On Thursday, the House Committee on Natural Resources approved an amendment to House Bill W000821, which mandates the immediate resumption of quarterly onshore oil and gas lease sales on federal lands, aiming to revitalize domestic energy production.
The amendment, introduced by Congressman Bruce Westerman of Arkansas, requires the Secretary of the Interior to promptly resume quarterly lease sales in compliance with the Mineral Leasing Act.
It stipulates that lease sales must be conducted immediately upon completion of all legal requirements and says that each fiscal year, the secretary of Interior must conduct a minimum of four oil and gas lease sales in states with available federal lands, including Alaska, Wyoming, New Mexico, Colorado, Utah, Montana, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Nevada.
In these sales, at least 50% of all nominated parcels that are available and eligible must be offered. If a scheduled lease sale is canceled, delayed, or results in a high percentage of unbid parcels, a replacement sale is mandated within the same fiscal year.
The amendment represents another reversal of Biden-era lockdowns in oil and gas producing states that have the vast majority of federally controlled lands.
The bill, with the approved amendment, is scheduled for further discussion in the House Committee on Natural Resources on May 6. If it advances, it will proceed to the full House for debate and a vote.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order terminating government funding of National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service.
As NPR and PBS have become “woke,” according to the administration, and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, through which the outlets receive taxpayer funding, must abide by principles of impartiality, Trump directed the corporation and all agencies in the executive branch to stop funding the organizations to “the maximum extent allowed by law.”
Americans have many more news options today than in 1967, when the corporation was founded, and if tax dollars are going to go toward public broadcasting, it should be totally nonpartisan, according to the executive order.
“At the very least, Americans have the right to expect that if their tax dollars fund public broadcasting at all, they fund only fair, accurate, unbiased, and nonpartisan news coverage,” the order reads. “No media outlet has a constitutional right to taxpayer subsidies, and the Government is entitled to determine which categories of activities to subsidize.”
The administration described the outlets as “entities that receive tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds each year to spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as ‘news’” and listed “examples of the trash that has passed for ‘news’” at the organizations in communications it sent out Friday morning.
NPR said the Declaration of Independence contained “flaws and deeply ingrained hypocrisies” in 2021, a year before it replaced its typical Independence Day reading of the founding document with a conversation about equality, according to the administration. The administration also criticized the outlets for promoting “gender-affirming care,” featuring drag queens in children’s programs and certain views on race and “white privilege.”
The executive order will likely be challenged in court, as many of Trump’s executive orders have been so far, for breaches of executive authority.
The president has signed over 140 executive orders thus far in his second term.
Reps. Sarah Vance, Justin Ruffridge, and Bill Elam defended their vote in favor of the controversial House Bill 57, which they called a “significant education measure that aims to strengthen Alaska’s public schools while delivering on key commitments made to constituents.”
In a press release on Thursday evening, the three explained their votes.
“Originally introduced as a narrowly focused bill to prohibit cell phone use in classrooms—a policy strongly supported by parents, educators, and school boards—the legislation was later expanded by the Senate into a broader education package. The updated bill now includes a series of substantive reforms and funding increases aimed at improving student outcomes,” the press release said.
“We want to be transparent with our constituents about why we supported this legislation,” the three said in a joint statement. “While HB 57 is no longer a simple bill, it presented a meaningful opportunity to move Alaska’s education system forward.”
Key provisions in the final version of HB 57 include:
• A permanent $700 increase to the Base Student Allocation (BSA)
• A 10% increase in student transportation funding
• Charter school reform to expand access and oversight
• A class size cap to reduce overcrowding
• Reading proficiency incentive grants to promote early literacy (dependent on a new tax being signed into law)
• Support for vocational and technical education in secondary schools (dependent on a new tax being signed into law)
“Education funding is the single biggest issue before the Legislature this year,” said Rep. Vance. “We had a choice: make real progress now or risk walking away with nothing. I chose progress.”
The legislators emphasized that while not every reform they advocated for made it into the final bill, the package includes significant strides they believe are in line with many of Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s education priorities.
“I gave my word to support education funding that puts students first — and I meant it,” said Rep. Ruffridge. “My vote today reflects that commitment.”
Rep. Elam added, “Is it everything we wanted? No. But it’s a strong, balanced package that reflects thoughtful compromise and keeps our promise to students, families, and teachers.”
In wrap up, the Kenai Peninsula House delegation said it remains committed to ensuring that every education dollar is tied to real results that prepare Alaska’s students for success.
Early on Thursday, the Valley Republican Women of Alaska club issued a rebuke to all Republican legislators who voted for the bill, while ignoring the bill offered by the sitting Republican governor. On the Amy Demboski Show on Thursday, Demboski pulled no punches either, criticizing the Republicans who voted for the bill for caving due to feeling the pressures of the election cycle.
Senate Joint Resolution 49, aimed at blocking President Trump’s tariffs, failed to pass in the US Senate on Wednesday after a deadlocked 49-49 vote.
The resolution, led by Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden and supported by a mostly Democrat group that also included Republicans Rand Paul, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski, sought to terminate the national emergency declaration Trump used to impose 10% reciprocal tariffs on most US trading partners.
The resolution had little chance of advancing in the House due to a new rule protecting Trump’s tariffs.
The White House had warned the senators that Trump would veto the measure, arguing it would undermine national and economic security. The failed vote coincided with new economic data showing a 0.3% decline in US GDP, raising concerns about the tariffs’ economic impact.
“Today, I voted in support of SJR 49, which would terminate the President’s national emergency declaration regarding our trade deficits with countries around the world. Bilateral trade deficits do not constitute a national emergency, nor do they qualify as an ‘unusual and extraordinary’ circumstance needed to unlock authorities under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. We have a lot more work to do to reclaim Congress’s constitutional power over tariffs, but this resolution is a step in the right direction,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski.
The “step in the right direction” failed, however, to must enough votes to make progress. Congress has the constitutional authority over tariffs as found in Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution, whereby Congress has the power to “lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” and to regulate commerce with foreign nations. This includes the authority to impose tariffs, which are, in fact, taxes on imported goods.
But Congress has delegated some of this authority to the president through various laws, such as the Trade Act of 1974 and the Tariff Act of 1930. These laws allow a president to adjust tariffs under specific circumstances, such as national security (e.g., Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962) or trade negotiations.
While the president can exercise this delegated authority, Congress retains the ultimate constitutional power to legislate tariffs and can override or modify presidential actions.
The unusual case of Wagoner v. Dahlstrom et al. is scheduled for trial on May 12 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska.
The plaintiff, Emalee Wagoner — born Emmanuel Cancel — is a biological male who says he identifies as female. Currently incarcerated at Goose Creek Correctional Center, a men’s prison, Wagoner is serving a 40-year sentence for multiple child sexual abuse convictions.
He is now suing the State of Alaska for allegedly failing to provide “gender-affirming surgery” while he serves his prison term.
The lawsuit names former Alaska Department of Corrections Commissioner Nancy Dahlstrom (now Lieutenant Governor) and other DOC officials, alleging deliberate indifference to Wagoner’s “serious” medical needs, particularly treatment for gender dysphoria.
In 2017, Cancel legally changed his name to Emalee Wagoner, but he has remained incarcerated in a male facility. The lawsuit, filed in 2018, seeks damages, declaratory relief, and injunctive relief. Wagoner claims repeated denials of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) from 2016 through 2022, in violation of what he says are medical standards for treating gender dysphoria.
Court documents reference the 2017 Gender Dysphoria Clinical Care Guide and assert that the DOC failed to enforce policies ensuring necessary care for transgender inmates. Wagoner argues this inaction exacerbated his condition, led to self-harm, and constituted a violation of his Eighth Amendment rights.
At one point, he attempted to castrate himself, allegedly to gain transfer to a women’s prison or to seek early release.
The defendants, including Dahlstrom and former DOC Health and Rehabilitation Services Director Laura Brooks, maintain that they were not deliberately indifferent. They point to the 2017 care guide and the implementation of Policy & Procedure 807.23 in July 2022 as evidence of efforts to address gender dysphoria within the prison system.
One of the legal questions before the court is whether vaginoplasty — a surgery that constructs a vaginal canal using penile or other tissue, such as colon tissue — is medically necessary in Wagoner’s case. Such procedures, which can cost between $20,000 and $100,000, are among the most complex and controversial forms of gender-affirming care. While some legal precedents exist, such as Edmo v. Corizon, Inc. (2019), which found the denial of surgery unconstitutional, the current case will test those boundaries further.
Notably, the court documents and filings refer to Wagoner as female. However, for biological accuracy, this article refers to Wagoner using male pronouns.
Wagoner’s criminal record raises additional complexities in the case. As Emmanuel Cancel, he was indicted in 2011 on 45 counts related to the sexual abuse of minors. Victims ranged in age from 7 to 20. According to court documents, Cancel threatened to kill his victims if they disclosed the abuse. Prosecutors say he heightened their fear by boasting of fictional murders, using physical violence, and supplying them with drugs — including marijuana, crack, and methamphetamine — to coerce their silence.
“Wagoner would tell the children stories of all of the murders she committed and how she would dispose of the bodies in order to elevate the fear experienced by the children. In addition, the children thought this threat was legitimate due to the level of violence Wagoner displayed in the household, including slamming the children’s heads against the wall, whipping them with a belt, and beating their mother. She also provided them with marijuana, cocaine, crack, and meth as a bribe to keep them quiet,” the State brief explains (embedded below).
“From the date of her arrest in 2011 until around August 2016, Wagoner continued to identify as a man and made no claims as to a diagnosis of gender dysphoria. However, starting in August 2016, she started to communicate with her then-alleged fiancé that she was contemplating attempting to perform a self-surgery by cutting off her penis and genitals. It appears that the motivation for this was either to be released from prison or to be transferred to a women’s prison. In August 2016, she attempted self-surgery. Initially, she claimed that it was an accident. Later, she changed her story and claimed that she was attempting a gender-affirming surgery. On one other occasion, Wagoner re-injured her penis which required elevated medical attention at Mat-Su Regional Medical Center,” the State asserts.
After his purported efforts at self-surgery, Wagoner began to demand gender-affirming care in the form of everything from breast augmentation to voice alteration therapy, and finally testicle and penis removal and construction of a vagina, the State explains. The State Department of Corrections, beginning in 2017, tried to accommodate some of Wagoner’s demands, after diagnosis of his gender dysphoria by a third-party provider.
“These efforts, increasing in concert with Wagoner’s regular appointments with the facilities’ mental health staff, initially included medication, the provision of feminine hygiene products to Wagoner and ensuring the availability of certain cosmetics, feminine undergarments, and grooming devices through the commissary. During this time, Wagoner was often less than cooperative and declined to follow the recommended treatment plan,” the State explains.
Wagoner’s complains that despite multiple requests for treatment and five documented denials of HRT, the DOC refused to provide transgender-related care unless his condition became “life-threatening.”
Wagoner now seeks a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring the DOC to provide medical and mental health treatment in line with the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) standards –guidelines that the Trump Administration has criticized as lacking scientific rigor.
The current case draws parallels to the 2019 Ninth Circuit decision in Edmo v. Corizon, Inc., which ruled that denying gender confirmation surgery to a transgender inmate violated the Eighth Amendment.
Last week, the Justice Department reversed actions taken under the Biden Administration regarding gender dysphoria claims by inmates who claimed a constitutional right to transgender surgeries provided by taxpayers.
The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, now headed by Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, withdrew a prior statement of interest in Doe v. Fuller v. Georgia Department of Corrections and submitted a new statement of interest in Fuller v. Georgia Department of Corrections. The filings, in the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, address claims brought by inmates seeking taxpayer-funded, elective surgeries as treatment for gender dysphoria.
Last month, Anchorage Mayor Suzanne LaFrance held a naming contest to name the city’s various snowplow equipment. She announced the winners, as Must Read Alaska wrote about in this report, which features the growing outdoor-living community in downtown Anchorage:
Must Read Alaska has written about downtown vagrancy and about the elaborate greenbelt shantytowns popping up all over Anchorage.
Urban trails are unsafe and downtown streets are smeared with human excrement. At night, walkers must be careful to not stumble over bodies.
But at least we have fun names for the snowplows in Anchorage: The Berminator, Taylor Drift, Blizzard Wizard, Luke Sidewalker, and Bladey Gaga. For whatever reason, no one offered Duck-Duck, Here Comes the Truck.
In the same civic spirit, we bring you a chance to name the homeless sprawl of tents and tarps along the Glenn Highway across from Davis Park. It’s a scene that’s not on LaFrance’s radar but can be viewed by commuters every day.
Here are some photos of the growing shanty encampment and what it looked like Wednesday:
Anchorage vagrant camps
Suggestions that have come in already include “Camp Trashmore” and “Camp It’s Complicated.”
Put your suggestions below, but keep it clean, not trashy, like these tarps and stolen whatnot decorating the Glenn Highway.
Why have Juneau city leaders supported an extensive list of municipal sales tax exemptions over the years, but are unable to seriously consider exempting basic necessities like food or utilities?
While seniors in Juneau do benefit from such an exemption, the majority of citizens do not.
The Affordable Juneau Coalition recently filed and will be collecting signatures on two ballot initiatives and a charter amendment designed to make Juneau more affordable. One of those initiatives would exempt food and utilities from CBJ sales tax.
Taxing basic necessities like food and utilities disproportionately penalizes lower-income households as these taxes represent a larger percentage of disposable income. Not taxing these basic necessities is seen as a way to make the tax system less regressive and to provide relief to young families and low-income individuals. It is an effective way for policymakers to help constituents, especially during times of high inflation or economic stress. Most states and a majority of counties in the U. S. already exempt groceries from sales tax, reflecting broad public support for the idea.
Of the 45 states with a sales tax, 33 states and the District of Columbia exempt groceries. Only 12 states still charge sales tax on food items. Washington State, our nearest neighbor, doesn’t tax food at the state or local level and, like Alaska, has no income tax.
Of course, the reduction in tax revenue must be offset by other revenue adjustments or a reduction in expenditures. Municipal entities that have implemented food tax exemptions have employed a combination of both.
Which brings me back to the question: Why does the City and Borough of Juneau (CBJ) exempt taxes from purchasers who expect to pay sales tax and are financially capable of doing so?
There are 35 different municipal sales tax exemptions currently in place and, if some were repealed, it would increase tax revenues – with minimal impact on most residents.
These include but are not limited to, exemptions for lobbyists, medical doctors, optometrists, acupuncturists, counselors, therapists, funeral directors, and travel agents. CBJ also exempts membership dues to labor unions and fraternal organizations, long-term residential rentals, bank fees, leasing commissions, and sales to and from certain non-profit organizations and federally recognized Indian tribes (except for pull-tabs).
Some exemptions are not significant enough to warrant much consideration and some may be worthy, but one of the most striking is the one exempting sales to or from certain non-profit entities or Indian tribes. On its face, this exemption doesn’t make sense. Only a handful of states provide broad exemptions for sales by nonprofits. In Washington State, for example, nonprofits are required to collect and remit retail sales tax on their sales of goods and services.
One could argue that exempting certain non-profits from paying sales on their purchases helps them and, thereby, benefits society generally. No such argument can be made to justify exempting retail purchases by Juneau residents and visitors when they buy goods or services from non-profit retail businesses or tribal entities.
Indeed, some exempt organizations operate businesses in Juneau that sell products that often compete directly with private sector businesses that have no such advantage.
Sealaska Heritage, Discovery Southeast Glacier Gift Shop, Juneau Arts and Humanities Council, and DIPAC are examples of non-profit sellers that don’t collect sales taxes on retail sales such as art, books, jewelry, souvenirs, tours, and other tourism related activities. Tlingit-Haida Central Council, a federally recognized tribal entity, operates two cafes and a motel in Juneau and is not required to collect sales tax from customers. (They do collect hotel tax).
When cruise ship visitors spend money in these venues, why not collect CBJ sales tax? It’s the cruise ship passengers, not the non-profit, paying the 5% tax.
It shouldn’t matter who operates the retail store, or which business a customer chooses to patronize. All businesses should be collecting and remitting the 5% sales tax when selling goods and services to the public. CBJ can then use this previously uncollected 5% to help compensate for removing tax on groceries and utilities.
Citizens will have an opportunity this month to sign a petition to place a food and utility tax exemption on the ballot.
From a budgetary standpoint, exchanging unwarranted tax exemptions for socially desirable ones is a fiscally prudent policy as well as a fairer one.
After retiring as the senior vice president in charge of business banking for Key Bank in Alaska, Win Gruening became a regular opinion page columnist for the Juneau Empire. He was born and raised in Juneau and graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1970. He is involved in various local and statewide organizations.
During the last two sessions of the legislature, the Alaska Republican Party has been unable to prevent RINO party members from joining with the Democrats to form governing caucuses. The Republican Party’s inability to prevent this has been well documented, but things might be changing thanks to actions at the grassroots level.
Recent articles on my Sewards Folly Substackhave shown how other states have held miscreants accountable in similar circumstances, but there has been nothing but crickets from the leadership of the AK GOP.
Where the state leadership has failed, grassroots party members have stepped up to take the lead on this issue. In a meeting earlier this month, members of the GOP’s District 6, located on the southern Kenai Peninsula, voted to censure both state Sen. Gary Stevens (R-Kodiak) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). While censure resolutions have been made in the past and accomplished absolutely nothing, things may be different this time.
I recently met with representatives from GOP leadership in District 6, who filled me in on the details of what they are attempting, and it sounds like something meaningful could finally get accomplished.
The first step in holding the Gang of Seven accountable is a change adopted to the Alaska Republican Party Rules in July of 2024. Article VII was added, and it includes language which says: “Any candidate or elected official may be sanctioned or suspended for any of the following reasons… (e) Forming a majority caucus in which non-Republicans are at least 1/3 or more of the coalition.”
Given this language, it is clear that each member of the Gang of Seven in Juneau has violated this part of the AK GOP bylaws. Article VII also specifies potential punishment: “Sanctions may include censure, declaring elected officials or candidates ineligible for endorsement or support by the ARP or its affiliates, recruiting a challenger, and prohibiting participation in ARP events, or any other appropriate sanction not disallowed by ARP or RNC rules.”
The significance of these rule changes is that censured Republicans could lose financial support from the party, be prevented from attending state GOP nominating conventions, or face a GOP-backed challenger in their next reelection campaign. These are real sanctions with real teeth to them.
With the new rule changes now in effect, the District 6 leadership convened a meeting on April 5th and voted to censure both Sens. Stevens and Murkowski. Sen. Stevens has violated the new rules adopted in February, and Sen. Lisa Murkowski receives their ire because she has been subversive to President Trump’s policies and is frequently aligned with the Democrats back in Washington, D.C.
The one problem with this round of sanctions is that although District 6 voted to censure both RINOs, District 5 did not, which prevents the full impact of the sanctions from taking effect, at least for now.
Alaska Senate districts are each composed of two House districts. Sen. Stevens represents District C, which is composed of House Districts 5 and 6. District 6, located in Homer, voted to censure the senator and begin the sanction process, but District 5, located in Kodiak, did not pass the same articles of censure, which is probably no surprise.
RINO Sen. Gary Stevens lives in Kodiak. The local party knows that having their senator hold the position of Senate President benefits them. Since AK GOP rules require both House districts comprising a senate district to vote for censure, this might seem like another failed attempt by the Republicans to police their members.
However, today’s Republicans aren’t your daddy’s GOP anymore; they are made of sterner stuff and aren’t taking no for an answer. There is a second part to the AK GOP’s February rules change, which also permits the sanction of a state senator if 19 of the 37 organized GOP House districts in Alaska also vote to censure the individual.
District 6 members have contacted other districts around the state, asking them to vote to approve Sen. Gary Stevens’s censure. If 19 of the statewide districts approve the resolution, Sen. Stevens could face the punishments documented in Article VII, which could hurt his reelection chances next November. More importantly, if the censure resolution can be passed against the sitting Senate President, then every other party defector today and in the future could face similar punishment. If the AK GOP can punish Sen. Gary Stevens, it will be a “Come to Jesus” moment for the rest of the Gang of Seven.
As a reminder to voters around the state, the Gang of Seven GOP political traitors includes House Representatives Louise Stutes (R-Kodiak) and Chuck Kopp (R-Anchorage) and Sens. Bert Stedman (R-Sitka), Gary Stevens (R-Kodiak), Jesse Bjorkman (R-Nikiski), Cathy Giessel (R-Anchorage), and Kelly Merrick (R-Eagle River).
Each of the organized House Districts around the state should vote to approve District 6’s censure resolution of Sen. Gary Stevens. Additionally, the House districts shown in Table 1 above should vote to censure their respective senators and representatives who have violated the AK GOP bylaws by joining governing caucuses with the Democrats.
Sometimes getting things done politically in this state is like trying to turn a supertanker. Those ships take a long time to turn, but given enough time and patience, it can be done. It is time for the Republicans to get their ship headed in the right direction, and for the first time in a long time, it looks like that just might be possible.
The Valley Republican Women of Alaska minced no words on Thursday: “Primaries are coming.”
In writing about the Republicans who voted for and against the Democrats’ education funding bill that has passed the House and Senate, the VRWAK executive team was direct. They praised those who voted against House Bill 57, and gave those who supported it a dose of tough love.
Here’s what the women posted on their Facebook page early Thursday:
From the VRWAK Executive Team:
We want to start by thanking the legislators who stood their ground and voted NO on 57 today. Your courage to defend conservative principles and make the right choice for Alaskans did not go unnoticed.
But let’s be honest, the Valley Republican Women of Alaska are done playing nice with the career climbers and political chameleons who fold under pressure.
PICK A LANE: Are you fighting for conservative values, or just wearing red while selling out the base?
We don’t rally behind politicians slithering their way for approval from the middle…or worse, the left.
We campaign and work hard to raise funds for those who speak truth, stand firm, and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT their way unapologetically to the Right.
And before the usual guilt trips roll in about “attacking our own,” let’s be clear: this is what accountability looks like.
True accountability doesn’t happen behind closed doors or whispered gently in your ear. It happens out loud, in public, with clarity and conviction. You are elected servants of the grassroots public. If we won’t hold our own to this standard, who will?
This is not about division, it’s about direction. We’re not here to babysit the status quo.
We’re here to take our state back.
Primaries are coming.
Only eight legislators in the House and three in the Senate voted against HB 57, which was the bill that became the Democrats’ funding mechanism for raising spending on schools. Originally, it was a bill only about cell phone use in schools, but it now appears that Rep. Zack Fields, the lead sponsor, always intended it to be the vehicle for a major increase to the Base Student Allocation. Fields is the former communication director for the Alaska Democratic Party and field coordinator for AFL-CIO.
The Republicans who voted with the Democrats appeared to be just “done with it,” worn out by the process and ready to move on, settling for what they thought was the best they could get, as the last day of session approaches.
But the Republican base around the state appears dissatisfied with the bill that spends $220 million or more per year on education, but with very little expected in return from school districts. Alaska ranks 6th in the United States for K-12 spending per pupil, with an expenditure of approximately $21,325 per student annually. Yet it is second from the bottom in terms of student competencies.
What’s more, Gov Mike Dunleavy, who has made education one of his top issues, has his own bill that adds annual spending for schools but has many policy improvements to help students and families, particularly those who want to start charter schools or who are studying via correspondence programs. The Democrats in charge of the House and Senate have not given Dunleavy’s bill a hearing in their highly partisan Game of Thrones.
Sponsors for the controversial HB 57, which may be vetoed by the governor, are all Democrats except for these Republicans: Sen. Rob Yundt, Sen. Mike Cronk. Sen. Bert Stedman, Sen. Jesse Bjorkman, Sen. Kelly Merrick, and Sen. Gary Stevens.
In the Senate, only Republican Sens. Mike Shower, Robert Myers, and Shelley Hughes voted against the Democrats’ bill.
In the House, the no votes were Reps. Jamie Allard, DeLena Johnson, Kevin McCabe, Mike Prax, George Rauscher, Rebecca Schwanke, Cathy Tilton, and Frank Tomaszewski, with David Nelson excused from the floor.
That means there were several legislators who voted for the bill and who have now raised the ire of Republican activists: Rep. Mia Costello, Julie Coulome, Bill Elam, Chuck Kopp, Elexie Moore, Justin Ruffridge, Dan Saddler, Will Stapp, Jubilee Underwood, and Sarah Vance.
Of those, Rep. Elexie Moore, Rep. Jubilee Underwood, and Sen. Rob Yundt — all first-term legislators — are in the Mat-Su Valley district and might lose the support of one of the major grassroots campaign groups in the region.
Here are our previous stories on the twisted path of HB 57, which now awaits the governor’s pen:
