-hosts the show with her husband, Niki Tshibaka.

Bethany Marcum: A Supreme Court case that could be the next Janus for labor unions

13

By BETHANY MARCUM AND STEVE DELIE

What good is a right if you don’t know you have it? What if you know about your right but are blocked from exercising it?

That’s the situation for millions of public workers. They have a constitutional right not to pay dues to government labor unions, yet unions are furiously trying to prevent workers from realizing it. The Supreme Court will decide any day whether to hear a case from Alaska that would ensure that all of America’s nearly 15 million teachers, police officers, firefighters, and other public workers have the information and opportunity they need to exercise their fundamental rights.

Alaska’s request has its roots in the Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling in Janus v. AFSCME. The justices recognized that the First Amendment rights to free speech and free association mean public workers can’t be forced to support labor unions. That was the correct decision, yet unions quickly subverted it. At the time, unionized public workers nationwide had to opt out of union membership proactively. Unions have made that process as difficult and opaque as possible, with the goal of keeping as many members as possible. Such union roadblocks have made Janus far less impactful than it should have been.

The union tactics are as obvious as they are unjust. In many states, government unions simply fail to tell workers that they have the right to opt out of membership, giving the impression that membership is mandatory. Some states have passed laws that ban employers from telling workers about their rights. And in other states, unions make the opt-out process so burdensome, few if any employees can navigate it.

Examples abound. In Oregon, one government union requires members to opt out between 45 and 15 days prior to the anniversary of the day they signed their membership cards. But the union doesn’t provide a copy of the card, making the window difficult to determine. In Michigan, the main teachers union only allowed opt-outs in August, when teachers are least likely to think about it due to summer break. When that was ruled illegal in 2015, the union required opt-outs to be sent to an obscure P.O. Box. In Alaska, state employees can only leave a union during a 10-day period in June.

Alaska tried to end this injustice in 2019. Gov. Mike Dunleavy revoked government unions’ control over membership and dues deduction, instead putting the state in charge of getting workers’ consent. Under the governor’s plan, Alaska would inform public workers on an annual basis about their right not to join a union or pay union dues. Workers would have the opportunity to decide on union membership and dues payments every year – replacing opt out with opt in.

Sadly, Alaska’s plan never went into effect, after state courts issued injunctions and the state Supreme Court struck it down on questionable grounds. Other states have had more luck. In 2020, Michigan began requiring annual direct consent from most state employees before unions get a cent of their paychecks. Turns out, huge numbers of workers didn’t know they had the option to leave their union, since no one told them, union or otherwise.

In the two years since Michigan’s policy went into effect, more than 10,000 state employees have decided to opt out of union membership. Overall, the share of state employees in government unions has fallen nearly 10 percent, to just over two-thirds of the workforce. Clearly, many workers had been paying union dues when they didn’t want to, likely never knowing they didn’t have to.

What if all public workers knew their rights and had a clear path to exercise them? If Michigan’s experience is any indication, an estimated 1.75 million workers would leave their government union in the next year or two. They would finally avail themselves of their rights to free speech and free association, despite union attempts to keep them in the dark. Unions should respect workers’ wishes, yet even if they don’t, they should be compelled to respect workers’ constitutional rights. The evidence shows that most workers would likely still choose to remain union members. That’s their choice, and they should be able to make it, without the union tipping the scales.

Only the Supreme Court can free America’s public workers. The justices should fully apply the logic of their 2018 Janus decision. If public workers can’t be forced into government unions, then they should be fully informed of their rights and given the chance to opt into union membership on a regular basis. Anything less will let unions continue to deprive public workers of the information they need and the freedom they deserve. It’s long past time to fully respect public workers’ rights.

Bethany Marcum is the Alaska State Director for Americans for Prosperity. Steve Delie is Director of Labor Policy at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. This column first appeared at Fox News.

Brian Hove: Truth and consequences for Germany, Ukraine, and Vladimir Putin’s search for a legacy

18

By BRIAN HOVE

Can an action be considered inadvertent if the consequences of such action were predictable, inevitable and avoidable? 

Kelly Tshibaka’s most recent post is very much appreciated as the topic of Ukrainian sovereignty is an important consideration. However, emphasizing Germany’s involvement as “inadvertent” may lack vital context. In fact, I believe it’s much too kind.

Germany’s role in destabilizing the rules-based security structure Europe (particularly Eastern Europe) has enjoyed these last 30+ years cannot be overstated. To be clear, I’m not referring to its proclivity for NATO free-ridership (another issue for another time). 

I’ll explain. 

But first, why should we care about Ukraine? Well, history provides a compelling hint.

In the late 1930s Adolf Hitler assured the world that all he wanted was a little more land for German-speaking people, specifically parts of what was then Czechoslovakia. 

To avoid war, an agreement was struck sacrificing Czechoslovakia’s sovereignty. But, for despots like Hitler, it’s never enough. So, Poland was next. At this point all hell broke loose with the start of WWII. This is the moment the world learned a hard lesson about the efficacy of appeasement. 

Vladimir Putin is 71 years old. You can bet he has given considerable thought to his legacy. He would like nothing less than to be recorded as an historic figure, a great Russian leader in the class of Peter or Catherine or his personal hero, Stalin. 

Putting Humpty Dumpty back together again would certainly cement the legacy he desperately seeks. Restoration of the once great USSR might even qualify him for a new moniker. Vladimir the Great? Perhaps a final resting place next to Lenin?  

If we appease Putin by turning our back on Ukraine thereby allowing him to succeed in this misadventure, we must know that other sovereign nations will be next. The short list includes Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Finland – all EU and NATO members. Better to support Ukraine now than to have American boys fighting in Europe – again. 

So, what does Germany have to do with putting Europe back in Russia’s gunsights?   

For several years, Russia exported large quantities of natural gas to Germany which busied itself deactivating complementary power sources. Thus, over time, the German people became more and more dependent on an energy policy predicated on a single-source supplier of ill-repute.

Many former USSR republics and Warsaw Pact countries – now members of the EU and NATO – warned Germany about the unreliable nature of its bellicose business partner to the east. Choosing to ignore sage advice, Germany continued full speed ahead into Putin’s trap.  

During Putin’s reign, Russia has notoriously used energy resources to advance its foreign policy objectives. As a large consumer of Russian natural gas delivered via the Nord Stream pipeline, it was only a matter of time before Germans would be put over a barrel. How they could not see it coming is inexplicable. 

For the rest of the world, it’s fairly easy to understand. All we have to do is follow the Deutsche marks – specifically, Gerhard Schröder’s Deutsche marks.   

In the fall of 2005, within days of resigning his post as German chancellor, Schröder was hired by Gazprom, the Russian oil and gas giant, to oversee the nascent Nord Stream pipeline project. Think about that for a moment. 

Nord Stream was a proposal Schröder went to great lengths to endorse and promote as chancellor. Yet, we are to believe his subsequent employment was purely coincidental. This would be akin to a U.S. president – acting on behalf of the country he leads – cutting a deal with a strategic Chinese firm closely tied to the CCP and then, immediately after leaving office, going to work for that firm. Not cool, to say the least.

As a result, Germany is compromised. Awkward acquiescence toward Russia’s “special military operation” has been on full display from the outset. Europe’s largest economy needed Russian gas to operate. German homes needed Russian gas for wintertime heating. Clearly, Putin was counting on leveraging Germany the day he invaded Ukraine thus making impotent Russia’s largest potential European adversary.    

So, one could argue that Germany’s role in Ukraine’s existential struggle can be characterized as not so much “inadvertent” as it is complicit. Clearly, Russia is responsible. But, certainly, Germany has blood on its hands. 

It’s a hard truth to swallow. But how else are we to reconcile the actions of Germany’s former head of state vis-à-vis Nord Stream? There was nothing inadvertent about the geopolitical hazard Germany willingly walked into thereby putting its European neighbors at substantial risk. The consequences are plain as day for all to see.  

But, don’t take my word for it. Check it out.

Brian Hove is a UAF business graduate and a 43 year resident of Alaska. Much of his working life was spent in the banking industry. He also staffed a state senator back in the day. In 1999 he began what has become a wonderful infatuation with a small-but-spirited Eastern European country on the SE corner of the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Finland. He’s fond of saying “Everybody needs a hobby.” His work can be found at 372collection.com. 

Ken Koelsch: Juneau Assembly needs to retreat

By KEN KOELSCH

We might not be privy to what the Assembly’s agenda is, but we need to begin with the premise that it wants to do the right thing. It is our job as citizens to help determine “the right direction” starting with the people here and then help make it happen.

Start with Taxation 101.

Taxes fund our local government so it can provide essential services we all value — like public safety, schools and roads. Property tax is calculated in mills, equivalent to one-tenth of a percent. A mill rate of 10 means that your property tax is equal to 1% of your property’s assessed value.

Do you remember what the millage rate was at the start of the 2023 year? It was 10.56.

In May, the Assembly lowered the rate from 10.56 to 10.16. The Juneau Empire headline read, “Assembly votes to lower property tax rate” and Assembly members proudly proclaimed that this was the lowest millage rate since the late 1990s.

Yes, the Assembly did lower the mill rate to 10.16, but what they couldn’t brag about was the fact that even though they lowered the millage rate, because property assessments rose so steeply — 13%, our tax bills actually went up an average of almost 9%.

But did you know that the Assembly’s 0.4 percent decrease (10.56 to 10.16) was actually less than what Juneau taxpayers achieved when they rejected $27 million in bonds for a new city hall in October?

That action effectively lowered the coming year’s debt rate nearly a half mill from 1.20 to 0.73 (0.47 percent).

What is happening to that money that does not need to be allocated to paying debt service on $27 million? Will it stay in the pockets of Juneau taxpayers or will it be collected for an Assembly “priority” that is not an essential service or just be collected because actually lowering property tax is not a thought process?

The CBJ has done an excellent job accumulating reserves (mostly by over-collecting sales and property taxes) they can disperse as they see fit without the permission of voters. But it is the citizens’ money.

There is $16.3 million that has been appropriated for a new city hall. That is your money.

There is at least $7 million appropriated for capital civic center funds; with another $10 million designated from passenger head taxes- That is your money.

There is projected to be $31 million in unrestricted 2024 budget reserves collected mainly from property and sales taxes. That is your money.

At the end of October (thanks to cruise ship passenger spending and inflation), the CBJ treasury set a record for third quarter sales tax collection of $21 million. That increase is your money.

And then there’s property tax. $64,484,700 was the budgeted value for FY24 for roughly 14,000 parcels. A total of $64.2 million collected so far (almost $5 million more than the projected $59.3 million collected in FY23). That increase is your money.

The senior population is now a larger percentage of the population than the under-18 population. What is needed to keep seniors and working families in their homes and attract young people to Juneau to balance out our population? There’s just one answer — we need to make Juneau more affordable.

So what sense is there in raising property tax on housing every year when we carry between $50-$60 million in restricted and unrestricted budget reserves? None. If this community wants to grow, it first needs to address the basic needs of its current population.

First, stop over-collecting taxes. Second, stop over-collecting taxes, Third, stop over-collecting taxes.

Make it affordable to live here. The 10.16 mill rate will be reduced by 0.47 as the debt service declines from 1.2 to 0.73. Why not lower the mill rate even further to keep the population we have here housed and attract new population? The Assembly during its retreat this weekend needs to actually ask for a plan to return over-collected taxes or a plan to use the over-collected tax for lowering property taxes for the next year or two.

It is Juneau taxpayers’ money that is filling the unrestricted reserve budget coffers well above normal levels; it is Juneau taxpayers’ money that is being appropriated to accounts for projects that voters have rejected. Leave the money in the taxpayers’ home budgets where they can use it to pay their mortgage or rent, or use it for food, medical and transportation costs.

Making Juneau a more affordable place for the people living here is a great starting place for any budget.

Ken Koelsch is a former mayor of Juneau.

Wrangell finds remains of Otto Florschutz in landslide debris

1

The body of Otto Florschutz was located on Thursday and recovered from the Nov. 20 landslide debris, with the assistance of Wrangell Search and Rescue K-9, Wrangell Search and Rescue volunteers, and an excavator.

Florschutz was a commercial fisherman who in 2022 was one of 48 people who filed to fill the vacant seat in Congress, after the death of Congressman Don Young.

“Ottie” Florschutz, who was a grandfather, had been elected several times to Wrangell’s Port Commission, was for decades a member of the Wrangell Fish and Game Advisory Committee. He and his wife moved to Wrangell in the 1980s after winning the right to get some land there in the state land lottery.

The only person known to still be missing is 12-year-old Derek Heller; the rest of his immediate family’s remains have been recovered, including 44-year-old Timothy Heller, 36-year-old Beth Heller, 16-year-old Mara Heller and 11-year-old Kara Heller. Search and Rescue volunteers and a scent detection K9 team continue with reactive searching as any new information or evidence leads to a specific search area, according to the Alaska Department of Public Safety.

Passing: Sandra Day O’Connor, Reagan-appointed Supreme Court justice, wrote opinion on submerged lands on Alaska’s Arctic coast

3

The nation’s first female Supreme Court justice has passed. Sandra Day O’Connor was a woman of many “firsts.”

Born in El Paso, Texas to cattle ranchers, O’Connor was raised on a remote ranch that, in her younger years, was without electricity or running water.  

Through grit, hard work, and determination, she would become an accomplished lawyer and was named by President Ronald Reagan to the Supreme Court.

After graduating from high school in 1946, O’Connor was accepted to attend Stanford University, where she became senior class president. She completed two degrees in six years and received her law degree two years later, also from Stanford, during which time she was on the board of editors for the prestigious Stanford Law Review. She graduated third out of a class of 102 law students.

Her marriage and career took her to Germany, then to Arizona, where she raised her children with husband John O’Connor; she eventually returned to the practice of law and became an assistant attorney general for the state. She was appointed by the governor of Arizona to finish the term of a retiring state senator, and when she subsequently ran for the seat, she was reelected, and was immediately chosen by her peers to be the state Senate majority leader, another first.

In 1975, she was sworn in as an Arizona Superior Court judge and in 1979 she was sworn in as a judge on the Arizona Court of Appeals.

During the final month of the 1980 presidential campaign, candidate Ronald Reagan promised to voters that, if elected, he would appoint a woman to the U.S. Supreme Court. In July 1981, President Reagan made good on the promise and nominated O’Connor. The Senate confirmed her 99-0, with just one member missing the vote. O’Connor became the first female justice in the nearly 200-year history of the Supreme Court. 

She was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1988 and underwent a mastectomy and chemotherapy.

In an Alaska case decided in 1997, O’Connor penned an important opinion relating to submerged lands on the Arctic shelf, after the the federal government disputed the ownership.

The Alaska Statehood Act had expressly provided that the federal Submerged Lands Act applied to Alaska, entitling Alaska to submerged lands beneath tidal and inland navigable waters and submerged lands extending three miles seaward of the State’s coastline.

The federal government claimed a right to submerged lands along the Alaska’s Arctic Coast for mineral leasing.

Alaska sought to solidify its title to coastal submerged lands within two specific federal areas, the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, formerly known as the Arctic National Wildlife Range.

The opinion authored by Justice O’Connor ruled that the federal government owned the disputed submerged lands adjacent to the National Wildlife Refuge and the National Petroleum Reserve along Alaska’s Arctic Coast.

Arguing on behalf of the State of Alaska was Bruce M. Botelhowho was attorney general for Alaska.

After serving for nearly 25 years, O’Connor retired in 2006. When she passed on Friday in Phoenix, she was 93.

More about O’Connor at the Sandra Day O’Connor Institute for American Democracy at this link.

House kicks Rep. Santos to the curb

New York Rep. George Santos, a Republican, was expelled by the House of Representatives today, becoming only the sixth House lawmaker in history to be removed by his colleagues.

The Friday vote, which is the third time the House has voted on Santos’ 11-month congressional career. He survived the first two votes, but this time 105 Republicans joined almost all Democrats in removing him.

“Representative Santos sought to fraudulently exploit every aspect of his House candidacy for his own personal financial profit,” an Ethics subcommittee said in a published report. Santos’ conduct “has brought severe discredit upon the House.”

“Representative George Santos cannot be trusted. At nearly every opportunity, he placed his desire for private gain above his duty to uphold the Constitution, federal law, and ethical principles,” the report said.

Before Santos, the most recent member expelled was Rep. James Traficant of Ohio. The Democrat was kicked out of the House of Representatives in 2002 after being convicted in a bribery and racketeering; he served time in prison, during which he mounted an unsuccessful campaign to regain his seat as an independent.

Before Traficant, three members of the House were expelled in 1861 for their disloyalty to the union at the outset of the Civil War: John Bullock Clark, a member of the Whig Party; John William Reid of Missouri, a Democrat; and Henry Cornelius Burnett of Kentucky, also a Democrat. All three supported the southern confederate cause. Reid actually resigned several months before he was expelled.

Alaska Native leaders argue against eco-colonialism by Biden, while Peltola appeases her liberal allies

During a hearing in which Arctic Alaska Natives pleaded for the right to produce oil and gas, which funds their very existence in the harshest climate of the world, Rep. Mary Peltola took the middle path, neither advocating strongly for Alaska’s economy, nor declaring herself on the side of the environmentalists who want to crush it. She played it safe, unwilling to say anything that might offend her base.

Wednesday’s hearing on the Alaska’s Right to Produce Act, which would roll back Biden’s ban on exploration and development of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, brought out the likes of New York Democrat Rep;. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a leader of The Squad, who argued on behalf of the Gwich’in people.

Although the Right to Produce bill is supported by all three members of Alaska’s congressional delegation, Peltola took the approach of appeasement to environmentalists, who are backing her campaign:

“And I do want to say that I have not been 100 percent pleased with all interactions with administration. But I think that this administration has shown Alaskans in deference with, in terms of Willow, the largest oil project that our state or nation has seen in decades. This is — we felt like this was a step in the right direction. And I think it’s unfortunate that people of the North Slope were not invited to have a discussion or no responses were given when overtures were made. But in order to get back on track, I think that it would be good to hear some constructive thoughts. I’d love to hear from each of you on how we can do a better job as Alaskans, making sure that industry, Native people and environmental folks can collaborate and work together, and that’s the only way we’re going to get anywhere,” she said, taking no stand that might offend her Democrat base.

Peltola continued to defend the Biden Administration and speak in veiled terms about climate change: “No one is coming to save us. And we do have a lot of concerns. And Alaska really does see firsthand concerning environmental issues and it’s warming, but it’s also marine debris, marine traffic. I mean, we are really seeing a new level of encroachment that we haven’t felt this firsthand before in any generation in Alaska.”

But Charles Lampe, president of Kaktovik Inupiat Corp., argued on behalf of Native Alaskans: “My community unapologetically supports the leasing program. Many people try to steer the debate to caribou. For Kaktovik, it’s about our people and having an economy to survive.”

Congress needs to fulfill its promises made to Alaska over 40 years ago, Lampe said. “We will not succumb to eco-colonialism and become conservation refugees on our own land. The people have every right to pursue economic, social and cultural self-determination. The laws of the U.S. should support indigenous populations, not interfere with these basic human and political rights.”

Others attending the House hearing to advocate for an Arctic economy were Nagruk Harcharek, the president of Voice of the Arctic Iñupiat; Josiah Patkotak, mayor of the North Slope Borough; Morrie Lemen, the executive director of the Iñupiat Community of the Arctic Slope; and Nathan Gordon Jr., vice president of the Native Village of Kaktovik, Arctic Slope Director of Natural Resources Doreen Leavitt,  and Anaktuvuk Pass Mayor Lilian Stone, all who support a responsible oil and gas industry.

These are some of the same Alaska Native leaders who have repeatedly tried to get a meeting with Sec. of Interior Deb Haaland, but have been rebuffed, as Haaland pursues the Biden agenda of “no more oil,” except in her home state of New Mexico, which under Biden is now second in production after Texas.

At the end of the hearing in the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources subcommittee Chairman Pete Stauber (R-Minn.) spoke to the “terrible repercussions” of the Biden Administration on Alaska:

“Alaska has been blessed with vast deposits of oil and natural gas that can unleash economic prosperity in Alaska and help restore American energy dominance,” he said. “The Biden Administration’s decision to take these resources offline without consulting with the Alaska Native communities most impacted by this decision has had terrible repercussions for the state of Alaska and the entire United States, including a loss in jobs and higher energy costs. President Biden’s ‘anywhere but America, any worker but American’ energy agenda must come to an end, which is why I was proud to introduce the Alaska’s Right to Produce Act. By reversing Biden’s harmful actions on Alaska’s North Slope, this legislation will empower Alaska Native communities and energy workers to responsibly develop these resources rather than continue our unstable reliance on hostile foreign adversaries. I am grateful to the witnesses who testified on the need for this legislation during today’s subcommittee hearing, and I promise to continue fighting until this crucial legislation is enacted.”

Alaska’s Rep. Peltola, however, focused her efforts on another piece of legislation, which would reintroduce buffalo to reservation land in other states.

“I’m proud to join a group of bipartisan legislators to reintroduce the Indian Buffalo Management Act–a bipartisan bill my predecessor supported–to restore Indigenous conservation and protection of buffalo,” Peltola said online, referring to the late Congressman Don Young, while ignoring the visit of Alaska Native leaders to the U.S. Capitol.