Our country carries a complicated legacy of using education as both a tool for assimilation and a privilege reserved for the affluent.

When our state’s constitutional delegates established the right to a public education, it was a time when many children were still being sent to regional boarding schools, where their cultural identities were often stripped away. This history reminds us of the importance of working tirelessly to create a quality education system accessible to all children — a mission that remains one of the most significant endeavors for policymakers and everyone who cares about the future.

At its heart, education is about empowering children to realize their fullest potential and become valued members of our communities. Public education serves as a lifeline, ensuring that every child, no matter their circumstances, has an equal chance to pursue their dreams. It’s about leveling the playing field so that where a child lives or their family’s financial situation doesn’t determine their future.

We champion public schools because our kids have the right to learn to read. The ability to read is not just an academic skill; it’s a crucial stepping stone to future opportunities — negotiating contracts, finding good jobs or even buying a home. If children struggle to understand the written word, they face daunting barriers that can hinder their aspirations.

Investing in our neighborhood schools is a commitment to the well-being of our children. Schools are often safe havens where kids can find support, meals, and a sense of belonging. They serve as gathering places in our communities, providing shelter during crises, nurturing family connections, and celebrating joys or mourning losses together.

Public schools are not businesses, and treating them as such overlooks the diverse needs our children bring with them every day. Education is about creating opportunities, and when a child arrives hungry or grappling with challenges at home, we must respond with compassion and understanding. Learning becomes nearly impossible in the face of unmet basic needs.

If there’s one area we should refuse to compromise, it’s our commitment to our children’s education. Cuts to school funding only undermine what we strive to provide for their future. Our public schools are not failing; they are starving for the necessary resources to thrive. For over a decade, Alaska has failed to sufficiently invest in education, and the effects are painfully clear. Many schools are in disrepair, with children learning in classrooms plagued by black mold and in gyms that are physically unsafe. Teachers, who care deeply about their students, find themselves trying to educate in conditions that compromise their health and well-being. It’s no surprise that we’re witnessing increasing rates of absenteeism and a troubling rise in classrooms without certified teachers.

We tell our kids that actions speak louder than words, and for far too long, our state’s lack of investment in public schools has sent a disheartening message.

[Deena Bishop: Why Alaska education funding and policy need to go hand in hand]

Instead of using national assessment scores against students, we should view these assessments as a constructive tool — one that helps us understand where support is needed most. Our responsibility is to invest in the resources that will improve learning environments, not to deprive schools of what they need to be effective.

It is simply wrong and deeply unfair to keep the critical funding needed to support our students hostage to political agendas.

Every child deserves access to a safe and supportive public school, staffed by committed educators who want to make a difference in their lives. By ensuring stable and predictable funding, we can address immediate needs, like fixing broken windows and repairing non-functioning toilets, while also helping our communities retain the talented teachers who impact our children’s lives.

Alaskans clearly want more funding for schools, and as elected officials in Juneau, we must prioritize the support our public education system needs. Our children’s futures depend on it.

Sen. Löki Gale Tobin is the chair of the Alaska Senate Education Committee and is a Ph.D. student studying culturally responsive education at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

• • •

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.

Alaska small-business owners’ financial and economic outlook swung sharply negative this year amid political uncertainty as President Donald Trump sets high tariffs on major trading partners, according to a survey of close to 300 Alaska businesses by a small-business development group.

“Business optimism plunged” and the survey recorded the “highest level of economic pessimism ever recorded” in its eight-year history, according to a statement from the Alaska Small Business Development Center on Thursday.

There’s been a big shift in the economic conditions that Alaska businesses face, said Jon Bittner, the group’s state director, in an interview Friday.

“The largest issue is not specifically the tariffs, but the public uncertainty,” he said. “Businesses don’t know what the pricing will be, how they should market their products, or what to invest in.”

The survey represents businesses across Alaska, in urban and rural areas, and close to every industry sector, Bittner said.

Late last year, about 60% of businesses expected to have good or very good financial conditions this year, the survey found.

By April, only 46% of businesses held that view, the survey found.

“The numbers we are seeing are close to the numbers we saw during COVID,” Bittner said. “But the big difference is there was a lot of federal funding provided to businesses to weather that economic storm. That’s not the case this time.”

Political uncertainty emerged as a top-three challenge facing Alaska businesses, the survey found. Inflation and rising operating costs were also leading concerns. It’s the first time political uncertainty has landed in the top three challenges, according to the center.

The reversal in small-business confidence in Alaska mirrors apprehension among business interests nationwide as the Trump administration sets high tariffs on U.S. trading partners and allies around the world.

The tariffs, some in place and others delayed or adjusted, have caused higher prices and uncertainty for small businesses in Alaska. Many businesses have raised the cost of their goods after their suppliers increased their costs.

[Uncertainty and impacts from Trump’s shifting tariffs hit small businesses in Anchorage]

The survey compares results from a survey late last year of nearly 960 small businesses statewide to an April survey of 273 of those same businesses.

The survey found that 61% of businesses report supplier price increases from the tariffs.

In response to higher supply costs, 48% of the small businesses said they have raised their prices.

Thirty-five percent are attempting to absorb higher costs without raising prices, the survey found.

The businesses expecting a declining financial situation increased from 25% to 63%, the survey found.

Those expecting improvement dropped from 46% to 26%.

That’s an “unprecedented swing” from a positive to a negative outlook, the center said.

Jenna Wright, president of the Anchorage Economic Development Corp., said in an interview Friday that she is not surprised by the survey results.

Her group recently held a business roundtable to hear from several Alaska businesses. She said the business representatives anticipated growth at the year’s start, but now say they’ll be happy with just a flat year.

Wright said the rapid pace of actions from the Trump administration — the on-again, off-again tariffs, the flurry of executive orders, the frozen funding tied to major Biden-era bills — are having ripple effects through the economy.

“All the uncertainty causes businesses to pull back and reassess until they can find what the new point of stability is,” she said.

“I think the concerns are widespread across businesses,” she said.

“But I do want to say that on the other hand, some businesses are excited about the potential for unleashing Alaska’s energy, as it’s been called by Trump administration,“ Wright added. ”So it not all bad, and there are some areas for optimism.”

Bittner said “Alaska is particularly ill-suited” as the tariffs impact global trade, he said.

The state imports nearly all its goods from the Lower 48, while the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport, one of the top employers in Anchorage, relies on global trade, he said.

Alaska is also the only state with trucked goods that must come through Canada, which has threatened to impose tolls on Alaska-bound commerce and could do so if the U.S. and Canada got embroiled in an all-out trade war, Bittner said.

Thailand said it’s interested in co-developing a massive gas pipeline project in Alaska backed by President Donald Trump, as the Southeast Asian nation explores ways to cut its $46 billion trade surplus with the US before tariff talks. 

Thai officials discussed Bangkok’s potential involvement in the $44 billion Alaska venture — a long-delayed pipeline that will stretch across the state — through investments in gas exploration and production and related infrastructure with project officials, the Ministry of Energy said in a statement on Thursday. 

Thailand is also open to signing a long-term contract to import about 3 to 5 million tons of liquefied natural gas from Alaska annually, the ministry added. Trump’s backing for the project has seen Asian LNG buyers like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan express interest in joining forces with the US developers.

The Thai interest in the Alaska venture is seen as part of efforts to ramp up investments in the US to ward off the Trump administration’s plan to impose a steep 36% tariff on the country’s exports. Bangkok, which is preparing to start negotiations with Washington, has identified natural gas, petrochemical feedstock and farm commodities as US products that it will import more in order to help cut the trade gap. 

A stake in the Alaska project will also help net energy importer Thailand to lock in guaranteed supplies amid depleting gas reserves in the Gulf of Thailand. The decline in local output has pushed the country to increase LNG imports in recent years. 

Last year, natural gas accounted for 58% of Thailand’s power generation mix. Domestic output only made up about 60% of the 4,500 million standard cubic feet per day that Thailand needed, with the rest being sourced through LNG imports and supplies from gas fields in Myanmar. 

Viable option

With electric vehicles taking off and investments in artificial intelligence and power-hungry data centres likely to boost electricity demand, the Alaska project may be a “viable future option” for affordable electricity, said Prasert Sinsukprasert, permanent-secretary at the Energy Ministry, who led a delegation to Alaska earlier this week. 

The delegation discussed LNG trade and investment opportunities with Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy and executives from state-run Alaska Gasline Development Corp. and Glenfarne Group, which back the project. 

The Thai team also included executives of state-controlled energy firm PTT Plc, the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand and Electricity Generating Plc — all licensed LNG shippers in Thailand. The companies have been instructed to further discuss with their US counterparts on potential import deals, the ministry said. 

Still, the Alaskan project faces massive hurdles, and hasn’t yet secured any binding investments or purchase agreements despite some interest from governments in Asia that are looking for ways to head off Trump’s threatened tariffs. The project has been proposed in various forms for decades. Unlike similar facilities on the US Gulf Coast, it would be massive in scale, requiring the construction of a pipeline stretching 800 miles (1,287 kilometres). 

Governor Dunleavy has said that Trump’s support for the project will ensure it gets completed.