Politics

Congress’s Fight Over Trump’s Agenda Runs Through Alaska

Published

2 weeks ago

May 5, 2025

Congress’s Fight Over Trump’s Agenda Runs Through Alaska

Twice a month, planes land on the gravel airstrip in Noatak, Alaska, about 70 miles north of the Arctic Circle, carrying the diesel that residents need to heat their homes in the bitter cold.

And once a month, they receive electricity bills four times higher than those for most of the rest of the country that include two separate charges: one for the cost of the energy itself, and another for the cost of the fuel used to fly it there.

“The fuel cost is the thing that kills,” Bessie Monroe, 56, who works as an assistant to the village’s tribal administrator, said as she pulled up her bill. Even though she supplements the heat from her generator with a wood-burning stove — and can still sometimes feel the chill of wind through one of her walls — Ms. Monroe has paid roughly $250 a month for electricity for her small one-bedroom house this winter.

So a few years ago, in an effort to build a local source of electricity and save residents money, the Inupiat village of 500 worked with its utility company to install a small farm of solar panels. And when Congress approved new tax credits for clean energy projects in 2022 through the Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by President Joseph R. Biden Jr., the village saw an opportunity to buy more.

But the fate of the project — and dozens more like it in Alaska and around the country — is now in doubt, leaving villagers unsure of their financial future.

Those doubts are at the root of an intraparty feud unfolding among Republicans in Washington, where G.O.P. members of Congress are casting about for ways to pay for President Trump’s domestic agenda. Some fiscal hard-liners have zeroed in on clean energy tax credits as a prime target for elimination.

Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, has become an outspoken proponent of keeping the tax credits.

“A wholesale repeal, or the termination of certain individual credits, would create uncertainty, jeopardizing long-term project planning and job creation in the energy sector,” Ms. Murkowski and three other Republicans wrote in a letter to the Senate majority leader last month to make the case for preserving the clean energy breaks.

The calls to scrap them have already had an effect. The leading builder of solar farms along Alaska’s Railbelt, the state’s most populous region, cited uncertainty over the tax credits’ future when it pulled out of a major project. Dozens more projects have been left in limbo after Mr. Trump signed an executive order in January to freeze federal grants financed by the law.

And all of it comes as Alaskans prepare for looming natural gas supply shortfalls, which have prompted state officials to warn of the possibility of rolling blackouts.

“It seemed like two, three years ago, there was a lot of enthusiasm moving forward with a lot of these projects,” said Matt Bergan, an engineer who worked for the electric association based in the hub city of Kotzebue, 50 miles south of Noatak.

“We know what we need up here,” Mr. Bergan continued. “We need the wind and the solar and the storage to make heat, and get away from diesel fuel. And the stars were aligning. These big federal dollars were going to be coming through. We got our projects shovel-ready to go. And now all the stars are have unaligned.”

Similar stories are playing out all across the country. But nowhere has the law had a more profound effect on everyday access to power than in Alaska, where energy companies have sought to leverage the tax credits to build out renewable energy infrastructure in isolated communities.

“There is still a substantial amount of money that has to come out of pocket in order to make these projects work,” said Bill Stamm, the chief executive of Alaska Electric Village Cooperative, a nonprofit electric utility serving residents in 59 locations throughout rural Alaska, including Noatak. “If you can get some of that money back, especially for folks that have a tax appetite — that I think, swayed the movers and shakers, the folks that are going to decide, ‘Do we want to actually get involved in this kind of business?’”

At an event last month in Anchorage, Ms. Murkowski recounted a conversation she had had with the interior secretary, Doug Burgum, in which he commented there would be little support from the Trump administration for wind energy projects.

“Remember that so many of the communities in the state of Alaska are never going to benefit from a natural gas pipeline,” Ms. Murkowski recounted replying. “It’s not going to do a spur out to Togiak. It’s not going to do a spur out to Kobuk. So please, please don’t forget the opportunities that come to our more rural communities that are more isolated, who need to be able to access the resources that are there.”

Even simple tasks in Noatak are often difficult. For years, the utility company servicing the village would send some diesel by barge during the spring and summer months. But the Noatak River’s water levels have since dropped so low that the utility can now only fly in the fuel. There are no roads to Noatak, and the closest city, Kotzebue, population 3,000, is more than an hour away by all-terrain vehicle.

“You could probably get to Hawaii as cheap as you can get to Noatak from Anchorage,” said Mr. Stamm, the utility executive. “So it’s not insignificant that we have to fly people there to do repairs. We have to fly all of our material in there to do repairs.”

Late last year, the planes used to fly in the diesel suffered mechanical issues and were grounded for weeks. The village rationed diesel for residents, forcing many, like Ms. Monroe, to rely heavily on their wood-burning stoves. It was 25 to 35 degrees below zero then, she and other residents recalled.

“It happens a lot, fuel shortages,” said Tristen Ashby, the village’s tribal administrator. “And some people don’t have wood stoves up here, so they only have one source of heat.”

The cold in the winters, Mr. Ashby added, “is like you wouldn’t believe.”

During that shortage, Ms. Monroe ran out of the wood she asks her 20-year-old daughters to chop. “I was asking, ‘Lord, I need wood today.’ Later on, there were two logs outside of my house. I walked out and there were two logs. And that was a humbling experience.”

When diesel is accessible, its fumes linger in the air over residential streets.

“When I came into this office, I asked the previous administrator, who got us the solar panels, ‘How could I get another farm?’” said Mr. Ashby, who, at 22, is the youngest person to ever serve as tribal administrator. “With solar energy, there’s no fuel emission. Every day we see smoke coming out of the plant.”

But the real reason he hopes to pivot to solar energy, he said, is to bring down costs.

While the average residential electricity rate in the United States is around 16 cents per kilowatt-hour, Noatak pays more than a dollar. On a recent visit, heating fuel was running $13 a gallon.

Some larger homes cost $1,700 month to heat, and residents say it is not uncommon for them to pay their electric bills in installments. Robbie Kirk, who lives in Noatak in a house he built himself, recalled receiving a $2,500 electricity bill one month about seven years ago, when the temperature sunk to negative 60 and stayed there for weeks.

That often presents tough decisions. Mr. Kirk described how he and others each winter must decide whether to heat their water line. If they do, it drives up their electric bill. If they don’t, the pipe could freeze and burst.

The more common trade-off, he said, is deciding between spending money on heating fuel or gasoline for the ATVs and snow machines they use to drive across the snow-covered gravel roads that cut through the village. Around 5 p.m. each day, just before the single gas pump at the village store closes, a small line forms. On a recent Thursday afternoon, Tianna Sage was filling up her brother’s snow machine so he could use it to go duck hunting. She said she would need to refuel it every day for him, at the cost of $11 a gallon.

“I work three jobs to make sure the struggle is not there,” Mr. Kirk said. “But I have a lot of family here, a lot of widowed uncles, widowed aunts that they’re not able to, just not physically able to. So just watching them struggle with those decisions on whether they should buy heating fuel or buy gas. That determines — I don’t want to say how well they live their life — but how much easier it could be.”

Sitting in her office, Ms. Monroe said she still had hope that Congress would preserve the federal support for villages like Noatak. She said she would worry about her daughters’ ability to pay their bills each month if some kind of change did not come.

“Our future, it doesn’t look good, per se, with the cost of living right now,” she said. “I start to realize that all this is going to come upon them. They’re going to have to carry the burden of heating their homes or buying food.”

Click to comment

Politics

Gabbard says Comey should be 'put behind bars' after picture allegedly 'issuing a call to assassinate' Trump

Published

2 hours ago

May 16, 2025

Press Room

Gabbard says Comey should be 'put behind bars' after picture allegedly 'issuing a call to assassinate' Trump

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said ex-FBI Director James Comey should be “put behind bars” for a post he made on Instagram on Thursday allegedly “issuing a call to assassinate [President Donald Trump.]”

Earlier on Thursday, Comey shared a picture on Instagram with seashells formed in the numbers “86 47.” To some, the number “86” is a call sign for murdering or getting rid of someone or something and “47” is typically used to refer to the 47th President of the United States.

“Cool shell formation on my beach walk…,” Comey wrote in the caption of the picture, which has since been deleted.

Gabbard made the comments on “Jesse Watters Primetime” Thursday night after Comey said he wasn’t aware that the number “86” stands for some sort of violence.

EX-FBI CHIEF COMEY’S ‘86 47’ SOCIAL MEDIA POST CONDEMNED BY WHITE HOUSE AS ATTEMPT TO PUT ‘HIT’ ON PRESIDENT

National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard said ex-FBI Director James Comey should be in jail for posting an Instagram photo of the numbers “86 47,” which has been interpreted as a threat to Trump. (ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images)

“I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message,” Comey said after deleting the initial picture. “I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence. It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.”

Gabbard said Comey and his people “need to be held to account according to the law” regardless of why he said he posted the picture.

“The rule of law says people like him who issue direct threats against the POTUS, essentially issuing a call to assassinate him, must be held accountable under the law,” Gabbard said, adding that she thinks he should be in jail.

Ex-FBI Director James Comey posted an Instagram photo of seashells arranged in the numbers “86 47” – which has been interpreted as a threat on President Donald Trump’s life. (AP)

The national intelligence director said Comey’s post has her “very concerned for [the president’s life.]”

“I’m very concerned for the president’s life; we’ve already seen assassination attempts. I’m very concerned for his life and James Comey, in my view, should be held accountable and put behind bars for this,” she said.

‘NEVER TRUMPER’ COMEY’S ’86 47′ TRUMP POST UNDER INVESTIGATION

Gabbard also said Comey has a lot of influence and that there are “people who take [him] very seriously.”

Shortly after Comey removed the post, Fox News Digital learned from a Secret Service source that the agency was aware of the incident and agents are being sent to investigate and interview Comey.

The White House also condemned Comey’s actions, with White House deputy chief of staff and Cabinet Secretary Taylor Budowich calling his post “deeply concerning.”

“While President Trump is currently on an international trip to the Middle East, the former FBI Director puts out what can clearly be interpreted as ‘a hit’ on the sitting President of the United States — a message etched in the sand,” Budowich wrote on X. “This is deeply concerning to all of us and is being taken seriously.”

Comey, who led the FBI during Trump’s first term before he was fired from the spot, had no comment when reached by Fox News Digital earlier on Thursday.

Fox News Digital’s Alec Schemmel and David Spunt contributed to this report.

Politics

Justices skeptical of Trump plan to limit birthright citizenship but also injunctions that block it

Published

3 hours ago

May 16, 2025

Press Room

Justices skeptical of Trump plan to limit birthright citizenship but also injunctions that block it

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court gave a skeptical hearing Thursday to a lawyer for President Trump who was appealing rulings that blocked his plan to deny citizenship to newborns whose parents were in this country illegally or temporarily.

None of the justices spoke in favor of Trump’s plan to restrict birthright citizenship, and several were openly skeptical.

“Every court is ruling against you,” Justice Elena Kagan said. “There’s not going to be a lot of disagreement on this.”

If his plan were to take effect, “thousands of children will be born and rendered stateless,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor said.

But Thursday’s hearing was devoted to a procedural question raised by the administration: Can a single federal judge issue a nationwide order to block the president’s plan?

Shortly after Trump issued his executive order to limit birthright citizenship, federal judges in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state declared it unconstitutional and blocked its enforcement nationwide.

In response, Trump’s lawyers asked the court to rein in the “epidemic” of nationwide orders handed down by district judges.

It’s an issue that has divided the court and bedeviled both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Trump’s lawyers argued that on procedural grounds, the judges overstepped their authority. But it is also procedurally unusual for a president to try to revise the Constitution through an executive order.

Thursday’s hearing did not appear to yield a consensus on what to do.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh said the plaintiffs should be required to bring a class-action claim if they want to win a broad ruling. But others said that would lead to delays and not solve the problem.

Justice Neil M. Gorsuch said he was looking for a way to decide quickly. “How do we get to the merits expeditiously?” he asked.

One possibility was to have the court ask for further briefing and perhaps a second hearing to decide the fundamental question: Can Trump acting on his own revise the long-standing interpretation of the 14th Amendment?

Shortly after the Civil War, the Reconstruction Congress wrote the 14th Amendment, which begins with the words: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

Before that, Americans were citizens of their states. Moreover, the Supreme Court in the infamous Dred Scott decision said Black people were not citizens of their states and could not become citizens even if they were living in a free state.

The amended Constitution established U.S. citizenship as a birthright. The only persons not “subject to the jurisdiction” of the laws of the United States were foreign diplomats and their families and, in the 19th century, Indians who were “not taxed” and were treated as citizens of their tribal nations.

However, Congress changed that rule in 1924 and extended birthright citizenship to Native Americans.

Since 1898, the Supreme Court has agreed that birthright citizenship extends to the native-born children of foreign migrants living in this country. The court said then that “the fundamental rule of citizenship by birth, notwithstanding the alienage of parents” had been established by law.

The decision affirmed the citizenship of Wong Kim Ark, who was born in San Francisco in 1873 to Chinese parents who were living and working there, but who were not U.S. citizens.

But several conservative law professors dispute the notion that the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States means simply that people living here are subject to the laws here.

Instead, they say it refers more narrowly to people who owe their undivided allegiance to this country. If so, they contend it does not extend broadly to illegal immigrants or to students and tourists who are here temporarily.

On Jan. 20, Trump issued an executive order proclaiming the 14th Amendment does not “extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States.” He said it would be U.S. policy to not recognize citizenship for newborns if the child’s mother or father was “not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”

Immigrants rights groups sued on behalf of several pregnant women, and they were joined by 22 states and several cities.

Judges wasted no time in declaring Trump’s order unconstitutional. They said his proposed restrictions violated the federal law and Supreme Court precedent as well as the plain words of the 14th Amendment.

In mid-March, Trump’s lawyers sent an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court with “a modest request.” Rather than decide the “important constitutional questions” involving birthright citizenship, they urged the justices to rein in the practice of district judges handing down nationwide orders.

They have “reached epidemic proportions since the start of the current administration,” they said.

A month later, and without further explanation, the court agreed to hear arguments based on that request.

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer struggled to explain how judges should proceed when faced with a government policy that would be unconstitutional and harm an untold number of people. Is it wise or realistic to insist that thousands of people sign on to lawsuits? the justices asked.

He also had a hard time explaining how such a new policy would be enforced.

“How’s it going to work? What do hospitals do with a newborn?” Kavanaugh asked. “What do states do with a newborn?”

“Federal officials will have to figure that out, essentially,” Sauer replied, noting that Trump’s order, if upheld, would not take effect for 30 days.

California joined 21 other states in suing successfully to block Trump’s order, but California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said it was important those rulings apply nationwide.

“The rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution belong to everyone in this country — not just those born in states whose attorneys general have stood up to challenge the president’s unlawful executive order. It’s clear that a nationwide injunction is not only appropriate here to avoid devastating harm to the states and their residents, but is also directly aligned with prior Supreme Court precedent,” Bonta said after Thursday’s argument.

The justices are likely to hand down a full opinion in Trump vs. CASA, but it may not come until late June.

Politics

Video: Ben and Jerry’s Founder Arrested at Kennedy’s Senate Hearing

Published

18 hours ago

May 15, 2025

Press Room

Video: Ben and Jerry’s Founder Arrested at Kennedy’s Senate Hearing

new video loaded: Ben and Jerry’s Founder Arrested at Kennedy’s Senate Hearing

transcript

Ben and Jerry’s Founder Arrested at Kennedy’s Senate Hearing

Ben Cohen, a co-founder of the ice cream brand Ben and Jerry’s, was among a group of protesters that interrupted a Senate committee hearing to protest Congress’s funding for Israel’s military as it wages war against Hamas in Gaza.

: I’m presenting today supports these goals and reflects — [protesters shouting] The witness will suspend. The committee will come to order. Members of the audience are reminded disruptions will not be permitted while the committee conducts its business. Capitol Police are asked to remove the individuals from the hearing room.
Advertisement

Recent episodes in U.S. & Politics