Tuesday, April 29, 2025
Home Blog Page 6

Michael Tavoliero: Alaska’s carbon reality and why we must reject the green fallacy

By MICHAEL TAVOLIERO

Let’s start with a simple but uncomfortable truth: If you believe that carbon dioxide (CO₂) is an existential threat to the planet, Alaska isn’t the problem — Alaska is the solution. And yet, in a breathtaking act of self-sabotage, some members of our Legislature are trying to make us the scapegoat anyway.

Let’s break it down in numbers that even a Washington, D.C. bureaucrat could understand:

  • The average mature tree absorbs about 48 pounds of CO₂ every year.
  • Alaska has roughly 31.75 billion trees.
  • That means our forests soak up about 691 million metric tonnes (MT) of carbon annually.
  • Alaska’s total carbon emissions? About 42 million MT per year.
  • That’s right — we clean 16 times more carbon than we create.

Globally, Alaska contributes just 0.1% of total CO₂ emissions while removing 1.65% of global emissions — and our people make up a mere 0.009% of the planet’s population.

By any honest metric, Alaska isn’t the climate criminal the environmental left makes it out to be. We are the unsung heroes of carbon capture. Yet rather than celebrate that, radical activists and their political enablers want to strap Alaska’s economy to the wrecking ball of Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) and a suicidal obsession with wind and solar projects that don’t work, don’t pay, and don’t serve the people they’re supposed to help.

Where Is the Logic?

The premise is straightforward: we are told that human CO₂ emissions are heating the planet to catastrophic levels, and that every ton emitted must be urgently offset. Fine — let’s assume that’s true. By that logic, Alaska should be heralded as a global champion. We should be receiving billions in carbon credits annually — not fines, not penalties, and certainly not regulations designed to cripple our industries and impoverish our people.

But that’s not what’s happening. Instead, we’re being punished, bullied, and coerced into adopting unreliable, expensive, and destructive energy policies. All while the real carbon mega-emitters — China, India, and even the industrial giants of the Lower 48 — churn out pollution at staggering rates with zero accountability.

This isn’t science.
This is religion.
And it’s a false religion, complete with its own commandments, high priests, indulgences, and heretics.

At its heart, this obsession with Alaska’s “carbon footprint” isn’t about saving the planet. It’s about control — political, economic, and social control — over what was once the freest and most resource-rich frontier in America.

The Government Is the Problem, Not the Solution

Consider what’s happening right now:

  • The Legislature is pushing two RPS bills that would force Alaska utilities to buy unreliable non-firm energy like wind and solar — despite decades of evidence that these sources raise costs and weaken grid reliability.
  • Fire Island Wind, hailed as Southcentral Alaska’s green miracle, is now the most expensive regularly used power source in the region — and that’s based on a decade-old contract. New wind generation would likely cost 140% more.
  • Hydroelectric expansion projects like the Dixon Diversion and Watana Dam — proven, stable, and cost-effective — are being sidelined in favor of ideologically driven, federally subsidized solar and wind experiments.
  • Coal resources west of Skwentna, once eyed for strategic development, are left buried while activists demand more expensive imports from out of state.

Meanwhile, the federal government, under the banner of “carbon reduction,” continues to lock up Alaska’s lands, kill projects, and deny permits — all while depending on Alaska’s trees to quietly scrub their carbon emissions for free.

This is not environmental stewardship.
This is economic sabotage under the false flag of climate virtue.

The Logical Fallacy: Sacrificing Alaska to Save the World?

Let’s expose the fallacy clearly:

If Alaska already removes vastly more CO₂ than it emits, then further “reducing” our emissions would have no meaningful impact on global carbon levels. None. Zero. Zilch.

Yet we are being told — over and over — that we must “do our part” by sabotaging our own economy, raising energy prices, and turning our communities into powerless eco-serfs.

It’s like asking the janitor who already mops the entire building to also pay for the building’s cleaning supplies out of his own pocket — while the actual polluters and litterbugs get tax breaks.

It’s insane.
It’s immoral.
And it’s deliberate.

Alaska Should Be Paid, Not Punished

If carbon capture is worth anything, then Alaska’s forests represent about $33 billion annually in global carbon offsets at the going market rate of $51 per metric tonne. That’s $33 billion that could fund our schools, our roads, our energy infrastructure — and yes, even meaningful, targeted environmental stewardship.

Instead, we get lectured by environmental lobbyists who think Anchorage should look more like Portland, and Fairbanks more like Berkeley.

They want Alaska to be a theme park — a pristine, undeveloped playground for the green elite — while our people live under economic bondage, high energy costs, and a suffocating regulatory regime that kills jobs and hope in equal measure.

If the green left wants to turn Alaska into their personal carbon sink, then it’s time we asked: What’s the price of admission?

A Rallying Cry for Alaska’s Future

Alaskans, it’s time to wake up.

We cannot allow our state to be sacrificed on the altar of a false environmental gospel. We must reject the green colonialism that seeks to chain our future to someone else’s guilt.

We must:

  • Reject any Renewable Portfolio Standard that sacrifices reliability and affordability for ideology.
  • Defend our right to develop our natural resources — responsibly, sustainably, and in service of our own people.
  • Demand payment for our carbon capture instead of accepting federal dictates that punish prosperity.
  • Hold politicians accountable — every lawmaker who votes to raise your energy bills in the name of “carbon reduction” needs to be exposed, challenged, and removed from office.

Alaska is not a problem.
Alaska is a gift — to America, to the world, and to the future.

But if we don’t fight for it, they’ll bury us under lies, regulations, and false promises until there’s nothing left but a hollowed-out memory of the Last Frontier.

The time to act is now.
Defend Alaska.
Defend the truth.
And defend the right of Alaskans to build a future rooted in freedom, not fear.

Michael Tavoliero writes for Must Read Alaska.

Breaking: Dan Fagan, columnist at Must Read Alaska and radio host, has passed

It’s with great sadness that we report that Dan Fagan, legendary longtime journalist and radio host in Alaska and Louisiana, has passed after a few months of heart-related issues.

This story will be updated as more information becomes available.

Update: KVNT has set up a message line at 907-802-8812 so that Dan Fagan’s friends and admirers can leave message, share memories, or make tributes to Dan, and the messages will be shared with his family.

The family said that they know he was loved in Alaska, but they are asking for privacy and will hold a private service for the family.

Fagan wrote columns at Must Read Alaska in recent years and was the host of a radio show for KVNT, and before that he hosted a show for 650 KENI. He was a reporter for many years for Channel 2, and he wrote columns for the New Orleans Times Picayune News, NOLA.com, and the Advocate, Louisiana newspapers. He was the originator of The Alaska Standard news blog.

He moved back to New Orleans a few years ago from Anchorage to be closer to his aging mother and care for her in her final years. After her death, he moved to Biloxi, Miss., where, after an 18-month break from broadcasting he returned to radio, broadcasting his show from his home to the KVNT audience in Southcentral Alaska.

He could leave Alaska, but Alaska would never leave him.

He had been struggling with health issues in recent weeks and told this writer that his heart was going out on him but he was not afraid of dying because he knew where he would end up.

“He was a man of strong faith, his whole family was that way,” said Charisse Millett, a close friend in Anchorage.

Fagan was born May 12, 1960 and grew up in Metairie, Louisiana, which is in the New Orleans metropolitan area.

He died in his sleep over the weekend.

Charisse Millett: Dan Fagan, we’ll dance again in heaven

By CHARISSE MILLETT

I’m struggling today with the heartbreaking news of our friend Dan Fagan’s passing.

From the moment his lovely sister asked me to call her early this morning, to right now as I try to put into words what our friendship has meant over the decades, it still doesn’t feel real.

I first met Dan during his early days as a reporter at KTUU. I was drawn to his reporting. He had this devilish twinkle in his eyes and an incredible talent for turning any news story into a must-see report. No matter the topic, Dan always found an angle that drew you in.

At the time, I was working in sales and marketing at Era Aviation. We had started a program to bring Santa Claus to the 18 rural communities outside Bethel that we served. Usually, it wasn’t hard to find someone local to play Santa. But one year, my usual Santa wasn’t available. I thought to myself, I wonder if Dan Fagan would do it? I reached out through a mutual friend, and to my surprise, he said yes!

Arrangements were made: Santa suit packed, tickets booked. Dan knew it would take three days to visit all 18 villages—it was an ambitious schedule, and the weather was beautiful but brutally cold, dipping to -30°F in some places.

I’ll never forget picking up Dan and his cameraman at the Bethel terminal. I was so excited! As he walked in through the -10°F wind, I noticed he wasn’t wearing a jacket. I asked if he’d left it on the plane, and he looked me straight in the eye and said, “Well, I didn’t think I’d need one.” I couldn’t tell if he was joking until he added, “I thought I’d have a Santa coat?” I burst out laughing. “You’re going to use the Santa coat as your jacket the whole trip?” He shrugged, “Yeah, I didn’t think the coat thing all the way through.”

That trip will forever be one of my favorite memories. With each stop, the crowds grew as word spread that Dan Fagan was the Santa. I got to play Mrs. Claus. In Chevak, when we landed in our Twin Otter, we were swarmed by excited kids. One little boy grabbed Dan’s arm, looked him right in the eyes, and exclaimed, “You’re not Santa—you’re DAN FAGAN!” We laughed and tried to convince him otherwise, but that moment was pure magic.

Evenings were filled with laughter, stories from the Era crews, and the camaraderie of a shared mission. Dan hated the cold, dreaded boarding the plane each morning—but he couldn’t wait to greet every child we met.

From that trip on, Dan and I became fast friends. He was witty, wicked smart, and always brought levity to any situation. He was my biggest cheerleader—and my sharpest critic—when I ran for office. We didn’t always agree; sometimes we argued, went weeks without speaking, but we always found our way back to each other with grace and forgiveness.

We shared a deep bond over our faith, our families, and of course—politics. We had so many adventures: taking the train to Seward with his nephew, road-tripping to Homer with our eclectic crew, visiting him in New Orleans with my friend Lynn, and the many hilarious memories on the golf course (those stories are for another time).

He stood by me through life’s highs and lows: when my dad passed, when I got divorced, when I was elected—and unelected. I followed his career from TV to radio and back again, joining him as a caller, a guest host, and sometimes just a listener.

We shared countless stories—about his beloved nieces and nephews, my kids, and eventually my grandkids. He never stopped seeing the beauty in this world. Even when life knocked him down, he always found his way back to hope.

Dan believed deeply in God, in the power of faith and prayer. He never hesitated to speak about God or the miracle of life. His heart was big—for Alaska, for this country, and for his faith.

I’ll never stop smiling about his constant teasing—especially his insistence that I wasn’t funny. “You’re just a big unfunny woman,” he’d say. It was his favorite line, and one of my favorite memories.

We supported each other through the loss of our dads, and when his beloved mother, Tommie, passed. I was so honored to call him my friend.

When I visited him in New Orleans, I heard his mom call him “Danny” with such love. Dan glowed when she said it. I asked her if I could call him that too. She smiled, winked, and said, “Absolutely.”

That’s how I’ll always remember him—Danny—and dancing in the French Quarter. The one and only time I ever saw him dance.

Charisse Millett served in the Alaska House of Representatives for the 25th District from 2009 to 2019. In the 29th Legislature, from, she was the House Majority Leader. In the 30th Legislature, she served the House Minority Leader.

Petroleum-based food dyes must be phased out: RFK Jr.

By THERESE BOUDREAUX | THE CENTER SQUARE

Eight petroleum-based synthetic food dyes must be phased out of the American food supply and medications within the next year, according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Martin Makary.

The dyes, commonly used in ultra-processed foods, are Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, Citrus Red, and Orange B. 

“We are simply asking American food companies to replace petroleum-based food dyes with natural ingredients for American children, just as they already do for children in other countries,” Makary said during a Tuesday news conference. 

Makary echoed concerns from some health groups that petroleum-based dyes are correlated with several health conditions in children, including ADHD, obesity, diabetes, cancer and allergic reactions.

The FDA will revoke authorization of Citrus Red and Orange B within the coming weeks. The food industry has until the end of 2025 to transition from the six other synthetic food dyes listed to natural alternatives.

To assist with the effort, the FDA will accelerate the approval process of natural food colorings.

“For too long, some food producers have been feeding Americans petroleum-based chemicals without their knowledge or consent,” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. said. “These poisonous compounds offer no nutritional benefit and pose real, measurable dangers to our children’s health and development. That era is coming to an end.”

According to the FDA in 2023, “the totality of scientific evidence shows that most children have no adverse effects when consuming foods containing color additives, but some evidence suggests that certain children may be sensitive to them.”

Foods that often contain petroleum-based color additives include sugary drinks and juices, cereals, snack foods, condiments, salad dressings, pudding, jams, yogurt, pickles, and sausages. Popular snacks such as M&M’s, Doritos, and Froot Loops include one or more of these dyes. 

The Center for Science in the Public Interest, which has long advocated for banning petroleum-based food dyes, said the announcement was a victory for food health and safety.

“The most important thing to know about food dyes is that their only purpose is to make food companies money. They are purely cosmetic, serving no nutritional function,” CSPI President Peter Lurie said. “We don’t need synthetic dyes in the food supply, and no one will be harmed by their absence.”

The FDA also revoked authorization for synthetic dye Red No. 3 as a food and drug additive in January, as The Center Square reported.

In light of the FDA’s announcement, the International Dairy Foods Association said it will voluntarily remove petroleum-based dyes from milk, cheese, and yogurt products sold to schools for the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs beginning in 2026.

The National Confectioners Association said safety remains its top priority. Christopher Gindlesperger, the organization’s senior vice president of Public Affairs and Communications, said the FDA and other regulatory agencies have deemed its products safe.

“FDA and regulatory bodies around the world have deemed our products and ingredients safe, and we look forward to working with the Trump Administration and Congress on this issue,” Gindlesperger said in a statement. “We are in firm agreement that science-based evaluation of food additives will help eliminate consumer confusion and rebuild trust in our national food safety system. We follow and will continue to follow regulatory guidance from the authorities in this space, because consumer safety is our chief responsibility and priority.”

Fizzled fast: Democrats fail to override governor’s veto of spendy education bill

In a joint session of the Alaska House and Senate on Tuesday, Democrats’ and unions’ attempt to override the governor’s veto of House Bill 69 failed to get the 40 votes needed.

Democrats stood and pontificated, lectured, and insisted in no uncertain terms that the $1,000 extra to be made permanent per student is an existential need for Alaska schools. But they knew they did not have the votes.

Sen. Lyman Hoffman, a Democrat who dissented from his party, said it’s too much and had no funding. The Legislature needs to come up with the revenue, he said. Hoffman, who is co-chair of Senate Finance Committee, said that HB 69 would cost the state $100 million more per year, and he is worried that next year, the Legislature won’t have the money to pay for it.

Jesse Bjorkman, a Republican who caucuses with Democrats, argued it’s only $77 million, contradicting Hoffman. He asserted that it’s the constitutional duty of the Legislature to pass HB 69.

But after the Democrats stripped all of the accountability pieces from the bill, it ended up just being a blank check, with the final vote to override ending up at 33 to 27.

The old saying, “If you don’t have the votes, talk. If you have the votes, vote” became clear early on in the joint session.

The votes were not going to be there and the Democrat majorities knew it, and true to the old saying, the Democrats (and a few tax-and-spend Republicans) talked and talked and talked.

With lower oil prices, a smaller Permanent Fund dividend, and a drained savings account, the Alaska Legislature is in a pickle. The 90th day of the session came and went on Sunday and the body is now in the home stretch for the 120th day, which is the constitutional deadline three weeks away.

Meanwhile, Gov. Mike Dunleavy has filed new legislation for education, which has his policy pieces in it and a smaller permanent funding formula for education. House Bill 204 was only referred to the House Finance Committee, bypassing the Education Committee, a sign that it may get passed before the 120th day.

David Ignell: Media double standard of ‘due process’ for Kilmar Abrego-Garcia and Thomas Jack Jr.

By DAVID IGNELL

The recent obsession of the mainstream media over the due process rights of illegal aliens turns my stomach.  

Serving as an echo chamber to amplify opinions of Democrat politicians and judges appointed by them, the media has attempted to use the Trump administration’s deportation of 29-year-old Kilmar Abrego-Garcia to portray our President as a reckless and dangerous leader.  

Even Alaska’s Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski has joined ranks with the Democrat choir, declaring “we are all afraid.” 

The media, politicians and judges have gone to great lengths to undermine police evidence and previous judicial findings regarding Abrego-Garcia’s affiliation with the dangerous M-13 gang.  They’ve minimized suspicions of his involvement in human trafficking and even downplayed the 2021 domestic violence restraining order his wife obtained against him claiming he “punched and scratched Petitioner, ripped off shirt, grabbed and bruised Petitioner.” 

In another deportation case, US District Court Judge Brian Murphy, appointed in 2024 by former President Biden, recently ruled that illegal aliens must be given a “meaningful opportunity” to assert their claims.  

It’s upsetting to observe this coordinated outcry for the due process rights of illegal aliens and then think of the silence regarding the injustice endured by Thomas Jack Jr., an Alaskan citizen incarcerated for the past 15 years. 

Jack is in prison because his due process rights were egregiously violated, yet the media and Democrat politicians and judges who know about his case have repeatedly ignored pleas for help.    

Jack, an Alaska Native, was twice denied a jury of his peers. The Tribal Council of the Hoonah Indian Association has specifically found that “reasonable doubt existed in considerable abundance regarding the charges brought against Mr. Jack, and that he would likely have been acquitted of all charges had he been tried by a jury of his peers.” 

The Tribal Council also specifically found that “not having been found guilty by a jury of his peers, Mr. Jack continues to be presumed innocent under the law.”   The Tribal Council has asked for Jack to be freed from prison pending the State’s decision whether to retry him in a fair trial before a jury of his peers. 

Jack’s conviction came only after a Juneau judge forced a patently unfair trial to proceed despite being told by Jack’s newly State-appointed attorney “there is absolutely no way I could be minimally competent to try this case.

Pastor Bob Barton, a decorated military pilot and key witness in the Jack case, has stated: “I expected that the charges against Thomas would be dropped as soon as [the] allegations had been properly investigated.  I never expected Thomas’ case to go to trial and can’t imagine how he could be convicted in a fair trial by an impartial jury.”  

Judge Murphy, do you think Jack was given a “meaningful opportunity” under the Constitution before being sent away to prison for 50 years? 

The cases for Jack’s innocence and denial of due process rights are considerably stronger than Abrego-Garcia’s on both substantive and procedural grounds.  Abrego-Garcia entered the country illegally in 2012.  He doesn’t qualify for asylum because of his several year delay in applying for it.

Abrego-Garcia’s rights are limited to the effect of a Withholding of Removal order, signed in 2019 by an administrative law judge under the direction of the executive branch of the US Department of Justice.  

In that proceeding, Abrego-Garcia agreed the United States has the right to remove him.  The order specifically “confers only the right not to be deported to a particular country, rather than the right to remain in the US.

The Trump Administration not only had the right to deport Abrego-Garcia, but they had his acknowledgment of that right.     

Jack has been incarcerated for 15 years, Abrego-Garcia for less than two months; Jack and his family have suffered considerably more hardship.  Both constitutional and humanitarian principles dictate that Jack should receive as much, if not more, support from the mainstream media, Democrat politicians and their judges.  However, Jack has received none whatsoever. Why is that?

US Sen. Chris Van Hollen provided the brutally honest admission Sunday during his appearance on NBC’s Meet the Press – it’s all political.    

In responding to California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s warning that the Abrego-Garcia situation is the “distraction of the day,” Van Hollen smiled and said:  

“I don’t think it’s ever wrong to stand up for the Constitution. And this is not about one man. If you deny the constitutional rights of one man, you threaten the constitutional rights for everybody. I think Americans are tired of elected officials or politicians who are all finger to the wind — what’s blowing this way, what’s blowing that way.  And anybody who can’t stand up for the Constitution and the right of due process doesn’t deserve to lead.

Van Hollen spoke the truth and, in the process, threw under the bus his fellow Democrat Party politicians in Alaska who have ignored the lack of due process in Jack’s case.  

For years I’ve tried in vain to get Juneau’s state politicians, all Democrats, to do something about Jack’s wrongful conviction.  Sen. Jesse Kiehl, Rep. Sara Hannan, and Rep. Andi Story are all aware of the disturbing facts behind the denial of Jack’s due process rights. Yet they held their fingers up to the wind and ignored the facts. Under Van Hollen’s standard, they don’t deserve to lead.

Matt Claman from Anchorage, currently Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee is another Democrat politician familiar with the denial of due process behind Jack’s wrongful conviction but hasn’t spoke up in protest. He doesn’t deserve to lead.

On Elizabeth Peratrovich Day last year, Jack’s 80-year-old mother, family members and supporters rallied on the steps of the Capitol Building in Juneau holding signs requesting justice. Afterwards, the group fanned out throughout the building and handed out flyers specifying multiple violations of Jack’s due process rights. Democrat politicians again held their fingers to the wind and did nothing. They don’t deserve to lead.  

Van Hollen has now created a most interesting situation for himself, Newsom and other Democrat politicians. They can’t unring the bell. I’ll send a copy of my article to them and encourage you to do the same. Will they show resolve and stand up for the Constitution and Jack’s due process rights?  If not, they don’t deserve to lead either.

David Ignell formerly practiced law in California state and federal courts and was a volunteer analyst for the California Innocence Project. He is currently a forensic journalist and recently wrote a book on the Alaska Grand Jury.

Mike Cronk: NEA-Alaska’s odd unmasking of its own real agenda of denying Alaskans school choice

By SEN. MIKE CRONK

As a 25-year retired teacher, two-year regional school board member, and current state senator, I feel compelled to write about the education struggle in Alaska.

When I reference the National Education Association-Alaska (NEA-Alaska) below, I’m not focusing on the thousands of teachers and support staff who are members. I’m focusing on the leadership.

NEA Alaska President Tom Klaameyer recently penned an op-ed for the Anchorage Daily News, in which he boldly stated, “to be clear, NEA-Alaska did not oppose the policy language ultimately stripped out of HB 69.”

Oddly, I find myself saying thank you and am grateful that he spoke the truth. Of course, NEA-Alaska did not oppose the language in the committee substitute for HB 69, after all, why would they?

For perhaps the first time in recent memory, they’ve proudly demonstrated their allegiance and displayed the truth: This legislation was built for them, by them, and championed by their legislative allies. The committee substitute introduced in the Senate Education Committee read like a blueprint of NEA-Alaska’s long-standing priorities, crafted not for the benefit of all Alaska students, but for the preservation of control by a single political force.

Let’s walk through what was included, just in case anyone has lingering doubts as to their goals:

First, the bill proposed class size mandates that were framed as a reform but were only designed to apply to the Anchorage School District, where NEA-Alaska’s influence is most concentrated. If this was such powerful policy, should it not apply to all districts in the state? While the concept of reducing class sizes is widely supported (myself included), that was never the true intent.

Instead, this provision served as a strategic tool: Draft a mandate that the Anchorage School District cannot realistically meet, compel it to respond with claims of inadequacy, and ultimately funnel additional funding directly to schools with high NEA membership.

The result? A policy that appears student-centered but delivers minimal benefit to learners while reinforcing the financial and political stronghold of the union.

Second, the bill then talked about so-called “open enrollment” language, celebrated by some as a breakthrough. Well folks, to be honest, districts have been using forms of open enrollment for years. It offered no tangible change to student opportunity but served as a political checkbox to try and garner support from the administration who are seeking to codify existing practices into law and preserve this right and desire of many Alaskan’s families.

Third, the charter school provisions in the committee substitute for HB 69 were an exercise in what is called an illusion, to put it mildly. They were packed with fiscal speak, legal language, deadlines, etc. Despite a significant public appetite for expanding school choice, the bill offered a depth of language that did little to strengthen access, support innovation, or protect the autonomy of charter schools. Again, a big swing and miss.

Fourth, the final, but most discriminatory and damaging aspect of HB 69? A direct attack on Alaska’s correspondence families. Under the original bill, families using state-approved correspondence programs could be denied access to their educational allotment if their child opted out of standardized testing.

Let’s be clear: Alaska statute allows all students to opt out of standardized testing. Yet this bill would punish only one group: correspondence families. Meanwhile, all other public school students in the state exercising the same legal right would face no consequence, no funding loss, and no interference in their educational path. The message couldn’t be clearer, this wasn’t about fairness or accountability. It was about control and working through legal speech to take away their choices.

Laughably, in the same article, NEA-Alaska’s president commented that, “Our dream is to support students robustly in all public-school programs… ensuring they have the resources they need regardless of where they choose to learn.”

This is a chapter pulled right out of the NEA’s playbook, present the magical illusion of support, but advocate from an entirely different angle. Can you picture the parade of buttons, protests, articles and lawsuits that they would wage if a bill like this was directed at brick-and-mortar schools, where the majority of their membership work? Can you begin to hear their battle-cry if the same reporting language the bill tried to levy against correspondence programs was applied to all schools within the state? Again, if the policy attempt was so important in nature and beneficial to Alaska’s children, don’t you think the NEA would have been championing for this to apply to all schools? Of course they did not, because it was never intended to serve that purpose.

The fun certainly did not stop there, as the bill initially included the creation of a biased Education Task Force, one lacking balance and objectivity, stacked with NEA-aligned members, giving the union a long-term mechanism to shape public education policy and direct resources toward institutions it favored. Correspondence schools, charter programs, residential schools and alternative models would likely have been excluded from any meaningful support. This task force would have allowed NEA-Alaska to further entrench its influence, redirecting funding to the schools and systems it deemed worthy, while pushing family-centered programs further to the margins.

So yes, Tom Klaameyer, NEA-Alaska president, we genuinely thank you for confirming in writing exactly what Gov. Mike Dunleavy said: HB 69 is your dream bill, designed not for all Alaskan children, but for one system, one narrative, and one organization to maintain its grip on power. Your support for the Senate Education’s CS for HB 69 reveals the truth correspondence and charter families have known for years: NEA-Alaska’s leadership has no interest in serving all students — only those who fit within a model your organization controls. You demonstrated your priorities in the policies you backed, the families you chose to ignore and the silence you displayed on discriminatory language included within that bill.

To the families across Alaska who choose a different path — whether through homeschooling, correspondence programs, residential, or innovative charter options — know this: Your voice matters, your children matter, and your educational choices deserve equal respect under the law. 

To the families whom children attend brick and mortar schools — you and your children also matter — you are being painted a very blurred picture of what is actually happening and people like myself are the ones standing strong in support of your children also.  We can’t continue to do the “same thing” and expect results.  We must demand for policies (like the Reads by 3 legislation) put in place that directly affect outcomes, give the teachers the support they so need to succeed in the classroom, and also make sure the money is being spent directly related to students.

Let me be extremely clear, unlike NEA-Alaska: I do support all forms of public education within the state and will work on behalf of all of Alaska’s children to support their education. I will continue to fight for a public education system that truly supports all students, not just the ones that NEA Alaska approves of. Remember, I was a public-school teacher, my children attended public schools (brick and mortar, charter, and residential) and my district is comprised of all models of education, each with its own intrinsic value to their community and to each child’s life.

It’s time all Alaskan families that value educational choices and value educating students know the truth about the narrative that is being fought in Juneau. It’s time, we Alaskans, take back the education of every single student in Alaska and begin “rebuilding” the educational system in Alaska that values each and every learner no matter how they are educated.

As a lifelong Alaskan and someone who dedicated his life to educating our children, I will stand strong to do exactly that.

Mike Cronk is a state senator, retired teacher of 25 years, 2 year Regional School Board member who represents Senate District R, which encompasses nearly 1/3 of the state from the Copper River Valley north across the Interior to Arctic Village, down the mighty Yukon River to Holy Cross west to McGrath as well as West Fairbanks.

DOGE-Alaska: Anchorage Assembly to award yet another sole-source contract to former mayor’s firm

The Anchorage Assembly is set to approve a $175,000 sole source contract to a former member and campaign contributor during Tuesday night’s meeting.

The award will go to QD Consulting, founded and led by former Mayor and former Assemblywoman Austin Quinn-Davidson, to steer the Anchorage Childcare and Early Education Board and Fund.

The contract, detailed in Assembly Memorandum No. AM 375-2025, is valued at not-to-exceed $175,000 for a year of executive leadership from May 1, 2025, to April 30, 2026. The Assembly meeting starts at 5 pm in the ground floor chambers of the Loussac Library on 36th and Denali Street. The agenda is here.

The Assembly documents say QD Consulting is the only outfit capable of handling this contract. With this sole-source award, Quinn-Davidson will have racked up $210,000 from her friends on the Assembly since 2024.

The ACCEE Fund, born from Proposition 14’s passage in April 2023, aims to bolster childcare and early education across the Municipality of Anchorage. QD Consulting, under Quinn-Davidson’s leadership, laid the groundwork for the fund from October 2023 to August 2024 through a prior contract with Alaska Children’s Trust.

During that time, they assembled an implementation team, sniffed out community needs, and drafted a budget and strategic plan to get the fund operational.

Now, with the board ready to execute its 2025 vision, they will hire an executive director, launch new programs, and navigate municipal red tape.

“Due to experience and history, the board believes that QD Consulting, Austin Quinn-Davison, is the only person who can navigate this path with them to ensure the plan is executed efficiently and on track.”

“QD Consulting, led by Austin Quinn-Davidson, is uniquely qualified,” the memorandum states, citing their “experience and history.”

The contract will see QD Consulting bill hourly, capping at $175,000, to guide the ACCEE Board through its critical first year of execution.

This isn’t the first time that Quinn-Davidson has been rewarded for donating generously to the campaign coffers of the liberal Assembly members. After leaving the Assembly to become interim mayor, she then left office and opened up a consultancy in 2023. She won her first sole-source contract from her former assemblymembers in 2024 for $35,000.

The claim that only Quinn-Davidson’s firm can handle this role is specious.

Quinn-Davidson, who became mayor when former Mayor Ethan Berkowitz was caught in some compromising positions, famously held a drag queen party for children at her home, posting the photos online of the drag queens mimicking strip club dancers performing for tips. She was heralded by the Left as Anchorage’s first openly gay mayor.

DOGE-Alaska: You won’t believe how much Northwest Arctic Borough schools pay (from your tax dollars) for broadband

The Northwest Arctic Borough School District has entered into a five-year, $64.5 million broadband contract with telecom provider GCI, costing approximately $12.9 million annually.

The district serves 1,928 students in 13 schools plus two sites, which works out to about $6,690 per student per year. The contract holds an additional $10.1 million for non-connectivity services.

The deal, primarily funded through federal (90%) and state school broadband assistance (10%) programs raises concerns about the inflated costs and outdated technology.

Breakdown of the costs under the GCI agreement:

  • Five-year total: $64,497,000
  • Annual cost: $12,899,400
  • Funding:
    • 90% from the Federal E-Rate Program ($11,609,460/year)
    • 10% from Alaska’s BAG 100 Program ($1,289,940/year)

Competing bids of the district using satellite services would run about $4,000 per month per site, totaling approximately $720,000 per year across all Northwest Arctic Borough School District’s 15 sites, which pencils out to $373 per student per year.

Many school districts have already made the switch to satellite broadband. Considering the school district chose microwave technology for all but three locations, Kotzebue-area students could be using faster, more affordable satellite broadband, and the school district’s 10% share for connectivity would have been $72,000 annually.

The GCI contract charges much higher rates for specific sites, such as:

  • Satellite/Starlink-served schools (e.g., Ambler, Kobuk, Shungnak): $54,150/month per site, which is nearly 13 times more expensive.
  • Microwave-served schools #1: (e.g., Buckland, Kiana, Kivalina, Noatak, Noorvik, Selawik, Deering): $92,500/month per site via GCI’s proprietary TERRA network, which is 23 times more expensive.
  • Microwave-served schools #2: (Kotzebue Area): $65,000/month per site, also using the TERRA Network, which is 16 times more expensive.

The TERRA microwave network is not built for today’s Internet consumption and is  being outpaced by low-earth orbit satellites such as Starlink, which offers greater scalability and lower costs. The five-year lock-in of the contract ties the Northwest Arctic School District to technology that is being replaced in a fast-evolving field.

Northwest Arctic Borough residents pay no local taxes, so this expensive program is coming from federal taxpayers and the State of Alaska, which will chip in 10%. 

The decision to overlook a dramatically cheaper, modern alternative for the more expensive and nearly outdated technology raises questions about why the district is not adopting Starlink or other satellite solutions, which are already available and being used in Kotzebue and other remote sites.

GCI’s E-Rate filing can be found here and the State of Alaska BAG 100 grant awards can be found here.