Day: March 13, 2026

Anchorage Democratic Rep. Zack Fields was listening to a speech by Republican U.S. Rep. Nick Begich III when he got fed up.

Fields scribbled a note on a nearby sheet of paper: “ICE out of Alaska” and held it up on the House floor for a few minutes while Begich spoke to lawmakers. 

That simple act riled Republicans, who sought to officially reprimand Fields and kicked off a sequence of events that roiled the state House this week and snarled legislative business for a day.

“That was probably not the best or most effective way to, you know, bear witness to the horror that ICE is inflicting on America,” Fields said in an interview Wednesday, the day after Begich’s speech. “But, you know, thinking about my kids, that was the one thing that I could do at that moment that didn’t interrupt the speech or get more dramatic.”

Begich, Alaska’s lone member of the U.S. House of Representatives, has been generally supportive of President Donald Trump’s administration, including the use of federal agents to aggressively imprison people and remove them from the country.

Some federal agents have acted violently, shooting 14 people in Minnesota, and killing two. Agents in other states have also killed unarmed American citizens and noncitizens.

Begich did not mention those shootings during his speech, instead repeating the Trump administration’s stated justification for the immigration crackdown — that it is intended to address drug trafficking.

“Nick Begich was going on about fentanyl and ICE, and it’s just not right,” Fields said. “That just completely outraged me, because ICE is arresting random children and adults who have been here for years, following the law, founding local businesses. I just thought it was grossly misrepresentative, outrageous, and I got angry about it because my kid, my kids, go to school with a bunch of families who are worried they’re going to be kidnapped or separated from their children.”

Fields’ sign was not visible to the Gavel Alaska cameras in the chamber and does not appear in a recording of Begich’s speech.

Neither Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, nor Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, saw the sign. Both were seated behind Begich as he spoke.

Hours after Fields held up his sign, members of the House’s all-Republican minority issued a statement denouncing his action, saying that it violated legislative rules and decorum.

“Sitting on the House floor during our Congressman’s annual keynote address is not the place for disruption and waving protest signs. This behavior reflects a lack of professional maturity and a blatant disregard for the rules of this body,” said House Minority Leader DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer, in the statement.

The following day, Johnson proposed that the House “issue a formal reprimand” against Fields. 

House Rules Chair Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak and a member of the House majority, spoke against the idea, saying she spoke to Fields about it, and “further transgressions … will not be tolerated in the chamber.”

Fields spoke in his defense, noting in part that “federal agents murdered multiple American citizens, including shooting a nurse in the back,” a reference to the killing of Alex Pretti by federal agents in Minnesota. 

Fields’ description drew immediate objections from Republican members of the House minority.

“It’s an insult to every member here,” said Rep. Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River. “Maybe it was hidden from the cameras or not but that’s an insult. If a member here has an opinion, they can express it in public speech, they can put it on social media, they can shout it on a street corner on the soap box, they can take part in marches, they could even do it as we see in special orders as long as it’s done without objection.”

During a break in formal debate, Rep. Jamie Allard, R-Eagle River, called Fields’ description “bullshit,” a comment loud enough to be heard across the House chamber.

“I yelled bullshit because Zack Fields called ICE a bunch of murderers,” she said after the House adjourned for the day.

The vote to reprimand Fields arrived on the same day that lawmakers took up a contentious vote to extend a state declaration of disaster that began when ex-Typhoon Halong devastated Western Alaska last year.

The House majority also attempted to force a vote on the state’s fast-track supplemental budget bill, something opposed by the minority and another factor in the day’s tensions.

At one point in debates, Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, called a halt to proceedings in order to verbally dress down Saddler.

The day ended with the resolution against Fields still tabled and unlikely to come up again.  

“And looking back, you know, probably there was a better way to do it,” Fields said afterward about his actions during Begich’s speech. “Obviously it was not in accordance with the procedure. But it’s like, what do we do when there are these outrageous acts and some people don’t even want to acknowledge them? … I think that’s a challenge every citizen of conscience faces every day.”

As for the sign? Fields said it’s already been recycled.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

The Trump administration has already put money into a huge and controversial mining project by investing in a company that would benefit from the development.

Now the administration is considering putting federal money into another aspect of the project: the proposed Ambler Access Project that would put a 211-mile industrial road through the currently undisturbed lands in the foothills of the Brooks Range mountains.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum discussed the idea of federal investment in the Ambler Road during a brief news conference in Anchorage on Thursday.

“I’d say the discussions are ongoing, but there’s a sense of urgency around this,” he said at the news conference, held at the Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport during a stopover in a trip by administration officials to an energy conference in Japan. Gov. Mike Dunleavy met with Burgum and other officials during the stopover but was not part of Japan trip.

The Ambler Access Project is sponsored by an Alaska state economic agency, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority. It would link the existing road system with the remote Ambler mining district in Northwest Alaska. That region holds large amounts of copper, and that has been much of the focus of exploration to date, though there are other minerals as well in the region.

Trilogy Metals Inc., based in Canada, is the main company operating the Ambler mining district and the company in which the Trump administration has invested $36.5 million. Trilogy has partnered with South32, an Australian mining company, to promote Ambler development.

Burgum said the lack of road access that has stymied commercial development in the remote region is due to change, now that President Donald Trump approved the Ambler Access Project, reversing a Biden administration decision.

Because of Trump’s go-ahead decision, “we think that the financing for the road is actually not going to be that difficult. There’s multiple parties that want to participate,” Burgum said at the news conference.

The Ambler Access Project is planned as an industrial-only road, with no public access, he noted. The plan is for industrial users to repay the government for road construction, and the nation needs the minerals that are in the Ambler region, he said. For those reasons, federal investment in the road makes sense, he said.

“The U.S. is actively considering whether to participate in financing or maybe even be one of the equity partners in that road itself,” he said. Getting enough financial support for the road will not be a problem, he said. “Because the resource there is so rich, I think the road financing will come together,” he said.

In October, when Trump announced his approval of the Ambler project, he also announced the investment in Trilogy Metals, which gained the federal government a 10% stake in the company.

The Ambler Access Project has drawn widespread criticism from environmentalists, tribal governments and others.

Critics of the mining road project have mostly cited environmental factors in their opposition, notably risks to the Western Arctic Caribou Herd and to salmon, both of which are important subsistence resources to hunters and fishers in Indigenous communities in the region.

But critics also object to the idea of public funding for a road to be used only by private industry. Although the project plan calls for the industrial users to repay the state for construction and maintenance, opponents of the Ambler Road argue that the project puts the state at too much financial risk.

On Monday, Ambler Road opponents released a study that found the project would cost the state $2 billion for construction, maintenance and financing.

That estimate is much higher than the cost estimates previously presented by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, which is coordinating studies and permitting of the project. A 2024 supplemental environmental impact statement put the cost at $765.2 million.

The new cost report, compiled by engineer Lois Epstein for the organization Defend the Brooks Range, does not consider the type of federal funding proposed by Burgum.

Ambler Road critics said it underscores some of the project’s risks, nonetheless.

“This report tells us what we already knew – this road is a bad deal for Alaskans,” Maddie Halloran, state director at the Alaska Wilderness League, said in a statement released Monday. “After widespread opposition from Alaskans during the environmental impact statement process, it’s adding insult to injury to have this project pushed through to benefit foreign mining companies. This isn’t economic growth for our state, it’s a giveaway that puts corporate profit ahead of Alaska’s communities and our environment.”

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

The Alaska House of Representatives on Thursday postponed its final vote on a fast-track supplemental budget bill that would use the state’s largest savings account to cover some shortfalls in the current state budget.

Members of the House voted 21-19 to pull the bill from the House floor after it became clear that there were not enough votes to fund the bill from savings. 

Thirty votes are needed to spend from the Constitutional Budget Reserve; a vote to spend from the reserve failed 22-18 before legislators reversed course, rescinded their rejection and sent the bill back to the House Rules Committee. 

All members of the House’s multipartisan coalition majority voted in favor of the postponement; all members of the Republican House minority voted against it. 

Rep. Mia Costello, R-Anchorage, was the only member of the minority to vote in favor of spending from the reserve. All legislators voted in favor of the underlying bill, even if they disagreed on how to pay for it.

A new vote on spending from the reserve could take place as early as Monday, but it might not be needed: On Friday, the Alaska Department of Revenue is expected to release a revised state budget forecast, and members of the House minority indicated they may be willing to bet that oil revenue from the Iran war will fill the gap.

“We have been blessed in this state. We have been blessed right now with the ability to look a little bit into the future … and notice that we have an additional amount of revenue that we have to spend. How incredible is that?” said Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna. 

Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage and co-chair of the House Finance Committee, said he does not believe oil prices will rise high enough and stay high enough to pay for the supplemental budget bill without savings.

If Alaska North Slope oil prices were to average $90 per barrel between March 10 and June 30, that would raise an additional $300 million in state revenue — not enough to meet the need, Josephson said. Prices would have to average more than $105 per barrel for that period to avoid a withdrawal from savings, he said.

The bill in front of the House on Thursday would have spent $373.5 million from savings to unlock federal transportation grants, cover last year’s wildfire response spending, and pay for part of the cost of dealing with the disaster caused by ex-Typhoon Halong in Western Alaska. 

All those items are additions for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30. Lawmakers are simultaneously working on a separate budget for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1.

The bill in front of the House on Thursday was adopted by the Senate on Wednesday after the six-person Senate minority negotiated the removal of $150 million in items in exchange for their votes on the bill and the draw from savings. Those items will still need to be funded later.

The biggest remaining item in the bill is $129.6 million to refill the state’s higher education investment fund, which was drained last year amid a veto-involved dispute between the Legislature and governor. 

The item that has garnered the most attention is smaller — $70.2 million that would be used to match federal grants for highway construction.

The state’s construction industry has been lobbying heavily for the Legislature to approve that money early so companies can make plans for the summer construction season.

“There is no way I would ever vote to gamble the future of our construction and oil and gas industry on months of oil prices in the most volatile market and geopolitical conditions of my lifetime,” said Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage. 

Fields said any delay has a cost: “Even if oil prices come in higher for the rest of the year, the Department of Transportation cannot put out bids based on price forecasts. They have to have a budget bill passed by us.”

Without firm projects, construction companies cannot make hiring decisions, he said.

“This is now a starvation year for the construction industry,” Fields said.

The postponement preserves some political leverage for the 19 Republican members of the House minority. Because 30 votes are needed to spend from the reserve and there are 21 lawmakers in the coalition majority, money can’t be spent from the reserve without at least nine minority members in support.

After the floor vote, House Minority Leader DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer, said the vote was not about leverage, but, but that the minority voted to protect savings ahead of Friday’s forecast. 

She pointed out that as currently written, the bill would have authorized lawmakers to spend hundreds of millions of dollars from the reserve, regardless of how much extra money the state earns from the Iran war. 

“What we were really doing is making sure that we didn’t just give a full, free opportunity to take money from our savings and spend $378 million without any controls whatsoever.”

Republican lawmakers said they had not seen the revenue forecast yet, but expressed confidence in increasing oil prices, despite uncertainty around the Iran war.

“There’s a saying in the infantry, ‘no plan survives first contact with the enemy,’ right? So I don’t know what’s going to happen with the Iran war,” said Rep. Will Stapp, R-Fairbanks and a veteran of the Iraq war.

“I can tell you, there’s been a lot of oil and gas infrastructure that has been blown up, and you generally can’t rebuild that stuff in a day,” he said. “So I don’t expect, personally, oil to be like $150. It is going to be higher than it was three weeks ago, probably for a while.” 

But members of the House majority were clearly frustrated by the delay.

“Volatility is a 10 out of 10 right now,” said Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham. “I’ve never seen a responsible finance committee or responsible leadership in the House make such an effort to gamble on the future in terms of oil prices.” 

Rep. Calvin Schrage, D-Anchorage, serves as co-chair of the House Finance Committee.

He pointed to past forecasts where revenues did not materialize and budgets had to be revised, and called the minority members’ move irresponsible. 

“That’s what they were suggesting today, that we rely on a forecast — unrealized, unpredictable, uncertain money to finance a budget when industry and Alaskans are asking for certainty. I mean, as recently as last year, we saw the folly of that sort of budgeting methodology, and it’s irresponsible.”

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE