Connect with us

Alaska

OPINION: The vanishing soul of Alaska

Published

on

OPINION: The vanishing soul of Alaska


Fifty-one years ago, I landed in Anchorage, a midwestern lad who grew up in the shadow of political giants. They were men of integrity — Eugene McCarthy, Hubert Humphrey, Gaylord Nelson, George McGovern, Fritz Mondale — trustworthy and committed to the common good. Alaska, my chosen state, seemed brimming with optimism and possibility, firmly grounded under the governance of a state constitution the envy of the other 49 states, truly echoing Abraham Lincoln: “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

Today, those very ideals and lofty vision are vanishing just like our beloved glaciers.

About 2,500 years ago Aristotle, a brilliant Greek philosopher for the ages, proffered his thoughts on the soul. From the soul emanates truthfulness, reason and morality. “The good life is the highest good, flourishing and achieved by people of exceptional character and virtue. In moral law, the man who possesses character excellence will tend to do the good and right thing, at the right time, and in the right way”. Likewise, so true of government and our leaders. Conversely, “a person without soul, like government, is an empty being, fallacious, ethically oblivious, without courage, feeling, historically blind, and uncomprehending of moral law.”

Advertisement

“Only by connecting with the soul can good government be exposed. Government is more than a legal structure; it is a manner of life, a moral spirit. By exercising virtue it enables its citizens to flourish. The highest good is the happiness and virtue of every citizen.” What does this say about Alaska today?

I grieve for the demise of our former Alaska — a vision for the common good, for community, civility and civic responsibility; in essence, the vision in our constitution. Today, the soul of Alaska languishes, the sinister effect of our governor — devoid of trust and transparency, rewarding loyalty above merit, sharply restricting freedom of speech and public participation, and employing creative abuses of power against opponents and dissenters. Alas, it is we the electorate who have abetted and created this vanishing soul of our Alaska. Those we have elected are in thrall to duplicitous multinational corporations and the usual panoply of laughably impossible promises: the Permanent Fund dividend, no individual taxes, endless schemes and schemers — bamboozlers all, as Carl Sagan would say.

Regrettably, the Alaska framers established one glaring oversight: a strong executive, which became a liability with a governor bereft of any Aristotelean character such as virtue and truthfulness, clueless of any concept enabling Alaskans to flourish. He has weaponized the line-item veto against his critics, common sense and the greater good. Meanwhile his main “act” is performative auditioning for Trump’s starting lineup. And with a second term, this governor is freer from constraints, be they ethical, moral or legal, and unchecked by a complicit Legislature, attorney general and dedicated PFD vassals. His and others’ view of the PFD as sacrosanct continues to beggar Alaska and shutter buildings and schools, opportunities and aspirations.

The PFD is, ironically and hypocritically, “libertarian socialism,” as Ethan Berkowitz once said. Imagine if the $23 billion paid via dividends to date had instead enriched every Alaskan with the finest schools and educators, the entire University of Alaska system, infrastructure, early childhood education and childhood, welcoming parks and recreation, a world class marine highway system, and so much more. Imagine. And the consequent outmigration abates not. Yet the obscenely profitable drillers and extractors continue to receive billions in tax cuts, subsidies and credits, compliments of standard industry coercion — that old saw, that without such Alaskan largesse, jobs and taxes will evaporate.

The former freed slave, Frederick Douglass, said that reading and education is freedom, and its absence is enslavement. Contrast that with the irreconcilable words and actions — vetoes — of this “education governor,” a virtual condemnation of public education.

Advertisement

He has, thankfully, failed to reshape the Alaska judiciary in his warped image. His parade of unqualified appointments goes on, unimpeded.

The previous sordid behaviors by attorneys general were kept hush-hush until journalists found them out. With little to no public notice or comment allowed, his Department of Transportation, Department of Natural Resources and Department of Fish and Game operate carte blanche, in flagrant defiance of democratic norms. The Permanent Fund trustees, all of whom are his appointees, continue to debase the goal of achieving the greatest return on investment in favor of personal and dubious strategies. So also the board of the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, having squandered many state billions with almost no return to the state, and with almost no official Legislature oversight, a constitutional surrender to the executive branch. This disgraceful Alaskan epoch proceeds unimpeded.

Must we, as Alaskans of conscience, accept this unholy, ruthless, soulless state? Surely the optimism, promise and possibility we knew not so long ago is not irretrievable — Aristotle’s government with soul, whose citizenry is enabled to flourish, find happiness, find satisfaction in life and embrace trust in our government. Lincoln said, “The noblest work of God is an honest man.” May we, blessed with an abundance of honest, good, valorous and true women and men, reestablish the honor and soul of our Alaska.

Peter Mjos is a retired Anchorage physician.

The views expressed here are the writer’s and are not necessarily endorsed by the Anchorage Daily News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.

Advertisement





Source link

Alaska

Mat-Su Initial Attack Responding to Fire in Flat Lake

Published

on

Mat-Su Initial Attack Responding to Fire in Flat Lake


An engine and firefighters from the Division of Forestry & Fire Protection’s Mat-Su Area are responding to a fire near Flat Lake.

A caller reported a fire on an island in Flat Lake, with 2 foot flame lengths and structures near by.

The engine crew responding will be shuttled by boat to the fire. The fire is currently reported as .1 acre, creeping and smoldering.

Advertisement

Additional updates will be shared as they become available.

‹ Pioneer Peak Hotshots, Gannett Glacier Crew Join Fight Against 2 Fires Near Ruby

Categories: Active Wildland Fire

Tags: #FireYear2026 #2026AKFIRESEASON, 2026 Alaska Fire Season



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

Opinion: Alaska’s $10,000 question: Leave or stay?

Published

on

Opinion: Alaska’s ,000 question: Leave or stay?


A new home under construction in Potter Valley in Anchorage. (Loren Holmes / ADN)

This June, two very different offers reach Alaska families, and both amount to the same thing: $10,000. The difference is everything.

Bill Walker, running for governor, would hand every eligible Alaskan a one-time $10,000 check and then end the Permanent Fund dividend for good. Ask one question: Where does his $10,000 come from?

It comes from the Permanent Fund, the people’s own money and the savings Alaskans built for their children. Walker would spend that endowment once to pay Alaskans to give up the yearly dividend forever.

Think about what that does. It cancels the annual check that gives a family a reason to keep an Alaska address and replaces it with a single payout. You hand people their own savings, call it a gift and cut the tie that held them here in the same motion. It is the oldest mistake in governing money: raid what you have saved to buy a moment’s applause and call the spending generosity.

Advertisement

A plan that spends the people’s savings to send the people away is not bold. It is foolish.

Now consider the other $10,000. Through Alaska Housing Finance Corp., the state offers families up to $10,000 to build a new, energy-efficient home. AHFC raids nothing. It earns its own way. Over the years, it has returned more than $2 billion to the state treasury, and it spends some of that income the way any good business does: to win a customer.

Here, the customer is an Alaskan who wants to own a home, put down roots and stay.

That is the oldest sound move in business: Invest a little of what you earn to bring in someone who stays. The homeowner remains, the community gains a family and the corporation keeps earning. The money spent comes back. A plan that puts earnings to work to bring people home is not charity. It is clever.

Same amount. Opposite source. Opposite wisdom. One spends savings; the other spends earnings. One pays Alaskans to leave; the other pays them to stay. One empties the state; the other fills it.

Advertisement

This Homeownership Month, the choice is the size of a single check, and the whole question is where the check comes from and what it asks of you. Ten thousand dollars of your own fund, to wave you goodbye. Or $10,000, earned and reinvested, to help you stay and build.

Evan Swensen is the publisher of Publication Consultants in Anchorage and the author of “What’s the Money For: A Permanent Fund Mortgage Proposal.”

• • •

The Anchorage Daily News welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)adn.com. Send submissions shorter than 200 words to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Read our full guidelines for letters and commentaries here.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan’s primary challenger who has the same name is eligible for ballot, judge rules

Published

on

Alaska Sen. Dan Sullivan’s primary challenger who has the same name is eligible for ballot, judge rules


man with the same name and party affiliation as Alaska Republican U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan is eligible to challenge the senator in the August primary, a judge ruled Friday.

Superior Court Judge Thomas Matthews’ ruling overturns a June 15 decision by Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher to disqualify the challenger and keep him off the primary ballot. Matthews’ ruling can be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

Attorneys for the state have said Tuesday is the deadline for a final ruling so that ballots for the Aug. 18 primary can be printed.

The judge ruled that the division’s decision to exclude Dan J. Sullivan because his candidacy was not “in good faith” was not based on the Constitution, Alaska law or the division’s own regulations. The retired teacher from the small fishing community of Petersburg filed to challenge the incumbent.

Advertisement

Dan Sullivan, who has filed to run for U.S. Senate in Alaska, poses for a photo Friday, June 26, 2026, in Petersburg, Alaska.

Katie Holmlund/AP Photo


“Instead, the decision was based upon a new, previously unstated, ‘good faith’ criteria,” the judge wrote.

The division is appealing the decision, Sam Curtis, a spokesperson with the state Department of Law, said by email Saturday. Jeffrey Robinson, an attorney for Dan J. Sullivan, said in an email he expected the division to appeal and couldn’t comment until the Alaska Supreme Court rules on the case.

Advertisement

The controversy over the two Dan Sullivans has underscored the stakes involved in the incumbent’s reelection campaign. The Alaska race is one of about half a dozen U.S. Senate races expected to be highly competitive in the fall, and the seat is one Democrats are trying to flip in their efforts to try to regain the majority. But it’s expected to be an uphill battle in a state that President Trump won by 13 points in 2024.

The senator and allies, including the National Republican Senatorial Committee, have condemned the challenger’s efforts to join the race, arguing his presence could confuse voters. Republican Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom earlier this month opened an investigation into the non-Senator Sullivan’s candidacy.

Under Alaska’s election system, the top four candidates from the primary, regardless of party, move on to the ranked-choice November general election.

The senator has accused the challenger Sullivan of working with Democrats and the campaign of Democratic former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola — who is considered the senator’s main opponent — to cause confusion and boost Peltola’s chances. The sitting senator brought the situation to reporters’ attention at the Capitol earlier this month, accusing Democrats of being “complicit in trying to trick Alaskans” to “rig an election in their favor.” 

Dan Sullivan

Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, speaks to reporters at the Capitol in Washington, D.C., June 30, 2025.

Advertisement

Mark Schiefelbein/AP Photo


Peltola’s campaign and state Democrats have denied the allegation, as has the challenger.

Sen. Sullivan and Peltola are the highest-profile candidates in the crowded race and the only ones to report raising any money.

Beecher has said she determined the challenger Sullivan is not eligible to run because his candidacy was not filed in good faith and instead was done with an intent to confuse voters. She said he had registered to vote as Daniel J. Sullivan Jr. and, in conjunction with his candidacy, changed his party affiliation to Republican. She also cited similarities between his campaign website and the senator’s, and his work with a consultant whose clients have included some Democrats. She did not mention finding any evidence of alleged coordination.

In arguing to keep the challenger disqualified, attorneys for the state pushed back on suggestions the ballot could be designed in a way to reduce voter confusion over two candidates with the same name and party running for the same office.

Advertisement

“The Constitution does not require States to place a sham candidate on the ballot and then attempt to mitigate the damage through design choices,” attorney Rachel Witty, with the Alaska Department of Law, and outside attorneys Christopher Murray and Michael Francisco wrote in court filings.

Attorneys for the challenger Sullivan argued that the Constitution lays out three exclusive qualifications for the Senate, addressing only age, citizenship and residency. They said Beecher lacked the legal authority to boot their client off the ballot.

The challenger Sullivan has said that sharing a name and party affiliation with the incumbent gave him “an instant megaphone.” But the 69-year-old retired teacher and former U.S. Forest Service employee said he had considered a run for some time and had grown frustrated with the senator.

He initially was certified on the state’s candidate list as Dan J. Sullivan, with the senator listed as Dan S. Sullivan and identified as the incumbent.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending