Alaska

Brad Keithley’s Chart of the Week: The Legislature to Alaska families – The less you make, the more we take

Published

1 year ago

September 27, 2024

Brad Keithley’s Chart of the Week: The Legislature to Alaska families – The less you make, the more we take

One of the things that disappoints most about the Alaska media is its ongoing failure to report on – or even reference – the hugely regressive impact of using cuts in the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) to fund state government. The regressive approach the Legislature has used since 2016 to fund state government can be summarized by the mantra some observers use to describe it, usually in hushed tones – “the less you make, the more we take.”

It’s not that there isn’t source material that the media can use. Both the 2016 study for the then-administration of former Governor Bill Walker by researchers at the University of Alaska-Anchorage’s (UAA) Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) and the 2017 study for the then-Legislature by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) provide detailed analyses of the highly disproportionate impact on middle and lower-income – which together are 80% of – Alaska families that results from using PFD cuts to fund Alaska government.

For those who claim that’s old news, just last year, ISER Professor Matthew Berman, one of the authors of the 2016 ISER study and still on the faculty at UAA, made clear that the impact remains as regressive as ever. In an opinion piece in the Anchorage Daily News, Berman reiterated the points made in the 2016 ISER and other subsequent studies:

A cut in the PFD is a tax — the most regressive tax ever proposed. A $1,000 cut will push thousands of Alaska families below the poverty line. It will increase homelessness and food insecurity.

The two most relevant times to remind Alaskans of the impact of using PFD cuts to fund state government compared to the alternatives are each Spring as the Legislature develops the state budget, when the cuts are being made, and each Fall when the reduced PFD is distributed to Alaskans, when the cuts hit home. For the past several years, however, the media has done neither, leaving Alaskans repeatedly in the dark about one of the most – if not for many families the single most – significant economic decision affecting Alaska household income made annually by the Legislature.

It’s not that the state’s politicians are much better. Unlike as in some past years, this year’s announcement of the per PFD amount by the Dunleavy administration – relegated to a press release by Revenue Commissioner Adam Crum, which doesn’t even appear on the Governor’s website – doesn’t even whisper a mention of the level of the reduction from the current law level. Instead, the press release leads the third paragraph with the misleading claim that “[t]his is the 43rd year Alaskans have received their share of the state’s natural resources and investment earnings;” it fails to mention that this is, instead, the ninth year that the amount set by the Legislature – and signed by Governor Mike Dunleavy (R – Alaska) – has been significantly below Alaskans’ “share” set by state statute, much less the size of the cut or its hugely regressive impact on Alaska families.

While there may be others, in glancing through various posts from the state’s elected officials, the only one we noticed that even mentioned the cut was a tweet from Senator Bill Wielechowski (D – Anchorage), but in an era where many claim to be concerned about the outmigration of middle and lower-income – working – Alaska families, even that post didn’t focus on the regressive nature of the cut. Others, like those from self-proclaimed PFD defenders Senator Shelly Hughes (R – Palmer) and Representative Sarah Vance (R – Homer), just regurgitate the Dunleavy administration’s press release without noting the deficiency or its impact.

So, as we have done before, we will use one of these columns to address the level of the cut and its impact on Alaskan families by income bracket.

Calculating the level of the PFD cut at the aggregate level is easy. Using data available from the Permanent Fund Corporation’s monthly “History and Projections” report, we (and others) can easily calculate, to use the words of the applicable statute (AS 37.13.140(a)), the gross amount of the “income available for distribution” from the fund. The annual level of the cut is the difference between that and the amount appropriated by the Legislature for distribution, which is easily calculable from the annual appropriations bill.

For dividend (calendar) year 2024, the “income available for distribution” calculated per the statute is $2.34 billion. On the other hand, the amount appropriated by the Legislature, including both the amount being distributed as the PFD and the amount euphemistically described as the “energy relief payment,” totals $1.10 billion. The difference – the amount of the PFD cut – is $1.24 billion, more than half the statutory amount.

As we explained in a previous column, to put that amount in context, PFD cuts alone (adjusted for the final budget numbers) represent about a quarter of overall projected state revenues. For those who like to claim that Alaska is “fiscally conservative,” the cuts – or, to use Professor Berman’s term, the “taxes” – are being used to plug a deficit in the state budget about the same size on a percentage basis, as the deficit in the federal budget.

Calculating the amount of the cut per individual PFD is more complex. As we explained in a previous column, the amount of the individual PFD is calculated first by making some statutory adjustments to the gross amount and then second by dividing the remainder by the number of approved recipients. The size of the adjustments and the number of recipients are published by the Department of Revenue’s (DOR) Permanent Fund Dividend Division (PFD Division) only in arrears, sometimes a couple of years after the fact.

However, pending the publication of the final numbers, we can make a reasonably close approximation for 2024 using a combination of data available from the Legislative Finance Division (LegFin) and the information included by DOR in its announcement. LegFin reported in its July 2024 Newsletter that the amount available for the so-called “Energy Relief” payment is $190.3 million, the full amount conditionally appropriated by the Legislature as part of the overall budget (HB 268, Section 27). For its part, DOR’s announcement reported that the individual energy relief payment is $298.17. Dividing the former by the latter results in a recipient base of roughly 638,225, a larger number than reported by the PFD Division for 2023 but not out of line historically.

Multiplying that recipient base by the individual amount reported by DOR for the PFD ($1,403.83) equals approximately $896.0 million, indicating a net deduction by the PFD Division of approximately $18.3 million in adjustments from the $914.3 million appropriated by the Legislature. Deducting the same amount of adjustments from the gross statutory PFD level and dividing the result by the same number of recipients results in an estimated 2024 statutory PFD of $3,640 and, compared to the $1,702 being distributed, a PFD cut of approximately $1,938.

As the following chart indicates, while lower than some, on a dollar basis, the amount of the 2024 cut ($1,938) is materially higher than the average size of the cuts made over the past nine years ($1,659). On the other hand, the percentage of the cut is about the same. Over the past nine years, PFD cuts have been about 52% of the statutory amount. The 2024 cut is a bit over 53% of the statutory amount. Put another way, the amount paid in 2024, including the so-called “energy relief” payment, totals about 47% of the statutory amount compared to an average of 48% over the full period.

However, that analysis is only the starting point for calculating the impact of the PFD cuts on Alaskan families. As both the 2016 ISER and 2017 ITEP studies emphasized, and as ISER Professor Matthew Berman reiterated in his column last year, at a household level, the impact of the PFD cut is felt through its effect on overall household income. The lower the income, the more the PFD – and therefore the more PFD cuts – matter.

Using the most recent measure of Alaska household income by income level available – the calendar year 2021 income statistics from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) – we have calculated the impact of the 2024 PFD cuts (or, as Professor Berman calls them, the “tax”) by income bracket.

To do that, we start by taking the average Alaska household income reported by the IRS for each income bracket for which it provides data for 2021 and adjusting that to projected 2024 levels using a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 2.5%. Some might argue we should use different escalation factors by income bracket because, in past years, income growth in Alaska’s upper-income brackets has far exceeded that in the lower-income brackets. However, we have forgone that step because it wouldn’t have a material impact over the short time frame for which we use the escalation adjustment.

After that, we calculate the impact by income bracket by increasing the resulting household income by the level of the PFD cut – so that household income reflects what it would have been at a full PFD – then dividing the level of the PFD cut by the resulting household income, reflecting the impact of the cut as a share of household income. In calculating the adjustment, we use the average household size – the number of recipients – in each income bracket calculated from the IRS data. That recognizes that, in Alaska, households at higher income levels tend to be larger – have more recipients – than those at lower income levels.

Here is the result:

Each quartile contains one-quarter – about 81,000 – of Alaska’s 323,074 households. As the chart shows, within the Top 25% of Alaska households – the quarter of Alaska households with the highest income – the average income at a full PFD is $253,183. Using PFD cuts to fund state government reduces that income by $5,039, or 2.0%.

Using the same breakdown as the IRS, the left columns show the impacts among the Top 10%, Top 5%, and Top 1% of Alaska households. Understandably, as income rises, the impact of using PFD cuts falls. At the average income of the Alaska households with the highest 5% of incomes, for example, PFD cuts to fund state government only reduce income by 0.8%. At the average income of those in the Top 1%, using PFD cuts only reduces income by 0.3%.

The reverse is true, however, as the focus moves down the income scale. For example, within the quarter of Alaska households in the Upper Middle-Income bracket, the average income at a full PFD is $87,497. Because of the smaller household size, using PFD cuts to fund state government only reduces that income by $3,973. However, because of their lower overall income, that still represents 4.5% of total household income.

Again, because of smaller household sizes, using PFD cuts to fund state government only reduces the average income of the quarter of Alaska households falling in the Lower Middle-Income bracket by $3,295. However, because of their lower overall income, that still represents 7% of total household income.

And while the $2,713 reduction in the average income of the quarter of Alaska households falling in the Lowest 25% is lower than in any other bracket, because of their lower overall income, using PFD cuts to fund state government reduces overall income by 14.8%, far more significant than for any other bracket.

In short, as the mantra goes, by using PFD cuts to fund state government, the Legislature is using an approach that takes more as a share of income from Alaska households – indeed, much more – the less the household makes. Again, to reference Professor Berman, the approach is “the most regressive tax ever proposed.”

For context, we also have included on the chart the level of take that would result if all Alaska households contributed the same share of household income toward the costs of state government. That level – 3.6% of household income – is reflected on the chart as a gold dashed line. Using it would raise the same overall amount – $1.24 billion – as using PFD cuts, but in a much more distributionally neutral way. Government action wouldn’t decide winners and losers; all Alaska families would contribute the same.

While using that approach, those in the Top 25% would pay slightly more as a share of income than they do using PFD cuts, the remaining 75% of Alaska families – the 50% in the middle-income brackets and the 25% of those in the lowest bracket – would pay less. Most importantly, unlike as occurs using PFD cuts, no Alaska household would be required to contribute any more toward the cost of state government than any other.

Instead of a mantra of “the less you make, the more we take,” using an average rate approach would result in a mantra of “we take the same share of income to pay for Alaska government from all Alaska families, regardless of whether they are rich, poor, or in between. They all have the same skin in the game. Unlike in the past, we no longer favor the rich over working-class families.”

Alaskans should be aware of the impact of the current approach and options to change it. Alaska’s politicians and the Alaska media should play a significant role in informing them of both.

Brad Keithley is the Managing Director of Alaskans for Sustainable Budgets, a project focused on developing and advocating for economically robust and durable state fiscal policies. You can follow the work of the project on its website, at @AK4SB on Twitter, on its Facebook page or by subscribing to its weekly podcast on Substack.

Source link

Alaska

Only in Alaska. Welcome to the ‘totem pole capital of the world.’

Published

11 hours ago

January 9, 2026

Press Room

Only in Alaska. Welcome to the ‘totem pole capital of the world.’

Ketchikan, Alaska is known as the “totem pole capital of the world” with over 80 poles.
Totem poles are unique to the Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest and represent family history, stories, and events.
Many of Ketchikan’s oldest totem poles were moved from abandoned villages to the Totem Heritage Center for preservation.

KETCHIKAN, Alaska – An arched sign stretching between two city blocks welcomes travelers to “Alaska’s first city” and the “salmon capital of the world.” But Ketchikan, the first port on many Alaska cruises, has another nickname: the “totem pole capital of the world.”

Totem poles are unique to the Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest. The ones around Ketchikan are particularly old and numerous.

“The history and the clans that own (the totem poles), like their animal clan crests, those are still living,” said Irene Dundas, Cultural Resources manager for the Ketchikan Indian Community. According to KIC’s website, its tribal citizens descend from Southeast Alaska’s three main Native peoples – Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian – as well as other Alaska Native tribal nations. “We’re not black-and-white photos … We still practice our culture every day, and we live it.”

“Travelers should know that there are spectacular and diverse Indigenous experiences and stories across every region of the United States, each unlike the other and each transcending generations to get to them,” said Sherry L. Rupert, who is Paiute and Washoe and CEO of the American Indigenous Tourism Association.

Here’s what else visitors should know about Ketchikan, the “totem pole capital of the world.”

Why it matters

“Totem poles are often used to show like family history, clan relationships, crest animals, stories, events, or to memorialize a specific person or event, like a battle or a visit by a dignitary, those types of things,” said Hazel Brewi, a visitor information assistant at the Southeast Alaska Discovery Center, an interagency visitors center for public lands across the state.

There are more than 80 totem poles around Ketchikan, many of which are visible to the public, according to Erika Jayne Christian, program coordinator for Ketchikan Museums, which include the Totem Heritage Center, where the oldest totem poles are found.

Normally, she said, “They’re only really meant to last a generation – 70 or 80 years from the time that this giant western redcedar is felled and then carved and then raised in ceremony” until it naturally deteriorates.

However, in the late 19th and early 20^th centuries, residents of Native villages on neighboring islands began moving to Ketchikan for various reasons, including job opportunities. When surveyors went back decades later, they discovered many totem poles had been vandalized or stolen.

“When it comes to the totem poles, our village was totally wiped out by an expedition that came up,” said Teresa DeWitt, who is Tlingit and serves as a program assistant for Ketchikan Museums.

To protect the totem poles that remained, elders from Tlingit villages on Tongass Island and Village Island and a Haida village on Prince of Wales Island allowed theirs to be moved. “It was a very big thing,” DeWitt said. “It’s not something we normally do.”

The Totem Heritage Center was built to house these totem poles, which still belong to the villages’ descendants, and preserve and perpetuate the traditions behind them, with continuing guidance from a Native advisory board.

Outside the center and elsewhere around Ketchikan, visitors can find newer totem poles, including recreations carved as part of a Civilian Conservation Corps project that began in 1930s and modern-day totem poles by master carvers.

“There has been a real revival effort, and so people are learning to carve and learning to do Northwest Coast design,” said Dundas. “Totem poles are just a little sliver of the overall beautiful, beautiful culture.”

What to see

Visitors can see totem poles throughout Ketchikan, but there are three clusters.

Totem Heritage Center: A $9 Museum Pass covers admission to both the Totem Heritage Center and its sister museum, Tongass Historical Museum. “You’re able to really learn about where it is that you’re visiting … where you are in place and time,” said Christian.

Single museum admission costs $6 for adults under age 65, and $5 for those who are older. Admission is free for children age 17 and under, active-duty military service members, and local residents. Both museums are in downtown Ketchikan and reachable by foot from the cruise port or the borough’s free shuttle bus during the summer.

Saxman Totem Park: Visitors can see recreations of historic totem poles, a community clan house and a working totem pole workshop in the Organized Village of Saxman, less than 3 miles from downtown Ketchikan. Totem park tours run throughout the cruise season, from late April to early October. They can be booked directly through Cape Fox Tours, part of the village’s Alaska Native Corporation, or as excursions through cruise lines. Self-guided tours cost $8 while Cape Fox’s guided tours start at $129 and may include additional experiences, like traditional dance performances.

Kristy Shields, who is Tlingit, recalls being told as a kid “that we were going to dance on the dock for big canoes and it ended up being cruise ships.” Now she helps pass the tradition on to younger generations as tours dance manager for Cape Fox Tours. “They are dancing. They know their songs. They know who they are. They know where they come from.” Saxman can be reached by Ketchikan’s free shuttle in the summer or $2 city bus. There is also a foot and bike path, but walking from downtown takes about an hour.

Totem Bight State Historical Park: More than a dozen Tlingit and Haida totem poles and a community clan house stand in this 11-acre state park, according to a guide on its website. Like many of the totem poles in Saxman, Christian said these were carved as part of a CCC totem pole restoration program. Park admission costs $5 per person from May through September and is free from October through April. The park is roughly 10 miles north of downtown Ketchikan and can be reached by $2 city bus.

Not-so hidden gems

Salmon Walk: This scenic 1.5-mile loop meanders through the heart of the city, along Ketchikan Creek, where salmon famously swim in the summer. There are various interpretative signs and points of interest along the way, including famous Creek Street and both Ketchikan museums. Visitors who don’t want to complete the loop can catch a free downtown shuttle from the Totem Heritage Center, which marks the path’s halfway point.

Southeast Alaska Discovery Center: This is a great point for learning about the region through ranger-led activities, educational films and elaborate exhibits. Three master-carved totem poles in the atrium represent the region’s three main Native peoples. Visitors can learn more through the Native traditions exhibit, developed by Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian elders so “they could tell their own story,” Brewi said. “The voices of the elders echo through that space and it is absolutely beautiful to walk through, especially at the quieter times of the day, because it’s all motion-activated and you can actually stand and just listen to those elders speak.”

The Southeast Alaska Discovery Center is located a few blocks from the cruise port. Admission is free from October through April. From May through September, admission costs $5 for visitors over the age of 15 and is free for anyone younger. Visitors with America the Beautiful Interagency Passes also get free entry.

Tongass National Forest: Ketchikan is nestled within America’s largest national forest and the “world’s largest intact temperate rainforest,” according to the USDA. Visitors eager to explore the great outdoors will find over two dozen hiking trails around Ketchikan, many of which can be reached on public transit, according to Brewi. She recommends first stopping by the Southeast Alaska Discovery Center for the latest information on conditions and bears.

Best time to visit

By far, summer is the busiest time of year with the mildest weather and the widest array of visitor experiences. Travelers hoping to avoid crowds may opt to visit early or late in the cruise season.

However, Dundas notes, “Later in the season, like in October, you’re really, really pushing it with weather and you have to be prepared for Ketchikan weather.” Ketchikan got over 12 feet of rain in 2025, according to the National Weather Service, and October is among its soggiest months.

She recommends visiting in July and early August, when various festivals are held, and packing a raincoat like locals.

If you go

Getting there: Most visitors arrive by cruise, including more than 1.5 million people in 2025, according to the Ketchikan Visitors Bureau.

Travelers can also fly into Ketchikan International Airport, a short ferry ride away on Gravina Island. Alaska Airlines provides daily service between Ketchikan and Seattle, as well as several other Alaska cities.

Where to stay: Ketchikan offers a variety of hotels. Campgrounds and vacation rentals are also available nearby.

The reporter on this story received access from Celebrity Cruises. USA TODAY maintains editorial control.

Source link

Alaska

‘Ticking time bomb’: Extreme snowfall fuels avalanche danger around Haines

Published

23 hours ago

January 8, 2026

Press Room

‘Ticking time bomb’: Extreme snowfall fuels avalanche danger around Haines

Avalanche professionals are warning backcountry adventurers to stay out of risky terrain after snow slammed the Upper Lynn Canal in late December.

National Weather Service data shows the storm dumped at least 44 inches of snow in Haines, making it the sixth snowiest five-day period in more than two decades. Other reports documented closer to six or seven feet.

“It was definitely one of the higher snowfalls you’ve gotten in five days, pretty much out of all your time that the station’s been there,” said Juneau-based meteorologist Edward Liske.

The dumping has created a risky situation in the backcountry that warrants extreme caution, said Jeff Moskowitz, the director of the Haines Avalanche Center.

His main message: “Avoid being in or around avalanche terrain.”

Earlier this week, Moskowitz dug a snow pit in town – in front of Haines’ historic Fort Seward – that confirmed his assessment. Standing chest-deep in the pit, he pointed out layers of snow stacked on top of each other, each representing a different storm.

There was a somewhat fluffy layer on top, from the snowfall in early January. Below that, there was a roughly three-foot-deep layer that was more compact, from the late December storm.

And then there was a thin, feeble layer of snow just inches from the ground that crumbled like sugar when Moskowitz ran his hand through it. That snow was on the ground before the big storm – it’s the layer that could collapse and trigger an avalanche under the weight of more precipitation, snowmachines or humans.

“We have about a meter of really strong snow just sitting over this sugar,” Moskowitz said, calling it a “dangerous combination for avalanches.”

Jeff Moskowitz directs the Haines Avalanche Center, the Chilkat Valley’s primary source of avalanche information.

Starting Dec. 27, the situation prompted the center to issue warnings about high avalanche risk in the Haines area. Moskowitz said people should stay off slopes that are greater than 30 degrees – and avoid traveling beneath them.

“It’s just a tricky situation, because there’s lots of snow, and we want to go play,” he said. “But we still have this strong-over-weak layering in most places.”

In some places, he said, the weak layer may be buried so deep that a human or snowmachine wouldn’t trigger it. But in shallower areas, like near trees or rocks. the layer would be closer to the surface and more likely to trigger an avalanche.

“People could ride that slope numerous times until one person finds that weak spot,” he said.

The deluge has stopped for now. But the situation could get worse before it gets better, as temperatures rise and the top layer of snow consolidates into a heavier, thicker slab. New precipitation or other conditions could trigger a natural avalanche cycle, wiping that weak layer out.

“Otherwise, it’s a little bit like a ticking time bomb,” Moskowitz said.

Haines Avalanche Center

The Haines Avalanche Center is a nonprofit and the main source of avalanche information in the Chilkat Valley, which draws backcountry adventurers from around the world. Moskowitz emphasized the importance of donations, grants and borough funding to make that work possible.

In the past, the Haines Borough has asked nonprofits to apply for funding from a $100,000 bucket. But Haines Mayor Tom Morphet said that, amid a steep budget deficit, the assembly discontinued that grant process for fiscal year 2026, which runs through June.

That has meant less funding than usual for the Avalanche Center, which has just three part-time employees, including Moskowitz.

“Less funding means less staff time,” Moskowitz said. “And staff time means that locals who are avalanche professionals and have certifications are out there, digging in the snow, making assessments, posting that information publicly.”

The center posts a general avalanche information product every week, plus a weather forecast and season summary. They also issue advisories when avalanche danger is high, including three days in a row in late December.

But the center does not currently have the funding or staff capacity to consistently publish advisories when avalanche risk is low, moderate or considerable.

“What we don’t want, is that there’s an accident that sparks the public interest in supporting the Avalanche Center,” Moskowitz said. “We just need to maintain the services we provide and just keep it going year after year after year.”

Morphet, the mayor, said the borough and assembly are “acutely aware” of the center’s importance.

Moskowitz said people who recreate in the backcountry can help by paying close attention to their surroundings – and he urged them to send in their observations online.

That could mean details about a human-triggered or natural avalanche, about where the sun has hit the mountains on a particular day, or an observation that feathery crystals – known as surface hoar – have started forming on the snow’s surface.

“There’s very little information that we’re not going to find useful,” Moskowitz said. “All of that is very valuable, and it helps to inform this bigger picture.”

Source link

Alaska

Alaska delegation mixed on Venezuela capture legality, day before presidential war powers vote

Published

1 day ago

January 8, 2026

Press Room

Alaska delegation mixed on Venezuela capture legality, day before presidential war powers vote

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTUU) – Alaska’s congressional delegation had mixed reactions Wednesday on the legality of the Trump administration’s actions in Venezuela over the weekend, just a day before they’re set to vote on a bill ending “hostilities” in Venezuela.

It comes days after former Venezuelan Nicolás Maduro was captured by American forces and brought to the United States in handcuffs to face federal drug trafficking charges.

All U.S. Senators were to be briefed by the administration members at 10 a.m. ET Wednesday, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, according to CBS News.

Spokespersons for Alaska Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, say they were at that meeting, but from their responses, the two shared different takeaways.

Sullivan, who previously commended the Trump administration for the operation in Venezuela, told KDLL after his briefing that the next steps in Venezuela would be done in three phases.

“One is just stabilization. They don’t want chaos,” he said.

“The second is to have an economic recovery phase … and then finally, the third phase is a transition to conduct free and fair elections and perhaps install the real winner of the 2024 election there, which was not Maduro.”

Murkowski spokesperson Joe Plesha said she had similar takeaways to Sullivan on the ousting of Maduro, but still held concerns on the legality.

“Nicolás Maduro is a dictator who led a brutally oppressive regime, and Venezuela and the world are better places without him in power,” Plesha said in a statement Wednesday. “While [Murkowski] continues to question the legal and policy framework that led to the military operation, the bigger question now is what happens next.”

Thursday, the Senate will decide what happens next when they vote on a war powers resolution which would require congressional approval to “be engaged in hostilities within or against Venezuela,” and directs the president to terminate the use of armed forces against Venezuela, “unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force.”

Several House leaders have also received a briefing from the administration according to CBS News. A spokesperson for Rep. Nick Begich, R-Alaska, said he received a House briefing and left believing the actions taken by the administration were legal.

“The information provided in today’s classified House briefing further confirmed that the actions taken by the Administration to obtain Maduro were necessary, time-dependent, and justified; and I applaud our military and the intelligence community for their exceptional work in executing this operation,” Begich said in a statement.

Looming vote

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-VA, authored the war powers resolution scheduled for debate Thursday at 11 a.m. ET — 7 a.m. AKST.

It’s a resolution which was one of the biggest topics of discussion on the chamber floors Wednesday.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-KY, said on the Senate floor Wednesdya that the actions taken by the administration were an “act of war,” and the president’s capture of Maduro violated the checks and balances established in the constitution, ending his remarks by encouraging his colleagues to vote in favor of the resolution.

“The constitution is clear,” Paul said. “Only Congress can declare a war.”

If all Democrats and independents vote for the Kaine resolution, and Paul keeps to his support, the bill will need three more votes to pass. If there is a tie, the vice president is the deciding vote.

“It’s as if a magical dust of soma has descended through the ventilation systems of congressional office buildings,” Paul continued Wednesday, referring to a particular type of muscle relaxant.

“Vague faces in permanent smiles and obedient applause indicate the degree that the majority party has lost its grip and have become eunuchs in the thrall of presidential domination.”

Legality of actions under scrutiny

U.S. forces arrested Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, from their Caracas home in an overnight operation early Saturday morning, Alaska time. Strikes accompanying the capture killed about 75 people, including military personnel and civilians, according to U.S. government officials granted anonymity by The Washington Post.

Maduro pleaded not guilty Monday in a New York courtroom to drug trafficking charges that include leading the “Cartel of the Suns,” a narco-trafficking organization comprised of high-ranking Venezuelan officials. The U.S. offered a $50 million reward for information leading to his capture.

Whether the U.S. was legally able to capture Maduro under both domestic and international law has been scrutinized in the halls of Congress. Members of the administration, like Secretary of State Marco Rubio, have been open in defending what they say was a law enforcement operation carrying out an arrest warrant, The Hill reports. Lawmakers, like Paul or Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, say the actions were an act of war and a violation of the constitution.

While the president controls the military as commander in chief, Congress constitutionally has the power to declare wars. Congressional Democrats have accused Trump of skirting the Constitution by not seeking congressional authorization before the operation.

Murkowski has not outright condemned or supported the actions taken by the administration, saying in a statement she was hopeful the world was safer without Maduro in power, but the way the operation was handled is “important.”

Late last year, I voted to proceed to debate on two resolutions that would have terminated the escalation of U.S. military operations against Venezuela absent explicit authorization from Congress. I took these votes because I believed the administration failed to provide Congress…
— Sen. Lisa Murkowski (@lisamurkowski) January 3, 2026

Sullivan, on the other hand, commended Trump and those involved in the operation for forcing Maduro to “face American justice,” in an online statement.

In the aftermath of last night’s remarkable operation, America and the world are safer, just as we were in the aftermath of previous strikes by the Trump administration against other American adversaries, including Quds Force Leader Qasem Soleimani, ISIS Leader al-Baghdadi, and…
— Sen. Dan Sullivan (@SenDanSullivan) January 3, 2026

Begich spokesperson Silver Prout told Alaska’s News Source Monday the Congressman believed the operation was “a lawful execution of a valid U.S. arrest warrant on longstanding criminal charges against Nicolás Maduro.”

The legality of U.S. military actions against Venezuela has taken significant focus in Washington over the past several months, highlighted by a “double-tap” strike — a second attack on the same target after an initial strike — which the Washington Post reported killed people clinging to the wreckage of a vessel after the military already struck it. The White House has confirmed the follow-up attack.

Sullivan, who saw classified video of the strike, previously told Alaska’s News Source in December he believed actions taken by the U.S. did not violate international law.

“I support them doing it, but they have to get it right,” he said. “I think so far they’re getting it right.”

Murkowski, who has not seen the video, previously said at an Anchorage press event the takeaways on that strike’s legality seem to be divided along party lines.

“I spoke to a colleague who is on the Intelligence Committee, a Republican, and I spoke to a colleague, a Democrat, who is on the Senate Armed Services Committee … their recollection or their retelling of what they saw [was] vastly different.”

See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com

Source link