The kiosks that heralded convenience and modern travel are being phased out by Alaska Airlines, because, well, they are old-fashioned.
The removal of the kiosks are part of a $2.5 billion plan to upgrade passenger technology in airport lobbies, starting with the larger airports. Alaska Airlines is nudging everyone to use the company’s app on smart phones, and speed up the check-in process at the airport.
The airline has a goal of getting passengers from the lobby to security in five minutes or less. To achieve this, Alaska Airlines encourages passengers to check-in and secure their boarding passes digitally before arriving at the airport using the Alaska Airlines app or other online methods, rather than printing out tickets. Many passengers are already doing this and kiosks may be more of a relic as the years go on.
“We realized the majority of our guests were doing most of the kiosk actions on their own phones and we could reduce the congestion in our airports. Alaska was the first airline to introduce kiosks more than 20 years ago, and we’ll be the first airline to remove them,” said Charu Jain, Alaska Airlines Senior Vice President of Innovation and Merchandising.
The check-in kiosks will be replaced with iPad stations, where passengers can pay for checked bags and print bag tags. The airline later intends to transition to a fully self-service experience for baggage drop-off. By the end of 2023, most of Alaska’s airports will have the new bag tag stations in place, the airline said.
By spring of 2024, the airline plans to introduce self-service bag drop-off stations, where passengers can scan their face, identification, and bags before placing their bags on a conveyor belt to be loaded onto the aircraft. Alaska Airlines will continue to have customer service associates available at the airports for assistance.
Alaska Airlines is also experimenting with electronic bag tags through a partnership with Amsterdam-based startup Bagtag.
Bagtag allows travelers to purchase reusable electronic tags and attach them at home, using their phone to connect them with the airline’s baggage system.
The World Health Organization recently announced that healthy kids and teenagers probably don’t need to get a Covid-19 vaccination.
Yet the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention still states in its “vaccine” guidelines that children six months and older should get the jab, despite the updated WHO recommendation. This CDC recalcitrance is despite the increasing knowledge that there are adverse risks for children from getting the jab.
After President Joe Biden announced in January that the pandemic will end on May 11, public service announcements are still being aired imploring Americans to get the jab for their health and the health of others.
The craziness goes even further in a small private school in Ithaca, New York. This school kept all the Covid mandates in place after the end of New York’s mask mandate. Why? Because the teachers demanded it.
We know that masks don’t work and Covid is a near-zero risk for children. At this school, not only are the children still masked, but they are not even allowed to speak during lunch. They can remove their masks long enough to take a bite, but they are forbidden from communicating. The children have developed a sort of sign language to get by.
Mainstream media and the federal government have pushed this fear agenda for a long time. We had to wear masks, we had to be six feet apart, and family members couldn’t go to family dinners if they weren’t vaxed or boosted. Most disturbing of all, people were forced to die alone in hospitals.
In a January, 2022Rasmussen Report, a majority of Democrats wanted to enforce restrictive policies and use punitive measures against anyone who dared not get the Covid-19 “vaccination.” These measures included fining people who didn’t submit to the vax, locking them up in their homes, sending them to unvaccinated camps, and worst of all removing their children from these folks temporarily.
Chris Talgo and the Heartland Institute commissioned this poll, which found that about half of likely voters oppose Biden’s vaccine mandates. These mandates appeared to be more about how to increase the federal government’s power than to stopping the spread of Covid.
As Biden made the Covid shutdown activists happy, the government failed to evaluate what happened to people who religiously wore masks because either the government or their job mandated it.
An article published just recently in the Journal of Public Health provided a systematic review and analysis of what happened to people who wore masks. The research did not focus on why the masks were useless, instead it looked at what side-effects occurred.
The results weren’t good for the mask zealots. The research review demonstrated“mask wearers had decreased blood oxygen, increased blood CO2, increased heart rates, higher blood pressure, more difficulty breathing, higher skin temperatures, and higher reports of headaches, acne, skin irritations, feeling overheated, voice disorders, and dizziness.”
It’s hard to believe in America, where we prize free speech and freedom of choice, we have had this horrendous response mostly due to the fear the federal government managed to induce in its citizens through the media.
The researchers found even wearing masks in the short-term can cause long-term medical problems. They stated “Long Covid” may be the result of mask wearing—not recovering from Covid.
Nearly 40% of main Long-Covid-19 symptoms overlap with mask-related complaints and symptoms. These include fatigue, dyspnea, confusion, anxiety, depression, tachycardia, dizziness, and headache.
Dr. Meryl Nass, a true heroine of the alternative early treatment movement, had her medical license suspended in January of 2022. She had to undergo a mental health evaluation and drug and alcohol evaluation for spreading “misinformation” about treatment for Covid. She is still legally battling with the state of Maineto get her license back.
What was Dr. Nass’ crime that caused such drastic actions? At the start of the pandemic, she offered consultations to patients who were afraid they had Covid. None of those patients complained about the care she gave them.
But the letters to the board stated she was providing “misinformation.”
Even as the truth comes out concerning the lies or manipulation the government used to gain power over us proves to be false, good people are still being persecuted for their beliefs. And we are still being held hostage.
Don’t worry. The government learned a lot from these last few years. It learned it can control every aspect of your life by making you fearful. And it learned how to effectively use the media to control what we hear and read. No debate is allowed.
We learned one basic thing: Fear is a powerful tool to control people.
It worked before. Will we let them do it to us again?
On the same day that Fox News Media announced it had agreed to “part ways” with news show host Tucker Carlson, Don Lemon has been fired as a news anchor at CNN.
Earlier this month, Variety published a reportaccusing Lemon of misogyny for the way he has treated female coworkers over the years. He also took fire earlier this year for saying on the air that Republican White House contender Nikki Haley is too old to run for president. She is 51.
“Nikki Haley isn’t in her prime, sorry,” Lemon said. “When a woman is considered to be in her prime — in her 20s, 30s and maybe her 40s.”
Lemon announced the news of his firing on Twitter and lashed out at CNN: “I am stunned. After 17 years at CNN I would have thought someone in management would have had the decency to tell me directly.”
Instead, CNN gave the news to his agent, who relayed the message to him.
“At no time was I ever given any indication that I would not be able to continue to do the work I have loved at the network,” Lemon wrote. “It is clear there are larger issues at play.”
Two years ago, CNN fired Chris Cuomo, after it was discovered that he was helping his brother, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, fight allegations of sexual misconduct. Cuomo sued CNN for $125 million for wrongful termination, and that case is still pending.
Fox News Media announced on Monday that Tucker Carlson, who hosts the most popular news talk show on television, has left the network.
“Fox News Media and Tucker Carlson have agreed to part ways. We thank him for his service to the network as a host and prior to that as a contributor, ” the network said in a statement. His final show was on Friday. The 8 pm eastern time slot will be filled by a rotating lineup until a new host is named, the company said. The news hour will be called “Fox News Tonight.”
Last week, Fox News settled a defamation lawsuit with Dominion Voting Systems for $757.5 million.
On Saturday night, Carlson gave a rousing speech at the 50th anniversary of the Heritage Foundation’s gala dinner in Washington, D.C., where he may have given a clue that he was out at Fox, where he has hosted Tucker Carlson Tonight since 2016.
“But you look around and you see some of the people who have really paid a heavy price for telling the truth. They are passed out of their groups, but they do it anyway. I look at those people with the deepest possible admiration,” he said, in speaking about the urge to shut down speaking the truth in order to be accepted by the herd.
Carlson was set to appear as a witness in the lawsuit Dominion filed against Fox, but the lawsuit was settled on the eve of the trial.
Carlson in 2010 was a co-founder of the news site, The Daily Caller, which features columns on Sunday by Suzanne Downing, publisher of Must Read Alaska.
Last week, Dan Bongino announced on his podcast Thursday that he was leaving Fox News, saying that he and Fox failed to reach agreement on a new contract.
“It’s no big conspiracy, I promise you. You’re going to read a thousand left-wing articles about some nonsense, and I’m guaranteeing you on my reputation, it is all made up. It’s a simple contract thing, and that’s it. It is no more complicated than that,” he said. But by Monday, the situation looks more like a purge than a simple contract standoff.
On Monday, HB 105 is the topic of another public hearing in the House Education Committee, where it has been greatly opposed by some teachers, LGBTQ advocates, and others who want to protect the sexual education curriculum and ensure parents are not advised about it in Alaska public schools.
The testimony, however, is actually going in favor of HB 105, but many who favor it are writing in their comments, rather than subjecting themself to possible violence from LGBTQ advocates by showing up at the hearings.
Another bill, which adds gender identity to protected classes, will be heard in Senate Labor and Commerce.
More tips about supplying your voice to the process at this link.
Other public testimony opportunities on Monday and Tuesday:
For readers following the tragic “AK Mom” story, I’m sad to report that George’s 16th birthday and third consecutive Easter away from home passed without Gov. Mike Dunleavy reuniting the family.
Dunleavy’s inaction means that AK Mom must next go through a long, drawn-out trial to get her children back. The trial starts this week, but Judge Kirsten Stohler has scheduled three weeks of trial days spread out over the next three calendar months. The trial won’t conclude until July.
The Office of Children’s Services will be represented by the Alaska Attorney General. AK Mom will be represented by a sole practitioner. The Guardian Ad Litem, the Knik Tribe, and lawyers representing the children through the Office of Public Advocacy will also participate.
No jury will be involved. It is up to Judge Stohler to determine if AK Mom’s children get to return home. The judge has not yet determined if the press will have access to the trial.
Has anything changed in the last 30 years?
Alaska legislators should be closely scrutinizing the actions of the Office of Children’s Services, Guardian Ad Litem, and Office of Public Advocacy during this trial. It’s a rare opportunity to gain valuable insight into the motivations of a dysfunctional foster care system that has challenged our Legislature for decades.
In 1990, a Family Law Review Task Force, chaired by Sen. Jack Coghill, held hearings in which 280 Alaska citizens submitted public or confidential testimony. The task force’s final report was particularly harsh on these State family service providers stating, “generally speaking, they are viewed as not accountable for their actions, more interested in protecting the agencies than in providing adequate services, nonresponsive, obstructionist and disingenuous.”
Why is the Alaska attorney general going after AK Mom with both barrels loaded?
I suspect one of the State’s objectives in the trial is to muscle out a win or favorable settlement, and leverage that outcome to discredit the federal class action suit filed against Office of Children’s Services last summer. AK Mom’s children represent 5 of the 13 children in that class action lawsuit, or 40% of the named children.
This indirect assault on the class action lawsuit could help the State avoid a formidable legal team with deep pockets in federal court. That team consists of 11 lawyers from three Alaska law firms and a national non-profit that advocates for children in dysfunctional foster care systems like Alaska’s.
The Attorney General must try to prove Office of Children’s Services is a better parent than AK Mom.
His attorneys will try to steer Judge Stohler’s attention away from the many appalling facts MRAK readers are by now familiar with – the children being split up from each other, 60 different placements including extended care in motel rooms by a transport company, multiple runaway attempts, bad grades, etc.
The State could have a tactical advantage in presenting their case first. If Stohler allows it, Office of Children’s Services officials will have days to nitpick mistakes they perceive AK Mom has made raising five children she adopted with fetal alcohol syndrome (FASD) over the last 17 years. Much of that evidence will likely be hearsay contained in notes authored by Office of Children’s Services employees, some with axes to grind against AK Mom.
Then the State will bring in experts and other witnesses who claim the kids are doing better with Office of Children’s Services. Most of these witnesses may receive economic benefit through the State. Money can persuade loyalty; Office of Children’s Services has a lot of cash and can also influence other government agencies.
The discernment of truth can often be assisted by focusing on what’s missing. In this case, who’s the State not calling as witnesses?
Will the Attorney General call the many church members, teachers, friends, and even complete strangers, who observed the family closely and feel AK Mom was very loving and responsible towards her children? Will he call the Office of Children’s Services social worker who understood FASD and was supportive of AK Mom, but who was removed from the case when Office of Children’s Services took the children?
Much ado about nothing
The truth in this case is simple. From the perspective of people who understand the effects of FASD on children, AK Mom’s family was doing remarkably well. Even people who don’t know much about FASD noticed big behavioral improvements after a new medical management provider utilized “Genomind” testing. The kids were loved and were happy. They were doing well in school. It was a compelling story of hope for FASD children.
However, some of the Office of Children’s Services personnel and members of the established medical industrial complex wouldn’t even acknowledge that AK Mom is a registered nurse who understands FASD better than they do. They didn’t like it when AK Mom stood up to them and didn’t go along with their opinions. Their animosity towards AK Mom grew to the point where they decided to teach her a ruthless lesson at the expense of the health and safety of her five children.
Judge Stohler can save a ton of court time and State resources by cutting directly to the chase and focusing on the actions of the State and medical providers in the months leading up to the removal. By taking this approach, Stohler can more quickly return AK Mom’s children to the safety of their home. There is an established risk that something bad could happen to these kids between now and July.
SCAN’s history of reckless Munchausen claims
My original article about AK Mom outlined the role that Dr. Barbara Knox and the Alaska CARES facility played in taking the five children. The danger Knox presented to Alaskan families has been well documented and she is long gone, but Office of Children’s Services still dug in their heels.
Knox had help from down south. The initial allegation of Munchausen, or medical abuse, came out of a group within Seattle Children’s Hospital known as Safe Child and Adolescent Network, or SCAN.
SCAN’s former Medical Director is Kenneth Feldman, a doctor of considerable controversy in the Pacific Northwest. Feldman was involved in SCAN’s Munchausen claims against AK Mom and later recommended that all five children have no contact with her. OCS then used these allegations to try avoiding important federal law known as the Indian Child Welfare Act.
Carol Smith, a reporter for the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, wrote a pair of articles in 2002 about multiple cases where Feldman was involved in breaking up families with unsubstantiated claims of medical abuse. One mother who lost a child to a bad diagnosis by Feldman called it “medical stalking.”
According to Smith, Dr. Michael Weinraub testified that Feldman was reckless in his medical consultation, that he had a preconceived opinion of abuse, and that he based his recommendation on limited records.
Dr. Gil Kliman, a San Francisco psychiatrist who testified against Feldman in several lawsuits was quoted in a Smith article as saying, “It looks to me like there is a big epidemic of Munchausen surrounding Dr. Feldman.”
The rate of Feldman’s allegations so alarmed Kliman that he filed a complaint with Washington authorities citing the “error rate Dr. Feldman has in making this diagnosis, and the frequency with which the children have other causes for their conditions”.
Insisting on in-person medical visits for autistic kids with FASD triggers medical abuse claims
SCAN claims it got involved because of complaints from Seattle Children’s Hospital staff that AK Mom was insisting on in-person visits instead of Zoom calls for her two autistic boys during the Covid outbreak.
What has this world come to when a mother’s insistence on in-person medical visits triggers concern of abuse by a hospital? Especially for autistic boys with FASD and attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, who don’t do well on Zoom calls.
The Alaska Governor’s Council on Disabilities publishes a pamphlet entitled “9 Core Messages: What Everyone Should Know About Prenatal Alcohol Exposure”. Regarding attention and focus, it lists the following challenges about FASD children: “Easily distracted, memory challenges, difficulty staying attentive or engaged.”
Making Seattle Children’s Hospital’s behavior even more egregious is that just a few months earlier, an Alaska medical provider had responded to the family’s behavior on a Zoom call to claim AK Mom was mentally injuring and physically abusing each of her children. These 10 allegations were later found to be not substantiated by the Office of Children’s Services social worker who fortuitously understood FASD.
Can anybody blame AK Mom for insisting on in-person visits from that time forward?
I urge every participant in the trial, doctors and psychiatrists included, to read up on FASD immediately. One study found that only 34% of pediatricians feel prepared to manage and coordinate the treatment of FASD. Another study found that 82% of psychologists reported being unprepared to manage people with FASD.
After the staff complaints, SCAN says they reviewed Seattle Children’s Hospital medical records that led to their Munchausen claims. However, there’s plenty of evidence in those records that didn’t support this allegation.
For instance, a 2019 letter from a Seattle Children’s Hospital psychiatrist ended with, “I hope you will join me in supporting this remarkable family guided by [AK Mom] single handedly raising these remarkable boys to reach their full development potential.”
But what makes SCAN’s action most absurd is their admission they didn’t review all the medical records involved. It’s very disturbing that SCAN doctors not only recommended an Alaska family be broken up based on limited information, but then lobbied to prevent AK Mom from having any contact with her children.
Was the Munchausen allegation a ruse intended to avoid the Indian Child Welfare Act?
The Indian Child Welfare Act lists several requirements that the Office of Children’s Services must satisfy before removing an Alaska Native child from their home. One is satisfying a court that active efforts have been made to provide remediation services and rehabilitative programs designed to prevent the breakup of the family.
It appears to be a slam dunk case that the Office of Children’s Services broke this federal law. If the Office of Children’s Services was concerned about Munchausen, they had a duty to engage remediation services and rehabilitative programs for the family before breaking them up.
Office of Children’s Services clearly didn’t do this.
The Indian Child Welfare Ac also requires that no placement can be ordered in the absence of a determination, by clear and convincing evidence, that staying in the home will result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child. The original judge in AK Mom’s case, Kari Kristiansen, appears to have violated this duty.
For example, consider Karen, who was three months shy of her 13th birthday. Karen didn’t have autism, so she wasn’t being seen by Seattle Children’s Hospital doctors. On the night of her removal by Office of Children’s Services, Karen thought she’d be able to stay with her mother because she wasn’t on any medications. What clear and convincing evidence did Kristiansen find that Karen would sustain serious emotional or physical damage remaining with AK Mom?
Office of Children’s Services and its army of lawyers have bullied AK Mom for two long years. Hopefully, Judge Stohler will begin the trial focusing on SCAN’s troubling conduct and the Office of Children’s Services’ avoidance of Indian Child Welfare Act. She can return the children to the safety of their home this week.
David Ignell was born and raised in Juneau, where he currently resides. He holds a law degree from University of San Diego and formerly practiced as a licensed attorney in California. He has experience as a volunteer analyst for the California Innocence Project, and is currently a forensic journalist and author of a recent book on the Alaska Grand Jury.
A remarkable segment of Tucker Carlson’s speech at the Heritage Foundation 50th anniversary gala dinner in Washington, D.C. on Friday, which closed out two days of a summit on the political realities of our era:
Carlson: I would just say two things about the present moment…
The first is, you look around and you see so many people break under the strain, the downward pressure of whatever it is that we’re going through. The disdain and sadness as you see people you know become Quislings, you see them revealed as cowards, going along with the New New Thing, and it is always a silly thing, saying things you know they don’t believe because they want to keep their jobs… and you’re so disappointed in people.
You realize the herd instinct is the strongest instinct, it may be stronger than the hunger and sex instincts. The instinct, which is inherent, to be like everybody else, not to be cast out of the group and shunned. It takes over in moments like this, it is harnessed by bad people in times like this to produce uniformity. You see people go along with this and you lose respect for them.
That has happened to me at scale over the past three years. I’m not mad at people, I’m just sad and disappointed. How could you go along with this, you know it is not true but you’re saying it anyway. Really, you’re putting your pronouns on your email? It’s ridiculous. what does that even mean? You’re saying things you can’t define.
“LGBTQIA+” Who’s the plus? The plus is invited on my show any time. Find a plus and I’ll interview him. What’s it like to be a plus? Am I a plus? I can do addition, does that make me a plus? No one even knows what it is, and the whole society… So you reach that place and you feel… I am so upset by some people I love and the country I revere… You see the sadness happening.
But, there is a countervailing force at work always. There is a counterforce to the badness, it is called goodness! And you see it in people. So for every ten people who are putting he/him in their electronic J.P Morgan email signatures, there’s one person who says, “No, I’m not doing that, sorry. It’s a betrayal of what I think is true… of my autonomy. I am a free citizen and I’m not doing that, and there’s nothing you can do to me to make me do it. And I hope it won’t come to that, but if it does come to that, here I am.” It’s Paul on trial. Here I am.
And you see that in people and it is a completely unexpected assortment of people… But because I’m sort of paid to predict things I think about what connects certain outcomes before they occurred. In this case, there is no thread I can find that connects all of the people who’ve popped up in my life to be that lone, brave person in the crowd who says, No thank you.”
You could not have known who these people are. They don’t fit a common profile… Some of them are people I despised on political grounds just a few years ago. You might know their names but I don’t want to wreck your dinner by telling you who they are. But there is in one case someone who I made fun of on television, and certainly in my private life in vulgar ways, who is really the embodiment of everything I found repulsive, who in the middle of Covid decided they’re not going along with it. And once you say one true thing and stick with it, other true things occur to you.
The truth is contagious. Lying is, but the truth is as well. And the second you decide to tell the truth about something you are filled with this power from somewhere else. Try it! Tell the truth about something. You’ll feel it every day. The more you tell the truth, the stronger you become. That’s completely real. It is measurable in the way that you feel.
And of course, the opposite is also true. The more you lie, the weaker and more terrified you become. We all know that feeling. You lie about something and all of a sudden you are a prisoner of that lie. You are diminished by it… Drug and alcohol use is the same way. It makes you weak and afraid.
But you look around and you see some of the people who have really paid a heavy price for telling the truth. They are passed out of their groups, but they do it anyway. I look at those people with the deepest possible admiration…
But how about if you’re a senior vice president at Citibank and you’re making four million a year… you need this job, and your whole sector is kind of collapsing. There is no incentive for you to tell the truth about anything. You just go into reeducation meetings and go, “Oh, yeah, diversity is our strength. Equity in the capital markets. All right!”
So if you are the one guy who refuses to say that, you are a hero, in my opinion. And I know some of them, in fact, my job is to interview them. And I sit back and look at these people, and I give them more credit than people who display physical courage, which is often impulsive… Every man fantasizes about what he would do when the building catches fire and you hear a baby crying. You rush inside. No one is trained to stand up in the middle of a DEI meeting at Citibank and say it is nonsense. And the people who do that — they have my deepest admiration. Their example gives me hope.
That’s the first thing… In this profound moment of widespread destruction of the institutions that people who share our views built… we can also see rising in the distance new institutions built by new people who are every bit as brave as the people who came before us. Amen!
Here’s the second thing, which is that it might be time to start to reassess the terms we use to describe what we’re watching. When I started at Heritage, the presumption was a very Anglo-American assumption, that the debates we’re having are rational debates about the way to get to mutually agreed upon outcomes. So, like, we all want the country to be more prosperous and free and people to be less oppressed or whatever. So we’re going to argue about tax rates… but the objective is the same. so we write our papers and they right their papers and may the best paper win.
I don’t think that’s what we’re watching now at all. I don’t think we’re watching a debate over how to get to the best outcome. That’s completely wrong… There is no way to assess the transgender-ist movement with that mindset. Policy papers don’t cover it at all. If you have people who say, “I have an idea, let’s castrate the next generation. Let’s sexually mutilate the children.”
I’m sorry, that’s not a political debate. What? It has nothing to do with politics. What’s the outcome we’re desiring here? an androgynous population? Are we arguing for that? I don’t think anyone could defend that as a positive outcome.
But the weight of the government and a lot of corporate interests are behind that. Well, what is that? It’s not rational. If you say you think abortion is always bad, or sometimes it is necessary. That’s a debate I’m familiar with. But if you’re telling me that abortion is a positive good, what are you saying? Well, you’re arguing for child sacrifice… I have compassion for everyone involved, but when the Treasury Secretary comes up and says you can help the economy by getting an abortion — well, that’s like an Aztec principle, actually. There’s not a society in history that didn’t practice human sacrifice. not one, I checked… It wasn’t just the Mesoamericans, it was everybody. So that’s what that is.
So what’s the point of child sacrifice? There’s no policy goal entwined with that. That’s a theological phenomenon. That’s kind of the point I’m making. none of this makes sense in conventional political terms. When people or crowds of people, or the largest crowd of people, the federal government, the largest organization in human history, decide that the goal is to destroy things, destruction for its own sake, let’s tear it down — what you’re watching is not a political movement, it is evil.
The Democrats are celebrating. Anchorage Assembly will certify the April 4 municipal election during its Tuesday night meeting and administer the oath of office to the new Assembly members, who will then take their seats on the governing body that is managing the affairs, setting the tax rates, and expanding the homeless industrial complex into a full-blown crisis in Alaska’s largest city.
Voter turnout was low, and as the Assembly certifies the election, it appears it will be 65,762 voters out of of 235,546 registered voters, for a 28% turnout. The results, still unofficial until certified on Tuesday, are at this link.
Leaving the Assembly is Assembly Chairwoman Suzanne LaFrance, former chairwoman Austin Quinn-Davidson, interim appointed Eagle River Assemblywoman Robin Dern, and interim appointed Assemblyman Joey Sweet. None of them ran for reelection. Pete Peterson will also leave the Assembly, term-limited after three terms.
Scott Myers, above, won a seat on the Assembly.
With the exception of Scott Myers of Eagle River, all the new members are hardcore leftists endorsed by a group that is trying to shut down natural gas in Anchorage, among other things. The Outside dark-money Alaska Centerhad a clean sweep with its endorsed candidates. The group has now turned its focus to taking over the Chugach Electric Association. The Alaska Republican Party had no successes in this election, except for a late and tepid endorsement of Myers.
Questions remain about some procedures at Election Central in Anchorage, with observers filing challenges because unknown thumb drives were inserted into equipment, without anyone checking to see if it had data on it. The complaint is below:
Other concerns raised by observers include that the Assembly has changed some of its rules that will allow Assembly members who won their seats to certify their own election results. Essentially, members can vote on anything that has to do with an election they were in, a rule that the Assembly changed in the middle of the election cycle.
Results that will be certified on Tuesday
Downtown: Assemblyman Chris Constant will serve a third term, winning with 64.85% of the vote. In addition to the Alaska Center and Democrats, he is supported by the LGBTQ Victory Fund, an Outside special interest group.
Eagle River: Scott Myers will serve his first term, winning with 59.21% of the vote. Appointed member Robin Dern did not seek election for the seat formerly held by now-Rep. Jamie Allard. Myers is the only incoming conservative, bringing the total to three out of the 12 who serve.
West Anchorage: Anna Brawley will serve her first term, replacing Austin Quinn-Davidson. Brawley won with 56.63% of the vote. She is a big-government union choice and her company, Agnew-Beck has multiple contracts with the left-run Assembly. Her endorsers include Anchorage Police Department Employees Association PAC, Anchorage Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO, Alaska Laborers Local 341, and Plumbers and Steamfitters Local 367.
Midtown: Assemblyman Felix Rivera will serve a third term, winning 54.28% of the vote. He successfully beat off a recall attempt in 2021 and is championed by the LGBTQ Victory Fund.
East Anchorage: Karen Bronga will serve her first term, having won 59.33% of the vote for Pete Peterson’s seat. She was endorsed by Forrest Dunbar, Pete Peterson, and numerous Democrat officials in Alaska.
East Anchorage: George Martinez will be sworn in for his first term, after winning 56.68% of the vote for the seat vacated by now-Sen. Forrest Dunbar. The appointed interim member, Joey Sweet, did not run for the seat. Martinez comes from the Occupy Wall Street movement in New York City.
South Anchorage: As Suzanne LaFrance demurred from running for a third term, Zac Johnson won and will be sworn in to represent South Anchorage after winning 50.70% of the vote. He is endorsed by many unions, including AFL-CIO, Teamsters, ASEA public employees, APEA, AFT education unions, police and firefighter unions.
School Board: Dave Donley won reelection to a third term, with 57.52% of the vote areawide.
In 2021, Bed Bath & Beyond made the decision to go with the company Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) flow, and become a top 10 ESG retail employer by 2030. It made it as far as 2023.
The company focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion goals to reach at least 50% women representation and at least 25% racial and/or ethnic diversity at all levels in the workplace. It focused on its carbon footprint instead of its bottom line. It ignored business threats from Amazon, the online retailer. And performance was a lower priority than equity.
Two years later, the company has spiraled downward and today filed for bankruptcy with the goal of closing all of its stores unless it can find a buyer during Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. The end result of Chapter 11 is often Chapter 7 dissolution, and in both cases, suppliers and contractors often get the short straw and are not paid what they are owed. Thus, small mom-and-pop companies will feel the ripple effect of this news, as will thousands of the people who work at the company.
Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) is a new tool that the financial investment sector is using to screen investments based on how well company policies perform as social leaders, according to a certain set of criteria.
ESG is controversial because publicly traded companies that adopt it shift their focus from their responsibility to investors. Instead, they align with ever-shifting social concerns — an arena where the goalposts are constantly moving and are ill-defined.
Alaska’s one Bed Bath & Beyond store, located on Dimond Blvd. in Anchorage, will be among the 360 stores that are likely to close, although that may not happen for weeks or months.
“While the Company has commenced a liquidation sale, Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. intends to use the Chapter 11 proceedings to conduct a limited sale and marketing process for some or all of its assets. The Company has filed motions with the Court seeking authority to market Bed Bath & Beyond and buybuy BABY as part of an auction pursuant to section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code. Alongside these efforts, the Company is also strategically managing inventory to preserve value. In the event of a successful sale, the Company will pivot away from any store closings needed to implement a transaction. The Company believes this dual-path process will best maximize value,” the company wrote in the statement it released today.
