Category: Alaska News

Fire activity is decreasing across Alaska, with only two staffed fires remaining near Ambler and Fairbanks as crews continue containment and monitor lightning risk.

As election officials across the country steel themselves for the midterm elections in less than five months, President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting voting by mail threatens to upend their preparations.

The executive order instructs the U.S. Postal Service to refuse to deliver ballots in states that don’t provide lists of voters or meet other requirements. It has created a sense of deep uncertainty and concern among election officials as they consider how to comply, according to a review of court documents and interviews with election officials and experts on election administration.

The March 31 executive order, and a proposed Postal Service rule published June 2 that would put the order’s requirements into effect, raise serious logistical and procedural challenges for those running elections, they say. Rural areas with limited resources are especially at risk, but jurisdictions of all sizes could be forced to scramble.

The executive order is the latest step taken by Trump to assert control over state-run elections, along with the stalled SAVE America Act, which would require voters to provide documents proving their citizenship. The Justice Department, under Trump’s control, is also trying to obtain state voter rolls.

“This is just another death by a thousand cuts that clerks have been experiencing since the 2020 elections,” said Barb Byrum, the Democratic clerk of Ingham County, Michigan, which includes Lansing.

First-ever national voter list

The order and the rule require states to provide lists of mail-in voters if they want the Postal Service to deliver ballots, marking the first time the federal government has created a national voter list. 

Mail ballot envelopes must meet certain design standards. And federal agencies have to compile lists of voting-age citizens to share with each state in an effort to root out noncitizen voters.

But Democratic states and voting rights groups argue the executive order — and the accompanying proposed rule — represent an illegal overreach by Trump because states administer elections under the U.S. Constitution. Trump and his Republican allies say the restrictions are necessary for election security and to combat noncitizen voting, which occurs extremely rarely.

The Postal Service didn’t respond to questions from States Newsroom. The agency has said the rule “will facilitate the faithful execution of federal law.”

Multiple lawsuits have been brought against the order, but a federal judge in Washington, D.C., in May declined to halt it, partly because the Trump administration hadn’t taken enough action to implement its requirements. Another federal judge in Massachusetts is weighing a separate request to block the order.

With the executive order still in effect, at least for now, election officials and experts who work with them are taking the ramifications of it and the proposed Postal Service rule seriously.

“We don’t have a national voter registration list. We don’t have, currently, a list of sanctioned, authorized voters to vote by mail at the federal level,” said Tammy Patrick, chief programs officer at Election Center, operated by the National Association of Election Officials.  “That’s a big, big change in the way elections have always been conducted.”

Sweeping changes very quickly

In court papers filed in May, local election officials and local governments representing 26 jurisdictions across the country warned the executive order would “severely disrupt” local election administration and force the implementation of sweeping changes within months. Implementation of the order’s requirements will largely fall on local election officials, they argued.

Byrum was among the officials to sign onto the brief, along with others in Boston, and counties in Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin and elsewhere.

Under the executive order, states that want to send ballots through the mail must provide the Postal Service with lists of voters they intend to provide a mail ballot. Local election officials will play a large role in helping states develop these lists, according to the court papers, and will have primary responsibility to help voters address any errors.

And Trump wants it all in place before November. The executive order’s proposed timelines “present a logistical nightmare for local election officials,” the officials warn.

“The general rule is don’t make changes before a big election because there’s always something you didn’t think about,” said Carolina Lopez, executive director of the Partnership for Large Election Jurisdictions, a nonpartisan organization for election officials in jurisdictions of at least 250,000 people.

The proposed Postal Service rule says the agency would launch a portal where states would submit voter lists and make updates. But a number of questions remain, said Lopez, who previously spent a decade administering elections in Miami-Dade County, Florida.

The portal poses the potential for bottlenecks in the election system and it’s unclear what would happen if it was ever offline. The United States has a decentralized election system, with states each running their own elections. By contrast, the Postal Service portal would create a single point of failure, raising concerns about the security of information on tens of millions of voters.

Additionally, while every state maintains a voter registration list, there is no nationwide standard for the formatting of that data. It’s unclear whether the portal will accept data in a variety of formats — the proposed rule only says the Postal Service wouldn’t alter the data provided by states.

“It looks a little different across the country and therefore normalizing the data will be a process,” Lopez said.

Struggle for small, rural counties

The Department of Justice initially said in a court document that the Department of Homeland Security planned to obtain voter data from the Postal Service before backpedaling a few days later. Still, Homeland Security continues to have “preliminary conversations” about data sharing, the Justice Department said in a subsequent court filing.

DHS operates the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements, or SAVE, system that can scan voter data to identify possible noncitizens. The Justice Department has sued 30 states in an effort to force them to turn over their unredacted voter rolls, which include sensitive personal data such as dates of birth, driver’s license and full or partial Social Security numbers, for the purpose of running the information through SAVE.

The proposed Postal Service rule also imposes standards on ballot envelopes that states must meet if they want to send ballots through the mail.

Envelopes must include an election mail logo, be automation compatible and have a bar code that allows for tracking. These are already considered best practices — and many jurisdictions across the country already follow them — but the rule would make them mandatory.

Election offices in small, rural counties may struggle to comply. In many places, a single person is in charge of elections and may not even be on the job full time, Patrick said. 

“There’s rural offices all across the country, some of them don’t have their own computer in their office — they are sharing it with the tax assessor or whatever — they don’t have the ability to generate those serialized tracking codes, intelligent mail bar codes,” Patrick said. “Because they’re physically hand-writing these envelopes out or they’re using a rubber stamp with their address on it.”

Neither the executive order or the proposed Postal Service rule include any federal funding for implementation, something that would likely have to be appropriated by Congress.

Some Republican states have championed the executive order. A dozen GOP state attorneys general filed court documents defending the order and arguing that it “will enhance the security of absentee voting.”

“It is vital to the strength of our republic that we ensure only American citizens vote in our elections and that mail-in and absentee ballots are secure and reliable,” South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson said in a statement earlier this spring.

But Matt Crane, a Republican who is the executive director of the Colorado County Clerks Association, said the executive order and the proposed rule mark an overreach by the federal government into duties best left to states and local governments. 

The biggest reaction among Colorado clerks, he said, has been, “why?”

“No offense to our friends at the post office,” Crane said, “but I trust our processes more than I trust theirs.”

The post Local election officials reel over ‘logistical nightmare’ of Trump’s vote-by-mail order appeared first on Chilkat Valley News.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, is among several members of Congress trying to prevent the National Science Foundation from dismantling portions of an instrument system that monitors the nation’s oceans.

The National Science Foundation plans to pull out much of the instrumentation in the Ocean Observatories Initiative system, which began operating in 2016 and was intended to last for three decades.

The system has more than 900 instruments that track ocean conditions, including circulation and currents, temperature, marine life, weather events and data used to manage seafood harvests. Under the Trump administration, the National Science Foundation plans in the coming year to remove instruments from the waters off Alaska, as well as Washington state, Oregon, North Carolina and Greenland. The first removal is scheduled for Tuesday in waters off Oregon.

In a letter sent Monday to Acting NSF Director Brian Stone, Murkowski and nine other senators urged the agency to reverse the decision.

“Eliminating most of this complex ocean monitoring system threatens the safety of our coastal communities while undermining our nation’s ability to monitor coastal environments, marine currents, and extreme weather events,” they wrote.

The system is especially important this year because of the powerful El Nino system that is developing in the Pacific Ocean and is poised to disrupt widespread weather patterns, the letter said. “The OOI system delivers crucial information about our ocean patterns and weather, reaching and touching all Americans. The effort to dismantle this vital network, jeopardizing decades of prior research, must be reversed in order to prioritize public safety,” the letter said.

The system is also of particular importance to Alaska’s multibillion-dollar fishing industry, which has objected to the NSF move.

A separate letter to Stone from 25 U.S. House Democrats called the decision “absurd.”

“This decision means that instead of paying for the valuable insights that can be gleaned from the 10-years-and-counting continuous monitoring, taxpayers are now paying for research vessels to span the ocean dredging up hundreds of pieces of instrumentation,” they wrote. “This is pathetic. In a time of strained resources, the NSF is wasting time and money to destroy its own scientific infrastructure.”

Murkowski was the only Republican to sign either letter. Spokespeople for the two other members of Alaska’s congressional delegation, Sen. Dan Sullivan and Rep. Nick Begich, also Republicans, did not respond to emailed queries about their positions on the Ocean Observatories Initiative changes.

A spokesperson for the National Science Foundation defended the changes as a “descoping” rather than a dismantling of the system. Descoping is a business neologism that usually refers to a reduction in the scope of a project or a weakening of a project’s objectives.

The system is not being canceled, the spokesperson said in an emailed message. “All previously collected OOI data will remain accessible through the OOI Data Center. The decision to descope aligns with NSF’s wider strategy of a nimbler approach to prioritize support for evolving scientific priorities and emerging technologies, as well as smart lifecycle management within its research infrastructure portfolio,” the spokesperson said.

The decision to pull out ocean sensors is in line with other Trump administration policies and with the plans for ocean science described in Project 2025, a report issued in 2023 by the conservative Heritage Foundation that was seen as a blueprint for a second Trump administration. Russell Vought, the prime author of Project 2025, is now Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Project 2025 called for the dismantling of NOAA’s science operations, describing the agency as a “colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity.” Deep cuts to NOAA orchestrated by billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, have already affected fishery management.

As for the National Science Foundation, the Trump administration is proposing a 55% funding cut for the coming fiscal year. That is on top of deep cuts made last year that resulted in mass firings and cancellation of more than 1,000 grants, most of them aimed at education.

The post Alaska’s Murkowski among Congress members seeking to save ocean science network appeared first on Chilkat Valley News.

The 53-year-old Columbia state ferry is set to resume mainline sailings between Alaska and Washington on Thursday, more than a month later than originally scheduled when it began a maintenance layup period last November, replacing the Kennicott which will now undergo maintenance.

The switch comes as the Kennicott developed a mechanical problem last Friday that forced the ship to return to its origin point of Bellingham, Washington, according to a service notice posted Saturday by the Alaska Marine Highway System. The Kennicott departed again at 3 a.m. Saturday, but “due to the late departure and heavy tidal movement this coming week, the schedule has been delayed significantly.”

The Kennicott is now scheduled to dock in Juneau from 2-4 p.m. Tuesday before heading north, then 3-6 a.m. on Wednesday before heading toward Ketchikan. The ship is scheduled to arrive in Ketchikan at 12:45 a.m. on Thursday, after which all passengers will transfer to the Columbia, which is scheduled to depart at 3:45 a.m. and arrive in Bellingham at 8:45 p.m. Friday.

That arrival would be four hours later than the time in the published AMHS schedule for the Columbia as of Monday evening. That schedule also shows the vessel departing at 9:45 p.m., compared to a 6 p.m. departure the following week (June 26).

“I think it might have even already had its sea trial, so the Columbia is pretty much ready to go,” Gabe Strong, a spokesperson for the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, said in an interview Monday.

While the Kennicott is scheduled to be in a long-term maintenance period once it reaches Ketchikan, the ship will be able to fill in for the Columbia or on other routes if needed during the coming months, Strong said.

The Columbia, which has about twice the vehicle deck space of the Kennicott, was originally scheduled to return from its winter layover on May 6, but that date was pushed back to May 20 and then June 5. Only one of the ships at a time has been operating, with ferry officials stating they don’t have enough crews for both vessels. That has resulted, among other things, in a cancellation of sailings across the Gulf of Alaska.

Strong said a disruption to smaller ship sailings in Southeast Alaska is also past, with the LeConte ferry back online after problems that kept it out of service for an extended period. The newer Hubbard ferry ended up alternating between its usual Juneau-Skagway-Haines day route and service to other Southeast communities normally handled by the Le Conte.

This story was originally published by the Juneau Independent.

The post Columbia ferry resumes sailings Thursday after seven-month layup; Kennicott heads for maintenance appeared first on Chilkat Valley News.

This story has been updated with a response from Sen. Dan Sullivan’s office on Tuesday, June 16, 2026 at 3:02 p.m.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, is among several members of Congress trying to prevent the National Science Foundation from dismantling portions of an instrument system that monitors the nation’s oceans.

The National Science Foundation plans to pull out much of the instrumentation in the Ocean Observatories Initiative system, which began operating in 2016 and was intended to last for three decades.

The system has more than 900 instruments that track ocean conditions, including circulation and currents, temperature, marine life, weather events and data used to manage seafood harvests. Under the Trump administration, the National Science Foundation plans in the coming year to remove instruments from the waters off Alaska, as well as Washington state, Oregon, North Carolina and Greenland. The first removal is scheduled for Tuesday in waters off Oregon.

In a letter sent Monday to Acting NSF Director Brian Stone, Murkowski and nine other senators urged the agency to reverse the decision.

“Eliminating most of this complex ocean monitoring system threatens the safety of our coastal communities while undermining our nation’s ability to monitor coastal environments, marine currents, and extreme weather events,” they wrote.

The system is especially important this year because of the powerful El Nino system that is developing in the Pacific Ocean and is poised to disrupt widespread weather patterns, the letter said. “The OOI system delivers crucial information about our ocean patterns and weather, reaching and touching all Americans. The effort to dismantle this vital network, jeopardizing decades of prior research, must be reversed in order to prioritize public safety,” the letter said.

The system is also of particular importance to Alaska’s multibillion-dollar fishing industry, which has objected to the NSF move.

A separate letter to Stone from 25 U.S. House Democrats called the decision “absurd.”

“This decision means that instead of paying for the valuable insights that can be gleaned from the 10-years-and-counting continuous monitoring, taxpayers are now paying for research vessels to span the ocean dredging up hundreds of pieces of instrumentation,” they wrote. “This is pathetic. In a time of strained resources, the NSF is wasting time and money to destroy its own scientific infrastructure.”

Murkowski was the only Republican to sign either letter. 

Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, is paying attention to the issue, spokesperson Amanda Coyne said on Tuesday. “Senator Sullivan has concerns about the dismantling the Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI). He will be meeting with the Acting Director of the NSF tomorrow to raise those concerns,” she said by email.

Spokespeople for the other member of Alaska’s congressional delegation, Republican Rep. Nick Begich, did not respond by midday Tuesday to an emailed query sent Monday.

A spokesperson for the National Science Foundation defended the changes as a “descoping” rather than a dismantling of the system. Descoping is a business neologism that usually refers to a reduction in the scope of a project or a weakening of a project’s objectives.

The system is not being canceled, the spokesperson said in an emailed message. “All previously collected OOI data will remain accessible through the OOI Data Center. The decision to descope aligns with NSF’s wider strategy of a nimbler approach to prioritize support for evolving scientific priorities and emerging technologies, as well as smart lifecycle management within its research infrastructure portfolio,” the spokesperson said.

The decision to pull out ocean sensors is in line with other Trump administration policies and with the plans for ocean science described in Project 2025, a report issued in 2023 by the conservative Heritage Foundation that was seen as a blueprint for a second Trump administration. Russell Vought, the prime author of Project 2025, is now Trump’s director of the Office of Management and Budget.

Project 2025 called for the dismantling of NOAA’s science operations, describing the agency as a “colossal operation that has become one of the main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity.” Deep cuts to NOAA orchestrated by billionaire Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, have already affected fishery management.

As for the National Science Foundation, the Trump administration is proposing a 55% funding cut for the coming fiscal year. That is on top of deep cuts made last year that resulted in mass firings and cancellation of more than 1,000 grants, most of them aimed at education.

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Alaska media coverage of a highly touted and long anticipated “connector trail” in downtown Anchorage has produced a series of “feel good” stories that sing the praises of a project widely considered to be a dream come true—at least by its backers. Those include a high-powered coalition of local recreational trail advocates and elected officials at both the city and state levels.  

In the words of Anchorage Park Foundation executive director Beth Nordlund, the new trail segment is “a big community accomplishment. . . . There’s really something to celebrate here.”

Articles in the Alaska Beacon, Anchorage Daily News, Alaska Public Media and Alaska’s News Source have focused on that celebration while extolling the connector’s significance.

About 1.3 miles long, this small trail segment will join the Tony Knowles Coastal Trail and Ship Creek Trail when finished in 2027, if all goes according to plan. Not only will the connector add a final piece to Anchorage’s popular 32-mile “Moose Loop,” it will also be an important piece of the much grander “Alaska Long Trail,” which is actually a network of multipurpose trails that when finally complete will stretch some 500 miles from Seward to Fairbanks and, along the way, pass through Anchorage. This “dream trail,” as Anchorage Mayor Suzanne LaFrance calls it, is expected to be a world-class pathway that rivals the famed Appalachian and Pacific Coast Trails.

All of this had the connector trail’s boosters in an excited frenzy at a ground-breaking ceremony in May. The media coverage reflected that.

But there’s a part of this story that no one in the media seems to have questioned: the price.

Connector-trail articles in local media put the price tag of this 1.3-mile segment at somewhere between $15.6 and $19 million.

YIKES was my first thought when seeing that cost estimate. Can that be true? More than $15 million for a bit more than one mile of trail? That kind of funding seems not only extravagant, but as one local letter-writer to the ADN noted, “From the outside, it appears completely fiscally irresponsible. Please help me to understand this.”

Like that letter writer, I would appreciate an explanation for what appears to be hugely excessive government spending, the majority of it state and federal funding according to media coverage, but some of it also local money.

So far, I have not seen or heard any such justification.

It is true that the connector-trail project will include a cultural “plaza” and public art installation dedicated to the Dena’ina Athabascan people who lived here long before the community of Anchorage was settled.

I’m all for that. But $15.6 million?

One reason this bothers me so much is that Anchorage has a world-class “backyard wilderness,” Chugach State Park, that is chronically underfunded and understaffed. The same Alaska Legislature that is so excited about the Alaska Long Trail has failed for decades to adequately fund the upkeep of trails and other facilities in Chugach State Park, nor has it provided enough money for a fully functioning staff.

This negligence is a long-running disgrace, as is the pittance of money annually appropriated to the entire Alaska State Parks system.

That Anchorage legislators—including some I normally support and admire—so loudly and proudly celebrate the Alaska Long Trail and its new connector trail while failing to give equal voice to Anchorage’s shamefully neglected backyard wilderness and other state parks is both maddening and disheartening to me.

Perhaps it’s simply one more example of our state’s unhealthy obsession with grandiose megaprojects, with the connector trail and its lavish funding being a symbol of that.

There’s also this to consider: millions of dollars will be spent on this short trail segment and its associated plaza, during a time when all sorts of social and cultural needs, including affordable housing, are being insufficiently addressed here in Anchorage.

No doubt some will argue that different “pots” of money are involved. I say that’s an excuse, not an explanation. Both locally and at a state level, our leaders need to reconsider their priorities.

But this Alaskan wants to know why we are spending $15.6 million for a small trail project, when there are so many other needs.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX.

The Alaska Division of Elections announced Dan Sullivan of Petersburg is ineligible as a candidate for U.S. Senate and will be removed from the ballot. Officials said his filing was “for the purpose of confusing or misleading voters,” in a final decision issued on Monday.

Dan Sullivan, a retired teacher from Petersburg, filed to run as a Republican for the U.S. Senate in May, which drew immediate criticism and complaints from the Republican incumbent with the same name, U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan, and Republican groups. The Petersburg Sullivan has defended his campaign as genuine. 

The division’s ruling follows an investigation announced by Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom and a preliminary decision last week, citing two complaints by Republican groups, including the Alaska Republican Party, claiming Sullivan was ineligible. The complaints accused the Petersburg Sullivan of misrepresenting himself and intending to mislead voters to the benefit of the Democratic candidate, Mary Peltola. 

In a letter on Monday, Carol Beecher, the elections division director, agreed with the complaints.

“On review of the complaints and other information in the Division’s possession, I conclude that your declaration of candidacy was not properly filed with the Division,” she wrote. “Because it was not filed in order to declare an actual good-faith candidacy for the office of United States Senator, but was instead filed with a purpose to confuse or mislead and to thereby compromise the ballot’s fairness or neutrality.”

A spokesperson for the Division of Elections declined to comment on the ruling, explain the other information cited in the letter, or say if similar scrutiny would be applied to the other 14 candidates running for U.S. Senate. “Consistent with our standard practice, we do not discuss ongoing reviews, investigations, or related proceedings,” said Stephen Kirch, public relations manager with the division, by email on Monday. 

In the letter, Beecher cited the candidate’s filing under the name “Dan Sullivan” while his voter registration was under the name “Dan J. Sullivan, Jr.” as evidence of an attempt to mislead voters, calling it a “new nickname.” 

She said Sullivan had mistakenly requested his name appear on the ballot as “Dan S. Sullivan,” the same name as the incumbent. “Indeed, you yourself appeared to be confused when you initially emailed the Division asking to be listed on the ballot as “Dan S. Sullivan.” “S” is Senator Sullivan’s middle initial, not yours,” she said. 

She suggested he was seeking to confuse voters. Beecher raised the same issue with Sullivan registering as a Republican. 

In an interview with the Alaska Beacon last week, Sullivan from Petersburg said he was previously affiliated with the Alaska Independence Party. After it disbanded last year, he decided to register and file his candidacy as a Republican, saying he identified as an “old school” centrist Republican like his father and grandfather.  

Beecher acknowledged Sullivan had the right to change party affiliation under Alaska law, but rejected the filing as suspicious.

“Of course, under Alaska law, you are free to change your party affiliation. This said, that you chose to change your affiliation to the same political party — one you’d never affiliated with before — as the incumbent Senator immediately before filing a declaration of candidacy in which you asked to access the ballot under the same name – in a shortened form you’d never used before — as the incumbent Senator strongly suggests an intent to confuse yourself with the incumbent Senator rather than to distinguish yourself from him,” she wrote.

Beecher also said the Petersburg Sullivan’s campaign website and logo are similar to the incumbent’s, and said that appears to be “deliberate.” She cited a complaint by the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which works to elect Republicans, who accused the Petersburg Sullivan of working with a political consultant, Amber Lee, to misrepresent his campaign. Beecher did not name the consultant but said she was a “known longtime supporter of Democratic candidates.”

“This consultant’s work on your behalf is, in isolation, innocuous,” Beecher wrote. “Alongside the other facts I have catalogued in this letter, however, it suggests a determined effort and a deliberate attempt to use the similarity of your name to confuse Alaska voters in the upcoming primary election.”

Beecher said she had concluded that Sullivan had not filed in good faith and would be decertified from the election.

“I conclude that the preponderance of the evidence is that you chose this new nickname and party affiliation because that name and party affiliation happen to be the name and party affiliation of another candidate in the race,” she wrote.

The Petersburg Sullivan can appeal within 30 days or challenge the decision in Alaska Superior Court, according to the letter. 

He did not respond to calls on Monday about whether he plans to appeal and challenge the ruling.

In a social media post on Sunday that celebrated his 70th birthday ahead of the ruling, the Petersburg Sullivan questioned the premise of the state’s investigation and threats to disqualify him from the ballot.

“Should every American be allowed to run for any political office if they are qualified? Should a candidate’s chances of winning an election disqualify them from trying? Should a person’s given name be a qualifier to be on a ballot? To me it’s not complicated,” he wrote. “I met the qualification and I entered this race because I am unhappy with the 12 year record of the current Senator and I feel we need a change. It’s that simple.”

Members with the re-election campaign for Republican incumbent Sen. Sullivan praised the decision on Monday, thanking Dahlstrom, who oversees Alaska’s elections. 

“We thank Lieutenant Governor Dahlstrom for upholding that right and for ensuring Alaskans can choose their next senator without a sham candidate whose primary purpose was to confuse Alaskan voters, treat Alaskans with contempt, and rig the election for Peltola” said Billy Mackey, Senator Sullivan’s campaign manager, in an emailed statement. 

Alaska Sen. Forrest Dunbar, D-Anchorage, said in a social media post Monday he had requested a legal review of the division’s decision, saying the reasoning “appears extremely weak.” In another post, Dunbar pointed to U.S. House Rep. Nick Begich III filing for office in 2024 under the same name as his grandfather who also served in the U.S. House, “Nick Begich.”

“I urge folks to set aside their partisan biases and think about the precedent this sets if it is allowed to stand, the authoritarian power we would be handing incumbent administrations to decide who is or is not permitted to run against them or their allies,” Dunbar wrote. 

“This started out as sort of a funny curiosity (no offense to Dan J. Sullivan, whom I have never met or spoken to, and probably has good ideas for federal policy). But now the Department of Elections and Lieutenant Governor have made it much more serious — a question about whether or not fully qualified American citizens can appear on a ballot and exercise their First Amendment rights.”

SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE